Context

The government-imposed deadline of October 31 for concluding talks with Naga groups has passed. And nothing concrete has come out of the Framework Agreement signed in 2015.

Events so far

• Framework Agreement with Naga rebel leader Thuingaleng Muivah was signed in 2015.
  • The agreement expresses an intent to work towards the final agreement.
  • The progress on the said agreement has stalled since then.
• Problem with the Framework Agreement: It was signed only with Muivah’s leading faction, National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isak-Muivah), or NSCN (I-M).
  • Exclusion of major players: The agreement excluded half a dozen more groups, besides Naga citizenry in Nagaland and contiguous Naga homelands in the neighbouring states of Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, and Assam.
  • This weakened the process.

Efforts made by the government

• Appointment of an interlocutor: The government-appointed R.N. Ravi as the government’s interlocutor. That move signalled the seriousness from the government’s side.
• Reach out toward the other players: The government reached out to Nagas across the board.
• The government reached out to other rebel factions, much to the irritation of NSCN (I-M), and began peace talks with them in end-2017.
• A breakaway faction of I-M’s arch enemies, NSCN’s Khaplang, joined the process in 2019.
• Government-led outreach attempted to bring on board non-Naga people in Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, and Assam.

What is offered in the process and related issues

• Disarmament, rehabilitation, and assimilation: A talks with I-M spelt out disarmament, rehabilitation, and assimilation of cadres and leaders through induction in paramilitary forces and political structures
• Expanded legislature: An expanded legislature in Nagaland, for inducting the rebels and more legislative representation and relative autonomy in Naga homelands outside Nagaland.
• Disagreement over flang and the separate state-constitution: Other Naga rebel groups agreed to what was offered by the government.
• I-M remained intransigent over the dual use of a Naga flag alongside the Indian flag, and its constitution—
• This I-M-scripted constitution is regressive, offers far less than what Nagas enjoy under Indian constitutional provisions, and effectively proposes Muivah as the overarching figure of Naga politics, development and destiny.
• Unacceptance by the other groups: This is evidently unacceptable to numerous Nagas—let alone non-Nagas—for whom Muivah, a Tangkhul Naga from Manipur’s Ukhrul region, remains a divisive figure.

Conclusion

There is a need to reconcile the difference between the different groups and reach a proposed agreement as soon as possible for the welfare of the communities and the region as a whole.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now