Putting on record to clarify what was all about and how, the NSCN (I-M) said that it is on record of the government of India having recognized the uniqueness of the Naga history and its position that Nagas were never part of Indian Union either by conquest or consent and questioned how can a Naga national movement be without flag and constitution, says the outfit.
By Imna Longchar, TFM Nagaland Correspondent
National Socialist Council of Nagalalim or the NSCN (I-M) on Monday has said that today the Nagas are reeling with utter confusion about the Indo-Naga talk and subsequently has started expressing their “total discontentment” pointing fingers and accusing the very people who brought the ceasefire and peace process.
According to a press release issued by MIP, NSCN (I-M), some people misconstrued that negotiation was was delayed because of the “flag and constitution” issues whereas it was not the case because “flag and constitution” was the “component ingredient” embraced in the Framework Agreement (FA).
Putting on record to clarify what was all about and how, the NSCN (I-M) said that it is on record of the government of India having recognized the uniqueness of the Naga history and its position that Nagas were never part of Indian Union either by conquest or consent and questioned how can a Naga national movement be without flag and constitution.
It said that having granted cognizance of the universal principle that in democracy, the sovereignty lies with the people, it should be noted that the framework agreement acknowledged and accepted the declaration of Naga Independence Day of August 14, 1947, and Plebiscite of 1951, and henceforth, the flag and constitution was the embodiment of the framework agreement.
Sharing of sovereign powers: As mentioned in the framework agreement, sharing of sovereign powers is a recognition and acceptance of Naga sovereignty and it is not the case of Indian constitutional provision granting power division, how could one say that there is no flag or constitution. “Every sovereign nation has its own flag and constitution”, the NSCN/GPRN maintained.
New relationship: The NSCN/GPRN said that it is the declaration of new arrangement which meant that there cannot be a settlement within the existing Indian constitution, therefore, “new relationship” was agreed upon.
Coexistence: Defined two people to coexist with understanding and conditional arrangement. Two entities: Defined two separate entities or as two separate people. The NSCN (I-M) questioned how could on say, there is no flag and constitution in the framework agreement.
The irony is that this matter was already resolved long back but RSS factor came in between questioning how could there be two flags and constitutions, the NSCN (I-M) said while also adding that the manifesto of RSS/Hindutva sharply contradicted the principle agreement of framework agreement. The actual point of delay started from here. The outfit also said that in the official talks, neither RN Ravi nor AK Mishra never said that that there was no flag and constitution in the framework agreement.
Twists and Turns: Ironically, the “twists and turns” of the “flip-flopping” habitual betraying character of the government of India comes up to take the centre stage and sown the seeds of confusion in order to “disown” the framework agreement. It said certainly, government of India was entirely responsible for the delay and that Nagas have had enough of the government of India’s overly pretentious appearance on Indo-Naga talk and it is high time for the government of India to come clean.
“The government of India signed two agreements with the Nagas—the framework agreement and agreed position. These two agreements have divided the Naga people. If the government of India is genuinely sincere to go for early solution why pursuing two agreements for one people and one common issue”, said the NSCN (I-M).
Also stating that these two agreements are parallel in nature, one within Indian constitution and the other being outside the purview of Indian constitution, the NSCN (I-M) mentioned that with this unwarranted policy, government of India is testing the “nerve” of the Nagas and delaying the “whole process”.
In this regard, the outfit said it is the time for the government of India to make her stand very clear on these “two agreements” and which one is to be used for the final agreement. “Simply inviting NSCN to New Delhi for talk without going through the detoxification process would not help expedite the Naga political solution”, it said.
The NSCN (I-M) further questioned that should the legitimacy of framework as proclaimed before the world by prime minister, Narendra Modi, be put in the bargaining level with another agreement that was signed “surreptitiously”.