Another round to talks betweenthe union government and the National Socialist Council of Nagaland –Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM) concluded at The Hague on June 25, 2006. The usual statementsregarding the talks being "quite good and very fruitful", were made by unionminister Oscar Fernandes after three days of talks with the insurgent leaders,along with union minister of state for home, S. Reghupathy, and minister of stateat the Prime Minister’s Office, Prithviraj Chouhan. Fernandes, Reghupathy andChouhan are members of the Group of Ministers (GoM) constituted by PrimeMinister Dr. Manmohan Singh to look into the long drawn Naga peace process. Theinterlocutor for the Naga talks, K. Padmanabhiah, was also present at themeeting. Chairman Isak Chishi Swu and General Secretary Thuingaleng Muivahrepresented the NSCN-IM. The government began talks with the NSCN-IM in1997 after the two sides agreed to a cease-fire.
However, the ground situationcontinues to cause serious concern, raising the crucial question: is Nagalandheading back to the days of continuous fratricidal wars between the ‘nationalworkers’ out to restore all that was wonderful in the state before ‘India’decided to ‘plunder and subjugate’? The question hangs heavy in the wake ofthe recent escalation in violent clashes between two rival National SocialistCouncil of Nagaland (NSCN) factions. The clashes appear to indicate that thecease-fire agreements signed between the union government and separately withthe NSCN-Isak-Muivah (IM) faction in 1997, and the Khaplang faction in 2001, arebeing violated at will. Worse, efforts to end the abiding and violentconfrontation have had no visible impact on the warring factions.
The May 19, 2006, killing of theNSCN-K ‘Education Kilonser’ (minister), Ngampan Konyak, by the rival NSCN-IMat Mon provoked the NSCN-K to launch a campaign codenamed, "OperationBlueland", under which it has stepped up attacks against the IM group. Onthe other side, the IM faction also alerted its armed cadres to reinforce theirdominance in different parts of the state. As rebel factions, both claiming torepresent the wishes and aspirations of the Nagas, build up their manpower andresources for future mutual carnage, the common people in remote and interiorlocales, are increasingly worried.
Although the ceasefires withthe union government still hold formally, escalating violence, large-scaleextortion and intimidation put a question mark on the very arrangement thatsupposedly prohibits the movement of armed cadres, armed violence, intimidationand disturbance to peace that are, in fact, endemic. According to the ceasefireagreements, the cadres of each faction are to remain confined to theirrespective designated camps, but the rule if flouted more often than it is kept.Indeed, the ceasefire has been exploited by militant groups to consolidate andexpand. Since the NSCN-IM entered into its formal ceasefire in 1997, it hasreportedly raised its cadre strength from 3,000 to 5,000 and nearly doubled itsweapon holdings.
Factional violence continues atregular intervals as both groups vie to augment their territorial supremacy. Ina statement made available to the local media on May 31, 2006, senior NSCN-Kleader A.Z. Jami threatened to take control of Dimapur, Nagaland’s commercialhub, known to be a stronghold of the rival NSCN-IM. Jami declared: "We willcertainly take over Dimapur. Our cadres are all over the town, waiting for theopportunity to strike." Alarmed, the NSCN-IM responded that it would nevercompromise with such a threat "by anti-nationalist like A.Z. Jami." Arelease issued by NSCN-IM’s ‘Secretary, Union Territory - I’, RomeoSankhil, asserted that his outfit was "well prepared to meet anyeventuality at any cost to protect the Naga peoples in general and Dimapurian(sic) in particular and also the ongoing peace process." The releasefurther added that the NSCN-IM had already intensified its vigil and deployedits men across Dimapur to meet any eventuality. The desperation of both thefactions is perfectly understandable. Dimapur is a flourishing commercial town– the largest and the only one in Nagaland – promising enormous profits towhoever controls it.
It is significant that, between2002 and 2005 – a period during which both factions of the NSCN were party toa ceasefire - 171 persons have been killed in militancy related violence in the state,of which 113 (66.08 per cent) were militants, 52 (30.40 per cent) were civiliansand the rest 6 (3.50 per cent) were security force SF personnel. With rareexception, most militant deaths have been the result of factional clashes. 2004saw at least 17 factional clashes, while 2005 witnessed another 14. 2006 hasalready seen 27 such incidents, (till June 25) in which at least 28 militantshave been killed (14 of the NSCN-IM, 10 of the NSCN-K and two of the NagaNational Council (NNC), and two unidentified). There is no available record ofthe numbers of injured.
Some of the significantincidents in just the last month and a half include:
June 18: NSCN-K‘awarded’ capital punishment to one, Wanpa, at Nangtan under Tizit AssemblyConstituency for his alleged role in the assassination of its ‘EducationMinister’, Ngampan Konyak, in the Mon district on May 18.
June 14: Clashes broke out between cadres of NSCN-IM and NSCN-K at Khukiye and Chisholiin Nagaland. Unidentified gunmen shot dead one NSCN-IM cadre, Yangthsase Sangtamat Longkhim in the Tuensang District.
June 8: A factionalclash occurred between cadres of the NSCN-IM and the NSCN-K at Naga Ching in theTamenglong district.
June 7: Two civilianswere wounded when firing broke out between cadres of the NSCN-IM and the Federalgovernment of Nagaland of the Naga National Council (NNC) at Chosaba village inthe Phek District.
June 2: NSCN-K killedone NSCN-IM cadre, James Tangkhul, during a factional clash near Zunheboto town.
May 31: Factionalviolence was reported from Sheyipu village in the Zunheboto District, Chingphoivillage in the Mon District, Athibung area in the Peren District and Old Phekarea in the Phek District. Several militants and one civilian were reportedlywounded.
May 30: Two NSCN-IMcadres were seriously wounded in a clash with rival NSCN-K at Lochomi village inthe Zunheboto District.
May 27: NSCN-K claimedto have killed two rival NSCN-IM cadres and injured two others in an encounterat a place near Longleng in the Tuensang District.
May 24: NSCN-K killedtwo NSCN-IM cadres while three others were abducted in different raids againstrival camps in the Zunheboto district. They were said to have been releasedsubsequently on May 30.
May 19: NSCN-IM killedthe ‘education kilonser’ (minister) of the NSCN-K, Nampang Konyak at hishome at Mon in Nagaland.
May 16: Two NSCN-IMcadres were killed while unspecified number of NSCN-K cadres were wounded in afactional clash between cadres of the rival groups at Athibung in the Perendistrict.
May 6: In a factionalclash, two NSCN-K militants were killed while three others sustained injuries ina pre-dawn attack by NSCN-IM cadres at Old Phek village in the Phek district.
Naga factional violence has notremained confined to the state itself, and has spilled over to neighbouringManipur. On May 5, 2006, a clash occurred at Tinkhai Khulen in Manipur’sSenapati district bordering Nagaland. Earlier on May 2, another clash took placeat Aling Saan village in the Tamenglong District. The NSCN-K, on May 5, claimedto have ‘neutralized’ a rival hideout at Alingson village under NungbaPolice Station limits in the Tamenglong District on May 2. On April 12, 2006,the NSCN-K shot dead two rival cadres and injured another at Keimai in theTamenglong District.
The impact of this unendingfriction on the lives of the common people is enormous. The Chakhesang PublicOrganisation, an apex body of the Chakhesang tribe, on March 7, 2006, made adeclaration prohibiting extortion, movement of cadres in combatant uniform andthe establishment of militants camps within the periphery of the tribe’shabitation. Again, on April 17, 2006, several Phek-based organizations under thebanner of Phek Area Public Organisation (PAPO) urged the state government totake up the issue of factional clashes with the rival outfits and the Union government,and to ensure that cadres belonging to the two rival factions move out of thePhek and the Chakhesang areas. A Press Release issued by PAPO stated: Ninety percent of our people are agriculturists, who depend on agriculture for theirsurvival. Although March and April is a time for sowing seeds, yet the villagersare afraid of going to the fields for fear of being mingled in cross fire."The gathering also condemned the unabated illegal ‘tax collection’ imposedby the militant groups.
The Chakhesang Baptist ChurchCouncil (CBCC) at a meeting held at Pfutsero in the Phek District on May 11 and12, 2006, said that, in Phek district, innocent citizens had suffered because ofthreats, intimidation, extortion, and forced taxation imposed by the variousmilitant groups. The church body alleged that the armed factions had forciblyoccupied a number of private houses and educational institutions in theDistrict. The meeting described the existing ceasefire with the Union governmentas a "public mockery".
The state government, oftendescribed as soft on the militants – especially the NSCN-IM – tends tosurrender to their caprice. Nagaland Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio, whilepresenting the state budget in the legislative assembly in capital Kohima onMarch 20, 2006, stated: "It is not possible for any government to preventthis (extortion) completely." The hapless Chief Minister termed thefactional killings "mindless and senseless", but has displayed littleintent or capacity to do anything about them, and all past attempts to containthe factional feud have remained subservient to short-term politicalcalculations. In March 2003, the ruling Democratic Alliance of Nagaland (DAN)coalition government formed a ‘Consultative Committee for Peace’ comprisingvarious political parties and major non-governmental organisations. However, theopposition Congress party, known to be sympathetic to the NSCN-K, was notincluded in the committee. As a result, the committee remained a partisan anduseless jamboree.
Since the 1990s, the church andthe Naga Hoho (the apex tribal council of Nagaland) have been attempting tobring all warring underground factions together through a ‘reconciliationprocess’, but their efforts have proven futile. The NSCN-K has accused theNaga Hoho, the Naga Students’ Federation (NSF), the Nagaland People’sMovement for Human Right (NPMHR), the Naga Mothers Association (NMA) and eventhe ruling Democratic Alliance of Nagaland (DAN) government of a pro-NSCN-IMstance. On May 29, 2006, the NSCN-K on accused Chief Minister Rio of providingsecurity to NSCN-IM cadres at Dimapur and Zunheboto. The Chairman of the NSCN-KCeasefire Supervisory Board, Kughalu Mulatonu, had alleged that the ChiefMinister dispatched security personnel belonging to the Indian Reserve Battalionto protect the NSCN-IM cadres.
There appear to be noprincipled and non-discriminatory efforts to contain the factional violence inNagaland, and the militant groups remain a law unto themselves, immune to anysuggestions or corrective measures. Under the circumstances, and in view of theenormous suffering continuously being inflicted on innocent civilians, it istime the centre reviewed its ‘hands off’ policy and made a proper assessmentof the anarchy on the ground that its deals with the insurgent outfits haveyielded. The conditions of the government’s ceasefire with the NSCN factionshave been clearly defined, and they cannot be allowed to be habitually violatedwith impunity.
M. Amarjeet Singh is Research Associate, Institute forConflict Management. Courtesy, the South Asia Intelligence Review of the SouthAsia Terrorism Portal.
