(From previous issue…)
When the bandh was imposed in all Naga inhabited areas by major tribal bodies – students giving exams, medical and police officials, etc were exempted from the bandh, however, the Army Personnel were not. Any sort of military vehicular movement was not allowed to take place in all Naga inhabited areas as per the bandh that was imposed. Why is this so? The Army is probably the most legitimate institution in the country. Regardless of this fact, most of us came across the news and have probably seen the videos of Armed Personnel who showed complete disregard of the imposition of the bandh and set out in their armed trucks and vehicles being confronted by the people from the tribal bodies (some in traditional attires) and being asked to go back to their camps. What gives these tribal bodies and organizations, from the president right down to the volunteers on the streets the confidence and belief that they have a legitimate right and the authority to impose a bandh upon the Army of the nation they are a part of? It is the belief in the Sovereignty of Nagas in their own land. The Article 371A already provides special provisions to the state of Nagaland with respect to the practice of Customary Naga laws, as well as giving some autonomy to Nagas to some extent. But whenever the “fire” burns strong, even people without any knowledge of any of these said factors stand up against “them”, simply because of the belief in Naga Sovereignty. Now the very concept of Naga Sovereignty may not be the telos or the end goal for a majority of the people, but when they proceed with acts such as imposing bandh on the army because of the belief that they have the authority because “they” (the army) do not belong here and “this” is our land and therefore our laws and our decisions in our land outweigh any legitimacy held by “them” (the army), because that very legitimacy itself is given to the army by the Indian Union. What is “Sovereignty in one’s own land” if not this?
Past mistakes and changing times
These are all examples that I have taken from just the Oting incident. Everytime any form of injustice is done to the Nagas, one can see it happen in various different ways, and this feeling keeps growing. If the government in the center chooses to not look into this matter as a chain of historical oppression and injustice done against the Nagas then it is their incompetence that will surely lead to further unease in the region.
It is also worth taking into consideration the argument that says that there may have been a time when the Indian Government’s imposition of AFSPA may have been justified given the situation. However, those times are long gone, and there is no excuse to not revoke this law, especially at a time when there is ceasefire between most of the Naga National Groups and the Indian Government (excluding NSCN-K, at the time of writing this article). In relation to this, I would like to bring out the argument that the issue of the Naga Separatism was always a Political one and this is perhaps one of the great blunders on the part of the Indian Union in its political and administrative history, that they viewed (and still view) the “Naga Problem” and other such armed conflicts as a law and order problem rather than a political one. Political problems demand political resolutions, and not the imposition of laws such as AFSPA along with the act of dispatching armed personnel to subdue the people who are (and have been) raising the political issue. At the time of Indian Independence from colonial powers, there was always a legitimate claim for Naga Self Determination and their refusal to accept India’s illegal occupation of what they thought was their homeland; this is where we see the claws of Indian Imperialism at its zenith, for what is (as many people have pointed out before) AFSPA, if not an extension of the infamous Rowlatt Act (1919) or the Armed Forces Special Powers Ordinance (1942, 1948) promulgated by Governor General Linlithgow under Section 72 of the Government of India Act, 1935. However, going down that line of argument will be a long discussion, and so although I believe that the imposition of AFSPA was never justified in the first place in any given situation, I will leave that debate aside and stress on the point that it is high time that this law is revoked. The statement from the Naga Club could at this point be highlighted, “A nation needs laws to counter separatist movements but while deciding on the continuance of a certain law, it must review the situation in which it is being exerted. The situation in Nagaland has changed from the 1950’s to the 1990’s”.
The goal of National Integration
I think it is important to give credit where it is due, the reaction and response shown by the Naga Community as a whole following the Oting incident was altogether commendable. The Nagas showcased great maturity (barring a few incidents) and we can proudly say that the situation did not go out of hand and that the peace loving Nagas proved that to engineer a proper solution, violence and hatred cannot (and should not) be fought with more violence and hatred. We must condemn and criticize what is wrong and call out and rebuke any form of injustice, but this lack of violent retaliation by the Naga community is ironic in a way and certainly a testament to how the rest of India may view the Nagas as “barbaric” or “terrorists” (as in the case of Kashmir). In the aftermath of this recent incident, we see who the “barbarians’’ truly were all along. With the Naga Peace talks with the Indian Government ongoing, we are currently in a very crucial and important juncture in the history of Nagas, and the Indian Government must make the right decision and revoke the law of AFSPA which has no place in a democratic nation. Like I have stressed several times in this piece of writing, many Nagas still first identify themselves as Nagas, then as Indians, and with draconian laws and tools of oppression such as AFSPA still imposed in Naga lands, the emotional integration of Nagas into India will only be made more complicated. At this point, I would like to quote Naushir Bharucha speaking on AFSPA in the Lok Sabha on August 11, 1958, “I also want to know whether the policy of shoot to kill underlying this Bill will not have a psychological effect, first on the Nagas and secondly on the Army personnel, shoot to kill instills in the people in whose hands power is placed a sense of carelessness and callousness. There is a feeling: we are protected, we can shoot to kill. I am not for a moment alleging that our defense forces are so callous as that. But human nature being what it is, having regard to the fact that our Army may have to work in very difficult and trying circumstances wherever they are, troops may be overworked and they may resort to these because a psychological impression is created in the minds of the troops: we can shoot to kill, nobody can question us. I ask: what type of policy is this to win the hearts of the people whom you are trying to incorporate and integrate as part of India. Shoot to kill” I would also like to quote Charles Chasie, who asks, “What kind of justice can be delivered to someone who has already been killed? The only thing that can now possibly be done to give meaning to their deaths is to make sure that no such incident ever happens again. This means to remove the things that make it possible for such incidents to happen in the first place”. This is the direction toward which we need to take our battle for justice. Not just Nagas, but anyone and everyone who believes in the value of Human Life and even to an extent, the National Integrity of India. Would the government of India agree to make AFSPA an all India legislation and apply it to the rest of India as well? It does not require a super human brain to figure out that the obvious answer is NO. Why is it then, that the life of a person from the so called “disturbed area” in Nagaland weighs any less as compared to someone from New Delhi or Mumbai? If it truly is national integration that the Indian Union desires, AFSPA is not the way forward, it never was.
(Concluded)
Vinolen John