NSCN/GPRN (K) sought clarification on why it was being described as ‘anti-Naga’ by the NSCN (I-M) for harboring friendly relationship with other revolutionary groups of the north east India.
MIP alleged that NSCN (I-M) continued to “malign revolutionary firmness” of NSCN/GPRN, under the leadership of S.S. Khaplang by it ‘anti Naga’. It reminded past events that led to division of the united NSCN, when Isak Swu, the then chairman of “undivided NSCN” formed an undeclared ‘United Front’ with other NE revolutionary groups at Janlam CHQ in 1985, assisted by Arobindo Rajkhowa (ULFA) and Shanayama (UNLF) as vice chairman and general secretary respectively, to fight with the occupational forces jointly as separate entities for sovereignty.
The MIP stated under the terms of agreement of the ‘United Front’, there should be no cease fire agreement and political talk with the government of India (GoI). It alleged, however, Th. Muivah had “cunningly convinced” Isak for a cease fire with GoI without consulting other “revolutionary friends”, adding that neither did they (Isak and Muivah) consult the ranks and files of the undivided NSCN in this regard.
The GPRN/NSCN (K) claimed their secret agenda was a possible solution from GoI on the basis of “suisa’s” proposal.
It stated that atmosphere of distrust and misunderstanding led to displacement of the two leaders along with their loyalist cadres were from Eastern Nagaland, and subsequently Isak and Muivah formed a new outfit, later known as NSCN (I-M), during 1991-92. The GPRN/NSCN (K) claimed that since all the “revolutionary brothers” shared similar military and political problems all over the NE region, feeling of oneness developed among them, resulting into formation of IBRF (Indo Burma Revolutionary Front) under the leadership of Khaplang as chairman, assisted by Arobindo Rajkhowa (ULFA) and Shanayama (UNLF), which continued to function till 2000s’.
It alleged that Muivah, on the other hand, hurriedly formed new confederation of some NE revolutionary groups called United Front of South East Himalaya Region (UFSEHR) in 1994 in Nepal with Muivah as chief convenor while Naplag (NDFB) and Oken (KYKL) were convenor and joint convenor. With the agenda to stand united in the face of occupational forces, groups like KYKL, NDFB, NLFB, HNLC, KNV, HPC and ANVC etc. took part under this organization, and decided not to have cease fire and political talk with GoI, the GPRN/NSCN (K) said. Alleging that Muivah had betrayed UFSEHR by entering into ceasefire with GoI in 1997, the MIP said the NE revolutionary groups who were once with NSCN (I-M) condemned the betrayal policy of Muivah and ultimately joined hands with Khaplang under whose leadership, formed new alliance known as North East United Alliances.
With regard to these events, NSCN/GPRN (K) questioned as to whether NSCN (I-M) assumed that calling Khaplang “anti Naga” for forming ‘United Front’ with other non Naga revolutionary groups of the north east, would save them. It pointed that Isak and Muivah had followed suit by forming a similar revolutionary group (UFSEHR) in 1994.
Further, while accusing NSCN (I-M) of being “reactionary forces” and that it would remain part of “reactionary elements”, the statement added that NSCN/GPRN (K) was a “revolutionary force” who stood for the sovereignty of Nagas, claiming it was the only institution that would liberate the Nagas.
For More Updates, follow us on
and
