Why in news?

The Isak-Muivah faction of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN I-M) has requested third-party intervention to resolve the longstanding Naga political issue with the Indian government.

Accusing the Centre of betraying the 2015 Framework Agreement, NSCN (I-M) warns it may resume armed resistance if this proposal is denied.

The group asserts that the Centre reneged on commitments to recognize a separate Naga flag and constitution, essential for honoring the Naga people’s unique history and "shared sovereignty."

What’s in today’s article?

• Naga Insurgency
• Naga Peace Accord

Naga Insurgency

• Background:
  • The British annexed Assam in 1826, and in 1881, the Naga Hills too became part of British India.
  • The Naga National Council (NNC) was formed in April 1946 to carry out social and political upliftment of the Nagas.
  • After the return of the radical leader of Naga cause, Angami Zapu Phizo, from Burma in 1947, the faction of NNC demanding full impendence grew strong.
• Shillong Accord and the split of NNC
  • The Shillong Accord was signed in 1975 by Government of India with a section of the NNC leaders.
  • As part of the accord, the leaders agreed to abjure violence and work towards the solution of the Naga problem within the framework of the Indian Constitution.
  • It was opposed by Phizo, Isak Swu and Muivah. Later, Isak Swu and Muivah formed the "National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN)" in January 1980.
  • Later, NSCN split into two factions, namely NCSN (I-M) led by Isak & Muivah and NCSN (K) led by Khaplang.
• Demand for Greater Nagaland
  • The Nagas under NSCN (I-M) had various views for a new Nagaland.
  • One was an independent nation of Nagaland comprising the present Nagaland, the Naga inhabited areas of Manipur and Myanmar.
  • Another one was to integrate the Naga inhabited districts of Manipur with the state of Nagaland under the Indian Constitution.

Naga Peace Accord

• Background
  • Since 1997, NSCN (I-M) has been involved in negotiations with the Government of India and signed many ceasefire agreements.
• 2015 Framework Agreement (FA)
  • On August 3, 2015, the Centre signed a framework agreement with the NSCN (I-M) to resolve the Naga issue.
  • Both sides-maintained secrecy about its contents. Hence, the details of the agreements are not entirely clear. However, broad points included:
    • The government could go for devolution of more powers to Nagaland under provisions of Article 371 (A) of the Constitution of India.
    • The army of NSCN-IM will be absorbed in a new force to be raised on the lines of Home Guards.
    • It would involve more autonomy to Naga tribes living in Manipur.
    • The agreement, however, does not include physical integration of all Naga areas in terms of a boundary.
    • The agreement was only a framework, with many details still to be hammered out.
• Issues with Framework agreement
  • The issue of sovereignty
    • The Framework agreement contains some clauses on ‘sharing sovereign power’ which is being interpreted differently by both sides.
    • The NSCN now argues that according to the agreement, its sovereignty has to be retained.
    • Any final agreement should be for peaceful coexistence of the two sovereign powers. This is not accepted by the Government.
  • Poor draft of the framework agreement
    • The wordings of the FA are vague, leaving for both sides to interpret the deal according to their own convenience.
    • E.g., FA at one point says, “Inclusive peaceful co-existence of the two entities sharing sovereign power”.
  • Issue of separate flag and constitution
    • NSCN(IM) contends that the idea of “sharing sovereign power” and “co-existence of the two entities” means:
      • Naga people will be entitled to their own national flag and constitution.
    • The FA was signed in 2015, when special status of Jammu and Kashmir existed.
    • However, the situation changed after scrapping of Article 370 and hence Centre cannot agree to such a demand.
• Smaller groups such as Naga National Political Group (NNPGs) got strengthened
  • Another obstacle in the talks was that smaller groups such as NNPGs got strengthened during the tenure of previous interlocutor N Ravi.
    • He used the strategy of dividing the groups by giving more prominence to the smaller groups.
    • This annoyed the larger groups such as NSCN(IM) and they stayed away from the talks.
• Release of the copy of the sensitive Framework Agreement
• In August 2020, NSCN-IM released a copy of the sensitive Framework Agreement. This reduced the trust between the negotiating parties.
• Trust deficit between the then Governor of Nagaland and NSCN
  • The group accused the then Nagaland Governor N Ravi, an interlocutor, of deleting a keyword.
  • In November 2017, Ravi signed an agreement with seven groups who had come together under the banner of the NNPGs.
    • This did not include the NSCN (IM), which considers itself the principal representative of Naga aspirations.
    • As a result, NSCN (IM) accused Ravi of attempting to “segregate the Naga civil society”.
  • Later, R N Ravi resigned as interlocutor for the Naga peace talks.