Naga National Council
Indroduction
This statement is issued in national interest to put the record straight on the actual positions of Nagaland as established. The objective is to clear all misgivings, correct mis-presentations, misrepresentations and distorted narratives, very often presented by self-interest people and groups in different platforms including print, electronic and social media. The positions so established are the Naga national stand. Thus, for all practical purposes, Nagaland’s case can only be addressed based on the following historical truths and foundation.
Early Historical Facts
1. The Nagas were never Indians or Burmese (Myanmarese). Naga territories were never Indian and Burmese territories. As a matter of fact, the sovereignty of India and Myanmar did not even exist before 1947.
2. The British intruded into the Naga territories from 1832.
3. The intrusion led to intermittent Anglo-Naga wars for over four decades.
4. The last Anglo-Naga war, also known as the Khonoma Battle fought in 1879 was brought to a halt with a “gentlemen agreement” arrived at in 1880. It was in the form of oral commitment only.
The British Occupation Period
1. The Nagas had no written treaty with the British whatsoever. That was the plain proof that in Naga case, there was neither defeat nor subjugation.
2. Without written treaty, the British administration in the so-called Naga Hills district of the then Assam province in the 19th century was not a qualified colonial rule. It only qualified as an occupation.
3. The area of the British administration was confined to only one fifth of the Naga territories. The rest of the Naga territories were left untouched as “unadministered areas”, also called free Naga territories, christened as free Nagaland post-British exit.
4. Even in the administered areas, the British had no real control at the primary (village) level. Naga self-rule continued as was always.
5. The Nagas in free Naga territories continued to live as free people in their own sovereign village republics. This part of the Naga country represented the age-old sovereignty of Nagaland that stood unchallenged and free from any external aggression until illegal Myanmar occupation.
6. The Nagas and the Britishers mutually co-existed from 1880 to 1947. The Anglo-Naga relationship during the peace times benefitted both the parties.
The Dawn Of Modern Political Consciousness
1. After the WWII, the British decided in principle, to exit from her South-East Asia Empire.
2. Alerted by this political development, the Nagas under the aegis of the Naga Club submitted a memorandum to the Simon Commission in January 1929. It was the first expression of self-determination put on record in letters.
3. The British Parliament in London debated on the Commission’s report. The outcome of the in-house debate was that, the British Parliament enacted the government of India Act, 1935 to rename the so-called Backward Tract (Naga Hills administered areas) as Excluded Areas. Technically, the Act had no effect in free Naga areas (unadministered areas) as the British India had no administrative jurisdiction over it.
The Birth And Rise of The Naga National Council
1. To meet the challenges of the changing political dynamics, the pioneer Naga leaders organized themselves into a common platform known as the Naga National Council (NNC) on February 2, 1946.
2. The NNC was founded as the central/apex national institution in the shape and style of the age-old democratic republic village institutions. For that reason, the NNC functions as an institution and not as an organization.
3. The NNC adopted the Gandhian policy of non-violence as its basic principle.
4. The NNC leaders discussed with the British government as well as the British India government and the prominent Indian leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, and others on the future of the Nagas post-exit but ended inconclusive as the later failed to understand the Naga aspiration to revert to her own indigenous political system as existed in ancient times. They misunderstood it as a challenge and hindrance to the power transfer plan.
5. In June 1947, the NNC leaders signed the 9-point agreement with the British India government. Regrettably, the agreement collapsed even before its kick-off.
6. The time for further negotiation had lapsed and there was no more time left to exercise.
7. The NNC leaders learned that the formal transfer of power was scheduled for August 15, 1947.
8. The NNC seized the last-minute opportunity and unilaterally declared the independence of Nagaland, as per the general international convention, on August 14, 1947, one day ahead of India’s independence and four months 11 days ahead of Burma (Myanmar)’s independence. The NNC hoisted the symbolic national flag of independent Nagaland at Kohima on the same day.
9. The NNC cabled the declaration statement to the UN office in New York for information.
10. Even after the independence declaration and the British exit, the NNC leaders made all efforts to reason together with the Indian leaders but to no avail.
The Naga Voluntary Plebiscite
1. The Assam administration of independent India in the so-called Naga Hills district (administered area) challenged the veracity of Naga independence declaration.
2. To show that the independence declaration was a mass aspiration, the NNC called for a Naga voluntary plebiscite with prior notice to the government of independent India. The Plebiscite, conducted on May 16, 1951 with Indian observers at ground zero, gave 99.9% mandate for independent Nagaland. The national exercise ratified the independence declaration. It was an impeccable record that stands as a living statement in support of our established positions.
The Nagas Had Never Joined The Union of India or Burma
1. To make India know and to show to the world that Nagaland had never joined the Union of India or accepted her constitution, the Nagas did not participate in the India’s first parliamentary election in 1952.
2. In February 1947, the Burmese government signed the instrument of accession, also known as the Panglong agreement, with all the other ethnic people. The Nagas of free Naga territories declined the invitation to join the Burma Union. The Nagas were the only ethnic people not party to the Panglong agreement. They maintained the continuity of the independent status of free Nagaland (unadministered areas).
The Establishment Of The Naga National Government
1. The NNC established the national government on March 22, 1956 and named it the Federal Republic of Nagaland, later rechristened as the Federal Government of Nagaland. In the same year, the Federal assembly officially adopted “NAGALAND” as the name of the country.
2. The NNC and FGN also drafted and adopted the national constitution called “YEHZABO”.
3. The NNC and FGN adopted a rainbow and a white six-pointed star (akin to the Star of David) on sky blue background as the national FLAG. The NNC and FGN hoisted the official flag at Parashen in Rengma region on its foundation day.
The Aggression On Nagaland
1. When resistance became inevitable, the NNC had no option than to temporarily suspend the policy of non-violence.
2. India, under the leadership of Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India chose military path to silence the Nagas. He dispatched large numbers of Indian army, in addition to the Indian armed forces already stationed in Nagaland, to invade Nagaland in 1955. The aggression violated the sovereignty of Nagaland.
3. To defend the sovereignty of Nagaland, the FGN organized a defense force which later evolved into Naga national army.
4. A full-scale Indo-Naga war ensued from 1955 following successive attacks and counter-attacks.
5. The Indian government unleashed terror in which, the Nagas suffered atrocities of the highest degree. The atrocities committed by the Indian Armed forces and Indian army were not just violation of human rights but crimes against the very humanity.
6. The full-scale Indo-Naga war lasted a decade. It was brought to a halt with a bilateral ceasefire agreement signed by the Federal Government of Nagaland and the Government of India on September 6, 1964. The bilateral ceasefire agreement in itself was the plain proof that the Government of India had acknowledged the existence of the Federal Government of Nagaland; in other words, the sovereignty of Nagaland. India withdrew unilaterally, from the bilateral ceasefire agreement and unleashed another cycle of military offensive. The NNC-FGN continues to honor the ceasefire agreement and has uphold its non-violence policy since then.
The Occupation Of Nagaland By India And Myanmar
1. India refused to withdraw her occupational forces from Nagaland even after the ceasefire agreement. The aggression and illegal occupation still continue as evident from huge military presence in all Naga inhabited territories and an imposed Indian civil administration through the puppet state government.
3. In February 1947, the Burmese government attempted to annex the free Naga territories under the instrument of Panglong agreement. The free Nagas were not signatories of the agreement. When the diplomatic plot failed, Burma extended her military regime into Naga territories. Myanmar-occupied situation in free Nagaland still continues.
The Creation Of A Puppet State
1. In 1957, the Indian government roped in some vulnerable Nagas who organized themselves into a self-representative body called the Naga People’s Convention (NPC) to work as “go between” to bring the Federal Government of Nagaland and the Government of India to the negotiating table.
2. When the FGN stood its ground on sovereignty, the NPC ultimately evolved into a negotiating body.
3. The NPC negotiated with the GOI on the basis of the 16-point memorandum. The memorandum demanded statehood in the Union of India which was granted in 1963.It was a political plot of the NPC and the GOI to decimate the sovereignty right of Nagaland.
4. They robbed the name ‘Nagaland’ as the name of the puppet state to confuse the world. Nagaland, as originally named and adopted is the name of our country. The state created in the Union of India is not to be confused with the name of the country.
5. The NNC and FGN had nothing to do with the creation of the Indian state as the NNC-FGN had no role and part whatsoever, in the political negotiations. As far as NNC-FGN are concerned, the state is a puppet state and its government, a puppet government. The India sponsored elections in the puppet state are imposed elections to cover up the illegal occupation.
6. Through the puppet state government, the GOI has been successfully implementing “the tactical action plan that had inspiration from Kautilya’s four principles found in the famous ‘arthashastra’ ‘Sham’(political reconciliation), ‘Dam’ (monetary inducement), ‘Danda’ (force) and ‘Bhed’ (split)”. What India could not do by military power, she has been doing it with money power.
The Factual Positions
1. Nagaland is a sovereign country by right of independence declaration.
2. It is not a secessionist movement.
3. Nagaland is not the frontier of India. It is beyond India’s northeast frontier.
4. There are no direct international boundaries between India and Myanmar as Nagaland stands between the two countries. Nagaland has international boundaries with India in the west and Myanmar in the east
5. Nagas of India and Nagas of Myanmar are semantics coined by the occupational powers. All in all, it is a case of India-occupied Nagaland on one side and Myanmar-occupied Nagaland on the other side.
6. The Free Movement Regime and border fencing within the sovereignty of Nagaland are illegal. They are evidences of naked aggression and illegal occupation. It is a vindication of our imputation that the occupation of Nagaland by India and Myanmar are illegal.
NNC Stand On Political Talks
1. Nagaland’s sovereignty is non-negotiable. Thus, the principle of political negotiation is inapplicable to Nagaland’s case as sovereignty subject is not within that ambit.
2. The so-called political solution/settlement is the subject of the occupational powers. The sovereignty of Nagaland has nothing to do with it.
3. India and Myanmar must admit that the occupation situations are real. India and Myanmar must withdraw their occupational forces from Nagaland. It is a pre-requisite for any dialogue. As neighbors, Nagaland can only talk/discuss on relationship matter.
4. Recognition of the sovereignty of Nagaland remains pending. Naturally, recognition of Nagaland’s sovereignty and discussion on relationship issues are inseparable as they are integral.
Conclusion
India and Myanmar occupations of our country have been the obstacles to the progress and prosperity of Nagaland. Nagaland is not demanding independence from India and Myanmar. Our struggle has been to free Nagaland of the illegal occupations. It is to live the God-given sovereignty and grow as a prosperous nation.
We seek not the sympathy of any country but diplomatic support and action to free Nagaland of the Indian and Myanmar occupations.
