Weakness of NSCN's demands for Nagalim
- Part 2 -

Dr. Khomdon Singh Lisam *

22. The  Nagas and the Plebiscite : . In the version of Naga history, the idea of Naga nationhood gained momentum in the 1950s.  A plebiscite was conducted in 1951 under Phizo , when volunteers of the Naga National Council went to far-flung villages to collect thumb prints of every Naga to announce that 99.9% of the Nagas want independence emotionally integrated the various Naga tribes. When the results of the plebiscite was submitted to the Government of India , Pandit Nehru reportedly told  a Naga delegation  "...it is impossible to consider even for a moment such an absurd demand for independence of the Nagas. I am doubtful whether the Nagas realise the consequences of what they are asking for. their present demand would ruin them." (Dinesh Kotwal , The Naga Insurgency: The Past And The Future). In March 1952, Pandit Nehru reportedly  told  the  Naga delegation  " ...even if the heavens fell or India went to pieces and the blood runs red in the country, I do not care. Whether I am here or for that matter any other body comes, I do not care, Nagas will never be allowed to become independent" ( M. Horam , Naga Insurgency , Cosmo Publications, 1988 , page-50).

What is the meaning of plebiscite ?  The  more modern use of the plebiscite arose out of the French Revolution and the French Republic's policy of holding popular votes on the question of French annexation of a territory it had occupied. Many of these plebiscites and those held in the following century were manipulated by the occupying power to legitimate an outcome already achieved through military or diplomatic means. The use of the plebiscite reached a high degree following World War I, when it was employed extensively in Central and Eastern Europe to determine the boundaries of newly created nation states.

Since then, it has been used in settling the status of disputed or border territories, e.g., Saarland (1935) and, most recently, in the process of the decolonization of Africa and Asia, e.g., West New Guinea (1969) and Namibia (1989). James Madison argued that direct democracy is the "tyranny of the majority." There were instances where Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini used the plebiscite to disguise oppressive policies in a veneer of populism. British politician Chris Patten summarized  that  referendum  were the favourite form of plebiscitary democracy of Mussolini and Hitler. They undermine parliament and therefore fundamentally anti-democratic.

The  Governments only concede them when governments are weak (retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/breakfast_with_frost/2954232.stm.). Crtics of  the Plebiscite argue that  voters in a Plebiscite are more likely driven by strong personalities  or the adverse influence of propaganda or expensive advertising campaigns or intimidation.

The Government of India had a very awful experience of plebiscite relating to Kashmir .  In 1947, British rule in India ended with the creation of two new nations, the Union of India and the Dominion of Pakistan and the abandonment of British suzerainty over the 562 Indian princely states. According to the Indian Independence Act 1947, "the suzerainty of His Majesty over the Indian States lapses, and with it, all treaties and agreements in force at the date of the passing of this Act between His Majesty and the rulers of Indian States" . So the states were left to choose whether to join India or Pakistan or to remain independent. Jammu and Kashmir had a predominantly Muslim population but a Hindu ruler, and was the largest of the princely states. Its ruler was the Dogra King ,  Maharaja Hari Singh.

In October 1947, Pakistani tribals from Dir entered Kashmir intending to liberate it from Dogra rule. The irregular Pakistani tribals made rapid advances into Kashmir (Baramulla sector) after the rumours that the Maharaja was going to decide for the union with India. Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir asked the Government of India to intervene.

The Maharaja desperately needed the Indian military's help when the Pathan tribals reached the outskirts of Srinagar. Before their arrival into Srinagar, Maharaja Hari Singh signed The Instrument of Accession on October 26, 1947 and completed negotiations for acceding Jammu and Kashmir to India in exchange for receiving military aid.  Immediately, India sent its armed forces to Jammu and Kashmir .

The Instrument of Accession of Kashmir to India was accepted  on 27 October, 1947 by Viceroy Lord Mountbatten of  India. The resulting war over Kashmir, the First Kashmir War, lasted until 1948, When India moved the issue to the U.N. Security Council on December, 31, 1947, United Nations Committee for India and Pakistan. Resolution (UNCIP) (6 February  1948 UN Security Council / document no.667 dated 18 February, 1948). passed Resolution 47 on April 21, 1948, which imposed  an immediate cease-fire and said that Pakistan should withdraw all presence  and  India should retain a minimum military presence and stated "that the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations". The cease fire took place December 31, 1948.

However, the question of a plebiscite for Kashmir is rejected by India since India holds that the Instrument of Accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India, signed by the Maharaja Hari Singh  on 26 October, 1947 was completely valid in terms of the Government of India Act-1935, Indian Independence Act-1947 and international law and was total and irrevocable

For a long time, the Nagas were advocating for the validity of the Plebiscite conducted in Naga Hills with the U.N. Bodies. The plebiscite in Naga Hills were conducted only in a group of Naga villages , not a country  or a state without involvement of the authority or without participation of United Nations. Moreover, there was no proof of free and impartial voting , which was conducted among highly illiterate and ignorant people. The result of the plebiscite was submitted to the U.N. but the UN.N. could not do anything to help the Nagas.

23. The Nagas and the "Right to Self-determination" :  The Nags particularly the NSCN has been advocating the "Right to Self-determination"  of the Nagas with the United Nations for a long time . But the meaning of   "Right to Self-determination" has to be interpreted in the context of International Law. According to Article 1 of the  International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly resolution  2200 A (XXI) of 16  December, 1966, Entry into force : 3 January 1977 in accordance with Article 27 ) ," All peoples have the right of self determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely  pursue economic, social and cultural development ".

According to Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ( Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly resolution  2200 A (XXI) of 16 December, 1966, Entry into force : 23 March , 1976 in accordance with Article 49), " All peoples  have the right of self determination. By virtue of that right  they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development" International Law and Right to Self determination :

Let us also examine how the  modern international law interprets it. The modern international law recognises the principle of "Self-determination". However, there is a general misconception that "self-determination is synonymous with secession". The Friendly Relations Declaration, adopted by the U.N. General Assembly by consensus in 1970, for the first time contains a legal formulation of the "principle of self-determination". It clarifies that it principally applies to colonial situations, i.e., situations of gross subjugation of a people by an oppressive power, usually an alien power. This is typically the case in East Timor, and the U.N. General Assembly has consistently recognised it so. The Friendly Relations Declaration also stipulates that it is for the colonial people to determine their future status, i.e. whether they wish to merge with the territory of its erstwhile colonial power, or opt for any other arrangement (free association, etc), or else decide to go independent.

One may ask the question " does this right to secession apply to an already established state?". The Friendly Relations Declaration, 1970  stipulates that "its provisions 'shall not be construed as authorising or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent states conducting themselves in compliance with the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples as described above and thus possessed of a government representing the whole people belonging to the territory without distinction as to race, creed or colour.'' In other words, self-determination of a people is a process, and it cannot be used as a facade for a right of secession; against a country with established democratic institutions and respect for the rights of the people. So long as India remains democratic, no State of the Indian Union can claim any right of secession, its people will have to persist in pursuing their rights within the framework of the Union.

Right to Self determination and the Government of India

Neelam Sanjiva Reddy, President of India deposited the declaration of the Government of India  on 10 April, 1979 with reference to Article 1 of  the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights , which runs as follows–" the Government of the Republic of India declares that the words  the right to self determination  appearing in these articles apply only to the people under foreign domination and that these words do not apply to sovereign  independent states  or to a section of people or nation–which is the essence of national integrity".

Here again, the United Nations can not do anything to help the Nagas.

24. It is clear  that the Naga insurgency movement had  been initiated by the British when the Nagas  came back brainwashed after the First World War. The hidden agenda of the British was to convert the Manipuri and Nagaland tribal into Christianity. That is why the British adopted the policy of " Divide and Rule " between the Nagas and  Non-Nagas. The British sought the assistance of the  Manipur Maharaja whenever they were in trouble in Naga Hills . When the Manipuri  forces  adopted the same strategy to subdue the Nagas, the British  said "it was 'impossible to get Manipur to carry out honestly the orders of the Government (Mackenzie, 2001: 108)". After two such expeditions to the Angami Naga country, Lieutenant Vincent reported in 1850 that 'in every Angami village, there were two parties, one attached to the interests of Manipur and the other to the British, but each only working for an alliance to get aid in crushing the opposite faction (Mackenzie, 2001: 112).  Further  the British laid down a boundary between the Naga Hills  territory and Manipur in 1842 and reasserted it in 1867 just to avoid annexation of  Naga Hills by the Manipur Forces but it was little regarded by Manipuris (Mackenzie, 2001: 122).

23. Phizo left Nagaland hiding in a coffin. He then showed up in 1963 in Britain, holding a Peruvian passport. It is strongly suspected that the British Baptist Church, which is very powerful in Nagaland, is the contact between British intelligence and the Naga undergrounds operating on the ground at that  time. Once Phizo arrived in Britain, Lord Bertrand  Russell  courted Phizo, and became his new friend. Russell was deeply impressed with Phizo's "earnestness" for a peaceful settlement. What, perhaps, impressed Russell the most is that Phizo had control over the militant Nagas, who had launched a movement under the Naga National Council (NNC) to secede from the Indian Republic. In a letter dated Feb. 12, 1963, Sir Bertrand Russell told Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, "I find it hard to understand the difficulty of coming to an agreement which would put an end to the very painful occurrences incidental to the present policy of India."

24. On Jan. 30, 1992, soldiers of the Assam Rifles arrested two British nationals along the Nagaland-Burma border. David Ward and Stephen Hill posed as members of BBC-TV, and were travelling in jeeps with Naga rebels carrying arms. Subsequent interrogation revealed that both were operatives of Naga Vigil, a U.K.-based group. Both Ward and Hill claimed that they started the organization while in jail, influenced by Phizo's niece, Rano Soriza. Both have served six-year prison terms for various crimes in Britain. Naga Vigil petitioned for their release in the Guwahti High Court. Phizo's niece took up the issue with then-Nagaland Chief Minister Vamuzo. (Ramtanu Maitra, The Indian North East,Next week:"Baluchistan and FATA in Pakistan."
(http://wondersofpakistan.wordpress.com/2009/04/23/south-asian-terrorism-all-roads-lead-to-the-british-empire/

Till the beginning of 1971, the USA continued to be the patron of the insurgents, though the actual supplies of arms and ammunitions from this source were not always steady. Bangkok became the Operational Headquarters of the C.I.A. Arms flowed from Bangkok liberally to any group that wanted to embark on  adventure. Besides, Pakistan  provided the insurgents with transit camps, training centrers and a route to Bangkok and Peking. Dacca–Bangkok–London–Pindi–Peking channel was used to operate on the common ground of  "hatred towards India".

As early as 1950s, the C.I.A. had extended its activities into Nagaland and was financing the underground movement in Nagaland. "American spies handed the tribal leaders several million rupees, weapons and secret instructions prepared in Washington". A journalist Dhruva Mazumdar, the author of 'Confession of a Journalist', states that he was paid by the C.I.A. to file reports from Northeastern India on movements of the Indian Army and "barrack room gossip".  Again, it was before Bangladesh was liberated that the U.S.A. and some other western powers hatched a conspiracy to create an "Independent Bengal" comprising East Pakistan, West Bengal, Assam, Nagaland, Manipur, Tripura, Sikkim and Bhutan. The "Blueprint of this design was spelt out in a Dacca datelined dispatch circulated by Agencies International De Presa (International Press Agency) on December 7, 1963". The separatist leaders are said to have accepted the plot of independent Bengal with its capital in Calcutta. It promised the Nagas and Mizos of 'Greater Nagaland' and 'Greater Mizoram' as autonomous units within the framework of 'Great Bengal'. (Dinesh Kotwal , The Naga Insurgency: The Past And The Future)

25. The Nagas were inspired by Christian Missionaries for more than one century. Their spokesmen were often British or Americans. The presence of foreign nationals like  Rev. Michael Scott, a British citizen  was  one of the few examples . When Scott was compelled to leave India on 3 May , 1966, the Nagas felt that the expulsion of Scott spelt general defeat of the Nagas and the wind was taken out of the sails of Naga underground movement . Christianity was a strong unifying force. among the Nagas.  The British gave them advance information  and guided them at every step steering formation of Naga Club, submission of memorandum to the Simon Commission. The movement was sustained and supported by the British , the USA , Pakistan, Bangladesh and China.  But nowadays, every country has faced the brunt of terrorism specially after  the  11 September incident  where the  twin World Trade Towers  were  destroyed by  the Terrorist Groups. So any  country would hesitate to  come forward openly to help the NSCN  or any other insurgent organization. In the absence of international support, the power and popularity of NSCN  are bound to  decline.

26. In the letter to the then Prime Minister Jawaharala Nehru  dated 30 June, 1956, the Federal Authority of Government of Nagaland said that "Naga territory is not and has never been a part of Indian territory . And we cannot give our country . This is the actual position".  This statement automatically excludes the Naga inhabited districts of Manipur. Because,  the Tangkhul and other Naga groups in Manipur  have been under the  Manipur kings and subsequently under the Manipur and Indian Government for almost 2000 years.

27. On the 6th September 1964, the  Cease-Fire Agreement was signed between the Indian Government and the Federal Government of Nagaland through the initiative of the Nagaland Baptist Church Council. The Naga Peace Mission was formed consisting of Rev. Micheal Scott, Mr. Chaliha and Jaya Prakash Narayan. Michael Scott played host to Phizo when he fled to England. He had " heart to heart talk"  with the Naga underground leaders whereas they refused to meet other two members. While the Cease-fire Draft was in the making , the Prime Minister Pandit Nehru passed away on 27 May, 1964. However, the Suspension of Operation Agreement was signed by both parties on 15 August, 1964 which was officially christened as Cease–fire , which came into effect from 6 September, 1964

28. The Naga movement became paralysed with internal disorders and disunity as early as 1956  with the murder of T. Sakhrie , the then Secretary General of NNC–showing the seed of discord. Mr. Scato Swu Sema, the erstwhile President of the Federal Government of Nagaland who surrendered as an Underground leader on 16 August , 1973 and became a Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha once commented "even if we get independence, Nagas would not be able to live together. We will fight among ourselves as  there is a lot of tribal politics".

29. Phizo's prolonged absence from 1957 to 1990 plunged the Naga morale into the abyss of despair. It is reported that  a good number of his followers surrendered to the Indian Government in protest against his escape to England. He was enjoying life in England in comforts whereas many Nagas were suffering in the jungles . He has many children  and none of them joined the underground movement whereas many poor villagers have sacrificed their lives . His own daughter (Tutu)  was married to a Indian  Army Officer . His niece Mrs. Rano Saiza contested  an Assembly election  seat in spite of public protest .

For a list of References, please click here.

To be continued...