Kohima/New Delhi, Jan. 7: Beneath a pastel portrait of Angami Zapfu Phizo, the architect of the Naga movement, Kevitsielzo Gu-u sits in silence, recounting the past and pondering the future. To Phizo’s son, a resident of Kohima village near the state capital, the much-hyped visit of the NSCN (I-M) leadership and their proposed talks with the Prime Minister do not “mean much”. His sister Adinno, who lives in London, feels “talks are meaningless without the participation of the Naga National Council (NNC)”. Phizo had founded the NNC in 1946.
Though members of Phizo’s immediate family live far from each other, they are bound by the dreams of the “little man” from Khonoma, considered the cradle of the Naga movement.
In an interview to The Telegraph via e-mail, NNC president Adinno said she supported the political dialogue, but it was imperative to involve the major Naga organisations in the process. “For achieving a peaceful end from the current state of suspended war, the Naga National Council and the federal government of Nagaland always stand ready for meaningful dialogue with the Indian government, based on mutual respect and trust.”
The NNC had played the main role in the underground movement till the mid-1970s. Banned in 1967, it has always been opposed to the 16-point agreement of 1960. It began to lose its clout after some members opposed the Shillong Accord of 1975. The focus of the Naga movement shifted with the emergence of the NSCN five years later.
The gap between the NNC leadership and the organisation’s grassroots-level activists had, however, widened much earlier — especially when Phizo moved to London in the mid-1960s.
Facing the same kind of criticism her father did, Adinno said it was irrelevant that the NNC president was based abroad. “Whenever national interest is at stake, the call of duty will be answered. The Naga nation gave the mandate to remain independent with the Naga National Council in 1951. Though not a political party in the normal sense, NNC is the apex Naga establishment as it embodies the organic whole of Naga communities.”
The biggest setback to the NNC was when it split into two after the death of its founder in 1991. The faction led by Khodao Yanthan later merged with the NSCN (I-M).
Adinno said the dialogue between the Centre and the NSCN (I-M) would end in a “repetition of past mistakes” if the NNC were not made party to it. “Whether India recognises it or not, no international accord or agreement can be valid and internationally binding without the endorsement of the president of the NNC or without its authorisation.”
Phizo’s daughter accused the NSCN (I-M) of not making any effort to involve her in its negotiations with the Centre. Not surprisingly, she questions the outfit’s right to represent the Nagas at talks with the political leadership.
Gu-u said Adinno’s views “more or less reflect those of the family”. However, he said the demand for “sovereignty” was a vague one. “The NNC declared freedom way back in 1947; so there is no question of seeking freedom again.”