Why Nagaland wants to boycott Assembly elections
Nagaland could be heading for a constitutional crisis unless the over seven-decade-old Naga political problem is solved. And soon.
The Naga civil society has called for a boycott of the February 27 Assembly elections until a just and negotiated solution to the ongoing peace talks is reached at. However, even if the boycott threat falls through, can New Delhi afford to give in to the demand for a "Greater Nagaland".
The Naga hills have come a long way since it took up arms and fought an independence war against the Indian Army. That struggle was as early as 1947. A ceasefire has been on for several decades now, yet solution to the Naga question has remained elusive.
Considering the backdrop of the Naga problem, regional sentiments are paramount here. Political parties find it difficult to go against public sentiment. This explains why members of 11 political parties, including the BJP and the Congress, went along with the civil society demand for an election boycott.
Yet luckily for the Centre, some cracks have appeared. The 11 political parties are now having second thoughts. One of the dominant Naga tribes, the Angamis, will no longer support the boycott. The BJP has also pulled out of the agreement. Chances are that if others reject the boycott, the ruling Naga People’s Front would follow suit.
If this momentum grows, the BJP government at the Centre can rest assured that polls would go through smoothly. But there are many ifs and buts to this.
Holding elections at the point of a gun, would be disastrous, especially in a volatile tribal state like Nagaland. It would not be the first time in the Northeast. The Congress government did it in Assam in 1983 amid violence and a dismal poll voting percentage. The massacre of nearly 5,000-6,000 Bengali Muslims in Nellie is the predominant image to those elections, forced by the then prime minister Indira Gandhi on the face of resistance by the general public.
It happened in Nagaland too. In 1998, as local outfits heeded a boycott call, it proved a bonanza for the ruling Congress. But the bad blood such an election leaves is difficult to overcome. It will again be a blot on Indian democracy.
Nagaland has given the ruling BJP government at the Centre a rude shock. The BJP was part of the ruling coalition in Nagaland.
The sudden decision of all political parties in the state to boycott the February 27 polls unless the Naga peace talks are concluded, has pulled the rug under the BJP’s feet. But the BJP on the ground have been hard at work and its efforts are now showing results.
Junior minister for home, Kiren Rijiju, spelled out the BJP’s dilemma in a series of tweets on January 30.
Holding of timely election is a constitutional process. Govt is bound by the constitution. Govt of India attaches utmost importance to the long pending Naga issue. We believe that peaceful election in Nagaland will facilitate the ongoing peace talks & strengthen our commitment. pic.twitter.com/y1cpGqidqC
— Kiren Rijiju (@KirenRijiju) January 30, 2018
We fully understand the sentiments expressed by the Core Committee of the Nagaland Tribal Hohos and Civil Organisations (CCNTHCO) but election boycott is not the solution. Let's have faith in the Prime Minister Narendra Modi ji's commitment. https://t.co/KHmpQSagiB
— Kiren Rijiju (@KirenRijiju) January 30, 2018
The bold initiative started by PM @narendramodi ji to settle the 7 decades old complex Naga issue will bring positive results. pic.twitter.com/dI16K5yYu1
— Kiren Rijiju (@KirenRijiju) February 1, 2018
N Ravi, the bureaucrat who has been negotiating the Naga agreement, had this to say to a local paper: "Election and solution are not interrelated.” Ravi added that once the negotiation successfully concludes, the "agreement will be duly incorporated into the Constitution of India to ensure its permanency and immediate implementation".
The Naga Hoho, a powerful tribal body, reflected the sentiments of most Nagas when they asked for a final solution to the Naga problem ahead of the state elections. Negotiations between the Centre and the National Socialist Council of Nagaland have been on for over 20 years.
The talks have helped keep peace in the frontier state, but the endless rounds of negotiations have produced no final outcome.
In 2015, with fears that the ageing leadership of the NSCN (I-M) did not have long to live, a framework agreement was signed between the Centre and the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (I-M). This was in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. However, the contents of the pact remained a secret, nobody in Kohima or in New Delhi talked about it.
In an effort to force the issue, the Naga Hoho has called for an election boycott.
While the contours of the deal are not known, the NSCN (I-M) had insisted that in lieu of an independent Naga nation, the only other solution was amalgamation of Naga-inhabited territory into one composite homeland called the Nagalim.
The problem here is that Nagas live bordering states of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. Ironically, all these are BJP-ruled states. Yet none of the local governments would dare to cede even an inch of territory for the creation of a composite Naga homeland.
If the ruling parties do so, the BJP would not be in a position to win either Assam, Manipur or Arunachal again.
So where and how can the BJP make the adjustments, without ruining its political fortunes? This question is at the heart of the current problem. It is a complex issue and cannot be worked out before the polls. In such a situation what does the government do? But assuming the election boycott fizzles out, how will the Nagas get a composite Naga homeland? It will be difficult for the prime minister to convince the state government.
This is exactly the reason why the peace agreement in 2015, signed in Delhi, was a hush-hush affair. If the Centre has not been able to deliver in the past two years, where is the guarantee it can do so now?