The Naga Hoho said on Wednesday that it was “shocked and astounded” by Nagaland State Governor and interlocutor RN Ravi’s statement on the eve of 58th Statehood Day of Nagaland.
“What is more shocking is Mr. Ravi, who is also the interlocutor to the Indo-Naga peace talks, who seems to have been glorifying the controversial Naga Peoples’ Convention (NPC) and the creation of controversial statehood,” said the Naga Hoho in a press statement. The Naga Hoho further said that it cannot support such an “abusive” statement from the interlocutor and “therefore we outrightly condemn the statement made by him,” the Naga Hoho added.
The Naga Hoho then said that it had the notion that Ravi was unlike other interlocutors of the past and had great hope that during his tenure something could be worked out as “he had wisely understood the Naga political problem and its history of more than seventy years”. The Naga Hoho further said it never expected such an “antagonistic statement from a brilliant, intelligent and self respecting” interlocutor who is supposed to be a harbinger of peace. “Regrettably, RN Ravi’s entire utterances are to create divisions among the Nagas in line with regional and artificial territory,” the Naga Hoho added.
The Naga Hoho then said it would love to refer line by line on RN Ravi’s statement. “However, we will not dwell as desired, rather leave it to the cognisant of tribe hohos, students and women associations and civil society organisations particularly from the state of Nagaland to have reflection as harbinger of Nagas identity at this crucial moment and to ponder upon with all seriousness over the issues we are raising through this communiqué and come out with an open mind whether RN Ravi’s antipathetic statement is acceptable to the Nagas,” it added.
The Naga Hoho then said that no Governor in the past had resuscitated 16 Point Charter of Demands.
The Naga Hoho then asked R N Ravi, “What prompted you to take keen interest on the contentious issues after 57 years of statehood when Government of India and Naga negotiators are trying to resolve above 16 point resolution? Did the founding fathers of Nagaland state spend a single night in the jungle fighting for freedom and what they were doing when the 16 Point Charter of proposal/demand submitted to the Government of India? Do you think the Naga problem is related to armed insurgencies and who started violence? Why the Government of India did sign another ceasefire Agreement in 1964 and 1997 if the 16 Point Resolution/proposal is final settlement? Who are the guns of people from outside the state of Nagaland inspired by Maoist ideology and tactics? Who raped our mothers and sisters and destroyed and burnt down scores of our churches? Is it not the occupational forces?”
It then said that the Naga political issue belongs to the Naga people alone and not outsiders.
The Naga Hoho further asked RN Ravi, “Which single entity is claiming the sole franchise over it? Who are the primary stakeholders on Naga issue? Are you not the one who created primary and secondary stakeholders?”
“No doubt, heart of Nagaland beats in its villages where plebiscite was conducted in 1951,” said the Naga Hoho.
It then said the Indian National Flag and Constitution are the pride of the people of India, “so also Nagas do have our own flag and constitution”. “Who is talking contrary and peddling preposterous lies? Are you not the one who misinterpreted Framework Agreement? If the talks concluded on October 31, 2019, why did the Government of India directed IB officials to engage in Indo-Naga peace talks after you have created divide and destroy policy? If Indo-Naga political issue is meant for the Nagas of Nagaland, where is your comprehensive inclusive political settlement and who is stopping or delaying the final agreement?,” the Naga Hoho further questioned RN Ravi, adding, “Hon’ble Sir, please remember that Indo-Naga political problem is much older than you. No one is immortal and we will all die but Naga issue will remain ever green if we fail to find out amicable solution and bring to a logical conclusion with sheer political will”.