Guwahati: Even as the talks between the Centre and the National Socialist Council of Nagalim-Isak Muivah (NSCN-IM) drag on for nearly three decades, a Myanmar-based NSCN faction is currently negotiating a possible ceasefire agreement with the Union government, ThePrint has learnt.
Representatives of the breakaway faction of the ethnic Naga group, the NSCN-Khaplang (NSCN-K) Ang Mai-Mulatonu, were in New Delhi last week for a second round of negotiations, sources within the outfit told ThePrint.
The NSCN-K was formed in April 1988, under the leadership of Shangnyu Shangwang Khaplang, a Hemi Naga from Myanmar. Based in Sagaing Region of northwest Myanmar, the separatist outfit is also active in parts of eastern Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh.
As the Naga communities are spread across Myanmar and India, different factions of the NSCN-K were led by leaders from both countries at various times. In June 2023, a split occurred within the Myanmar-based Yung Aung faction (NSCN-K YA) of the NSCN-K, leading to the formation of the new group under Ang Mai, another leader from Myanmar.
In April, Kughalu Mulatonu, an Indian Naga, joined the Ang Mai group and was elected general secretary two months later. Both Ang Mai and Mulatonu have influential roles in the ongoing ethnic and political dynamics in Myanmar and the Naga areas in India.
While the negotiations were carried out behind the scenes, the Konyak Anghs’ Union (KAU) representing the Konyak village chiefs in eastern Nagaland, wrote to Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio on 7 December, urging for the inclusion of NSCN-K (Ang Mai-Mulatonu) faction in ceasefire agreement to ensure “peaceful coexistence among the Nagas”.
KAU president Pohwang Konyak, a former MLA and an adviser to the Nagaland Konyak Union, said it would be a welcome step to bring the NSCN faction under ceasefire around Christmas.
“I have written to the Nagaland CM to enable the Ang Mai-Mulatonu group to enter into a ceasefire with the Government of India. It will be a good step, and beneficial for all. In the Ang Mai group, there’s a bigger number of Konyaks from the Indian side living in western Myanmar, almost about 300-400. They will all return home,” Konyak told ThePrint.
A source in the security establishment, however, said there has been no real outcome from the negotiations with the Ang Mai-Mulatonu group, so far.
The Ang Mai faction has positioned itself as “a protector of Naga interests” against what they perceive as “deceitful and destructive actions” by Yung Aung. On the other hand, the NSCN-K (YA) has been asserting its commitment to “full sovereignty” for the Naga people, stating that there could be no talks with India or Myanmar, if the issue was not addressed.
Also Read: Vibrant village programme bringing people back to LAC villages; tourists knocking
Leadership crisis in Naga Movement
The NSCN was formed after a split from the political organisation, the Naga National Council, on 2 February 1980. Eight years on, it split into the NSCN-Isak Muivah and the NSCN-Khaplang factions over differences in initiating a dialogue process with the Centre.
Since Khaplang’s death in June 2017, the NSCN (K) has seen multiple splits of its own. In 2018, the group divided into two factions: one led by Indian-origin leader Khango Konyak—later impeached in an internal struggle—and the other led by Khaplang’s nephew, Yung Aung.
Now, the factions led by Yung Aung and Ang Mai are at loggerheads over leadership and governance issues. Sources said leaders of the Ang Mai group met with authorities in Myanmar on several occasions, and reached an understanding regarding “free military operations” within the Naga Self-Administered Zone (NSAZ). Some of the insurgent groups operate close to the India-Myanmar border in the NSAZ of Sagaing Region and the surrounding mountains.
The leadership crisis among Naga groups is also fuelled by the long struggle for Naga identity and the issue of “sovereignty”, further complicated by the geopolitical landscape concerning India and Myanmar.
While Indian Naga leaders believe the factionalism in Myanmar won’t impact their own peace talks with New Delhi, they have reiterated their demand for an “early solution” to the Naga political issue, saying this would lead to the end of most such divisions.
‘Too many groups’
Talks between the Centre and the NSCN-IM have been officially continuing since a ceasefire agreement was signed in 1997. Even as there has been occasional optimism, the process has remained stuck over the outfit’s demand for a separate Naga national flag and Constitution (Yehzabo) in recognition of the “Naga history spanning over 70 years”.
New Delhi’s efforts are at odds with NSCN-IM general secretary Thuingaleng Muivah’s vision of cutting a deal with the government for a “Nagalim sovereign territory”.
Last month, the NSCN-IM issued press statements threatening to “resume armed resistance” if the Centre does not agree to “third-party intervention” to address its demands. It also reiterated that the Naga flag and constitution are “composite materials of sovereignty”.
A government official told ThePrint that the Centre is focused on finding a solution for Indian Nagas, but not for those settled in Myanmar, pointing out that the two countries are well demarcated by an international border.
Stakeholders in the ceasefire agreement with the Centre include the NSCN-IM, the NSCN Khaplang faction (NSCN-K) led by Khango Konyak, the Naga National Political Groups (NNPGs) and the Niki Sumi faction of the NSCN.
The NNPGs, that arrived at an ‘Agreed Position’ in 2017 are a group of seven Naga outfits in talks with the Centre, but separately. Today, there are more than 27 factions of Naga political groups, each claiming to represent the Nagas.
In the past fortnight, the sources from the security establishment said, two more groups have come up because of splits in the existing ones.
With the talks showing no sign of reaching a conclusion, the church leaders and youth leaders have been calling for a resolution at the earliest. This section of the Naga society claims to have grown weary of the “secrecy” surrounding the talks, and the Centre’s alleged approach encouraging splinter groups to join ceasefire, which, they say, has led to a “divided house”.
(Edited by Tony Rai)