Unification of Land in Naga Context

Nagas are however being denied the right to exercise their sovereign powers that will allow them to be self-determining. Therefore, any process of negotiation must focus towards reclaiming the rights of the Naga people to exercise their Sovereign Will as expressed and desired by the people. The natural yearning of the Naga people to unify their homeland into one political entity is a manifestation of the will of the people. Any attempt to prevent the unification of the Naga homeland is a denial of the Naga people’s right to exercise their Sovereign will. It is imperative to understand together the fact that unification of all Naga areas as an expressed will is directly related to the sovereignty of the Naga people. The Nagas for fullest realization of their identity and rights demands the unification of their land which is at the heart of their existence. It implies the desired will of the people to live together as one “political entity” with the freedom to decide the fate of its own destiny.

Perhaps through this gathering, a natural praxis will evolve based on the idea that the freedom of one is the freedom of the other; because when one is unfree, no one can claim to be free. The strive for our rights and freedoms requires an act of supreme will, whereby our political conscience will not allow us to do otherwise. Like all other struggling peoples, the Nagas only want to wake up peacefully, have some food, be assured of their dignity and that of their children, go to work with heads lifted high, govern themselves on what they know is best and right for them, decide their own destiny, have a drink, sing and dance…. Is this too complex to understand?

The time is now to tell!

[1] Parts of this section are adapted from an ongoing research study chapter “The Language of Self-Determination” being undertaken by Aküm Longchari at the University of New England, Armidale in Australia.
[2] S. James Anaya, Indigenous Peoples in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), p.75
[3] Taiaiake observed that ‘Meaningful progress towards self-determination can never be made until Native communities are free of economic dependency.’ See Alfred Taiaiake, Peace, Power, and Righteousness: an indigenous manifesto (Canada: Oxford University Press, 1999), p.136.
[4] Richard Falk, “Self-Determination Under International Law: The Coherence of Doctrine Versus the Incoherence of Experience” in Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World. (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.65
[5] See David Archard, “The Ethical Status of Nationality,” in Desmond M. Clarke and Charles Jones ed., The Right of Nations: Nations and Nationalism in a Changing World (New York: St. Martins Press, 1999), p.154
[6] Ali A. Mazrui, Towards a Pax Africana: A Study on Ideology and Ambition, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1967), pp. x-xi.
[7] David C. Gordon, Self-Determination and History in the Third World (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1971), p.128
[8] Mahmood Mamdani, When Victims become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism and the Genocide in Rwanda (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), p.22.
[9] John Hoffman, Beyond the State: An Introductory Critique (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995), p.66.
[10] Marimba Ani, YURUGU: An African-Centered Critique of European Cultural Thought and Behavior (Trenton, NJ & Asmara, Eritrea: Africa World Press, Inc. 1994, 10th Edition 2000), pp.15-16.
[11] Freire reminds us that the language is a vital component of the structure of oppression and it both generates and derives from the policy of domination, exploitation and subjugation of others. Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed: New Revised 20th-Anniversary Edition (New York: Continuum Publishing Company 1970, Revised 1993, 2000). Thiong’o says that language is central to a peoples’ definition in relation to the world around them and has a dual character as a means of communication and a carrier of an evolving culture; therefore language as the collective memory bank of a people’s experience in history. He further adds that “the domination of a people’s language by the languages of the colonizing nations was crucial to the domination of the mental universe of the colonized.” Ngugi Wa Thiong’o, Decolonizing the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature (Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers Ltd & London: James Curry Ltd., 1993), pp.4-16.
[12] Parts of this section are adapted from an ongoing research study chapter “Self-Determination and the United Nations” being undertaken by Aküm Longchari at the University of New England, Armidale in Australia.
[13] The order of present sovereign states dates roughly to The Peace Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, a settlement which ended the Thirty Years War. Westphalia was a modus vivendi, an agreement not upon common principles of religion or justice, but upon the mutual obligation of political authorities not to interfere in one another’s territory. Westphalia State named after The Peace Treaty of Westphalia became the most enduring, universal and invoked form of territorial sovereignty in international law. See Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.407, Daniel Philpott, “Self-Determination in Practice” in Margaret Moore ed., National Self-Determination and Secession (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp.89-90, See also, S. James Anaya, Indigenous Peoples in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996) and Charles Tilly, Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990-1992 (Cambridge, MA & Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publisher, Ltd. 1990; 1992)
[14] Ali A. Mazrui, Cultural Forces in World Politics (Oxford: James Currey Ltd., 1990), p.38.
[15] S. James Anaya, Indigenous Peoples in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), p.15.
[16] This does not mean that States did not exist before the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. One can find important instances of Greek city-states and both oriental and indigenous patterns of human association and political institutions. The idea of state with sovereignty and some sort of an interstate system, resting upon some mutual higher ideas and values was, however, not prevalent prior to the seventeenth century. Sovereign states based on European models were imposed in Asia, Africa and Latin America during the era of colonization. Jeffrey Herbst says that it was not until the 19th century that the post-feudal political entities were converted into national states in Europe and that the organizing principle across must of the world outside of Europe was not nation-state but empires. Jeffrey Herbst, “Global Change and the Future of Existing Nation-States” in Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World. (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.15
[17] Ngugi Wa Thiong’o, Moving the Centre: The Struggle for Cultural Freedoms (Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers Ltd & London: James Curry Ltd., 1993), p.13.
[18] Jeffrey Herbst, “Global Change and the Future of Existing Nation-States” in Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World. (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.15.
[19] Jeffrey Herbst, “Global Change and the Future of Existing Nation-States” in Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World. (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.19.
[20] Richard Falk, “Self-Determination Under International Law: The Coherence of Doctrine Versus the Incoherence of Experience” in Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World. (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.31.
[21] Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World. (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.5
[22] Jeffrey Herbst, “Global Change and the Future of Existing Nation-States” in Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World. (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.19
[23] The victors of World War II formed the United Nations in 1945 with its members being designated as ‘peace-loving nations.’ The “self-determination of peoples” was featured in the “purposes and principles” of the founding documents of the United Nations Charter – containing two direct and two indirect references of self-determination. Aurelie Cristescu, The Right to Self-Determination: Historical and Current Development On The Basis Of United Nations Instruments. A Study Prepared By A Special Rapporteur. (New York: United Nations, 1981), p.54
[24] Webber states that the United Nations membership has increased from around 50 to more than 180 in 1996. Mark Webber, “State and Statehood” in Brain White, Richard Little and Michael Smith, ed., Issues in World Politics (MacMillan Press, 1997) p.24. Alptekin says there is at present an estimated 6,500 nations, peoples, minorities and indigenous peoples in the world of which less than 200 are represented in the United Nations. Erkin Alptekin in his presentation on Self-Determination and Conflict Transformation in Geneva,  July 16, 2002.
[25] F.S. Northedge, The International Political System (London: Faber and Faber, 1976), p.15.
[26] S. James Anaya, Indigenous Peoples in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), p.41.
[27] Michael Freeman, “The Right to National Self-Determination: Ethical Problems and Practical Solutions” in Desmond M. Clarke and Charles Jones ed., The Right of Nations: Nations and Nationalism in a Changing World (New York: St. Martins Press, 1999), p.52
[28] James Anaya, Indigenous Peoples in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), p.79.
[29] Ali A. Mazrui, Towards a Pax Africana: A Study on Ideology and Ambition, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1967), pp.10-11.
[30] Richard Falk, “Self-Determination Under International Law: The Coherence of Doctrine Versus the Incoherence of Experience” in Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World. (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.33.
[31] Michael Freeman, “The Right to National Self-Determination: Ethical Problems and Practical Solutions,” in Desmond M. Clarke and Charles Jones ed., The Right of Nations: Nations and Nationalism in a Changing World (New York: St. Martins Press, 1999), p.51
[32] Declaration of Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States adopted by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV) in 1970
[33] Morton H. Halperin and David J. Scheffer with Patricia L. Small, Self-Determination In The New World Order (Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1992), pp.23-24
[34] Umozurike, Self-Determination in International Law 236, quoted by Gerry J. Simpson, “The Diffusion of Sovereignty: Self-Determination in the Post-Colonial Age” in Mortimer Sellers ed., The New World Order: Sovereignty, Human Rights, and the Self-Determination of Peoples (Oxford, UK: Berg, 1996), p.54.
[35] Judge Hardy Dillard (ICJ Reports, 1975) quoted by Richard Falk, “Self-Determination Under International Law: The Coherence of Doctrine Versus the Incoherence of Experience” in Wolfgang Danspeckgruber ed., The Self-Determination of Peoples: Community, Nation, and State in an Interdependent World. (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), p.47
[36] Trevor Taylor and Seizaburo Sato ed., Security Challenges for Japan and Europe in a Post-Cold War World, Volume IV: Future Source of Global Conflict (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs and Institute for International Policy Studies, 1995), pp.8-9
[37] Foucault quoted in Mark E. Denham and Mark Owen Lombardi ed, Perspectives of Third-World Sovereignty: The PostModern Paradox (Hampshire: MacMillan Press LTD, 1996), p.1