The opinion provides key factors and observations into the dynamics of the Naga peace process in a brief manner. It looks at the progress of the negotiations, the roles of the key players, the issues that arose along the way, and the way forward.
The opinion’s goal is to understand the reasons for the process’s failure and delayed resolution in the hope that the lessons learned will be useful to policymakers, analysts, researchers, and others interested in the long-term resolution of the Naga political issue, as well as other disputes in the region and beyond.
Factors and Observations:
🔸 The fundamental reason for the “delay in settlement” between India, Myanmar, and the Nagas was the vast disparity in their goals. While India and Myanmar “diplomatically” accept the issue as “political,” in practice, they saw it as an issue of “internal law and order.” The factors included not only the tactical (rather than principled) stance that both sides (Naga-India and Naga-Myanmar) took toward the peace process, but also aspects of the broader political context, such as the gradual recovery(increasing) of both India’s and Myanmar’s military-political confidence, and the influence from a regional geopolitical standpoint. The attempt by India and Myanmar to impose a strict timetable (agreement) on the negotiations approach in 2019 (India and Myanmar) was another impediment. It was unrealistic for the government of India and Myanmar to expect that imposing a single-sided approach would result in a full settlement without first establishing proper norms and procedures. An important lesson is that the final resolution of zero-sum disputes cannot be achieved quickly.
🔸 A broader spectrum of Nagas, Indian, and Myanmar representatives should have been involved to broaden the scope of discussion and shift the focus away from the “one interlocutor” representation by both India and Myanmar to avoid misreading and questions arising in the more than 7+ decades political issue for an opportunity to shift toward more practical steps rather than stuck in their respective positions.
🔸 Some critics have suggested that India and Myanmar may have contributed to the peace process’s delays and failures due to factors such as their relative inexperience in resolving strategy and personnel’s limited conflict (historical) knowledge of the issue. Others have suggested that the Nagas’ disunity and strong stance on sovereignty may have played a role.
🔸 Key elements in India’s and Myanmar’s military and political elites were aware that Naga pro-independence (individuals and groups) aimed to internationalize the Naga political issue and were keen to limit (or prevent entirely) international involvement in the peace process.
As a result, a viable formula would have addressed substantive political issues while also seeking to benefit all negotiating parties. India and Myanmar resorting to a military solution is unlikely to resolve the conflict and may even be counterproductive. While India, Myanmar, and the Nagas had an institutional interest in “talking up” the peace process, at times instilling false optimism and failing to address fundamental stumbling blocks, there has been no official outside(international) mediation in the Naga peace process to date, which is critical given the issue’s geopolitical significance. While the Naga political issue is rooted in British colonial rule, the Commonwealth, particularly the United Kingdoms, can offer expertise in this area. India and Myanmar’s continued assertiveness in the Naga peace process raises the risk of conflict in the region.
Author’s Disclosure Statement: Augustine R. is an independent researcher on the India-Naga-Myanmar political issue, as well as on broader global security and strategic issues, and does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article/opinion.
Featured Image: Wikipedia / The picture has been reworked/merged by the International Council of Naga Affairs (ICNA).
ICNA reserves all rights to the content submitted. The author’s views are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of nagaaffairs.org