The collapse of the final agreement may lead to the return of the insurgents, not only in Nagaland, but also in the neighbouring states, with the NSCN (I-M) playing a leading role in maintaining porridge in this part of the country. All other insurgent groups consider NSCN (I-M) to be a big brother to continue their infamous activities. The Chinese are also looking for ways to jump into the fray. We have to be careful. It is interesting to note that other Naga groups had previously signed a nine-point agreement — in June 1947 — known as Naga-Akbar Hyderi (then governor of Assam). Phizo refused. In 1951, Phizo claimed 99 percent support in a referendum for a “sovereign state of Naga.” A peace agreement between the government and the NNC was signed in 1975. The NNC, dubbed the Shillong Agreement, has promised to give up arms, but several senior NNC leaders have not endorsed the deal and have broken up to push their own factions. One such group was the NSCN, which then split into an NSCN (I-M) group. Asked if the NNPGs were ready to sign an agreement away from the NSCN (I-M), alezo Venuh, wc coordinator, told ThePrint: “It`s the I-M; they also agreed on a solution on 31 October 2019. We can`t speak for him. In declaring its opposition to what was said in the commission`s report, the NSCN attempted to tell the Naga public that it had not abandoned its previous position, and it was only NSCN that was trying to get the best offer for people against adversity. This avowed perseverance can also be interpreted as an attempt to reject Ravi`s efforts to involve more actors in the peace process, in order to probably weaken the NSCN`s position as the main peace negotiator.
Phizo`s outfits agreed to give up arms under the Shillong Agreement, but this gave the NSCN under Thuingaleng Muivah, who was in China at the time of the agreement and received the support of the communist regime. The northeastern states were cautious about the framework agreement signed by NSCN (I-M) leaders with the Indian government in August 2015. The content of the agreement has not yet been revealed, although tribal associations and civil society insist on transparency. The NSCN said it had so far renounced the publication of the agreement, which respects “the tacit agreement between the two parties not to be made public for India`s security reasons.” He said that Mr. Ravi had taken an unwarranted advantage and began modifying and manipulating the agreement to mislead the Nagas and the center. As Muivah was already in New Delhi for his medical treatment, a final agreement was expected before Independence Day. But with the relationship between the NSCN (I-M) and the interlocutor, new discussions have become impossible. The Prime Minister`s office intervened and urged the Director of the Intelligence Bureau, Arvind Kumar, and Special Director Akshay Kumar Mishra to continue the discussions.
The National Socialist Council of Nagaland-IM published for the first time the details of the 2015 framework agreement, accusing interlocutor R.N. Ravi of removing a keyword from the original document and sharing the modified version with other Naga groups.