 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. On 4th December, Indian Army soldiers shot dead 13 civilians, minors who were simply returning from work in the Mon district of Nagaland. The Indian government has called it a case of misidentification and intelligence inputs gone wrong. In the violence that ensued, there was further firing by the army, a soldier died, and some were injured. The continuance of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act in force since 1958 has come into focus once again. We have with us well-known lawyer and writer, Nandita Haqzir, whose extensive experience working in the region to help put the violence in context, explain what it takes for a region. Nandita Haqzir, welcome to the show. Nandita, I wanted to begin by asking whether you can put this recent incident of violence in some sort of framework. Is it a question of intelligence failure gone wrong, or is it a question of impunity of the army? I think it's something much, much more serious. In the sense that, OK, maybe they have the intelligence has some information. Maybe they take an ambush position, and they have been doing it from 58. But what kind of failure is it that coal miners are coming and they don't know how to stop it, and they just start firing? It's not an inexperienced force which has been in that area. I understand mistakes can happen, but in this situation, where they have been doing counterinsurgency, where armed forces special powers act has been used since 1958, how on earth can this be a mistake? These are people who have been experienced in counterinsurgency and in Mountain Warfare. They are trained. And yet, this horrendous act could have been done. It shows an utter indifference to human lives and utter indifference to what they can get away with, because they cannot get away with something like this in any other part. So they have that assurance within themselves that, OK, this is just one more incident. But this time, it's not one more incident. I think the Nagas, there's now a long history. There's meant to be a peace process. And I think this time, their patience has run up. And the kind of protests and demonstrations that we have seen this time is truly different from all the parts. Do you think the northeast, parts of the northeast will become ungovernable as the Indian government says, if the law is withdrawn? We, meaning the human rights community and all those who have been fighting against this particular act, are saying a very simple thing. If there's an insurgency, if there's a political problem, however complex and difficult, the only solution is a political solution. Military solution does not work, has not worked. Our history shows it has not worked. In 1958, there was one Naga insurgency led by Mr. Pizo, the NNP, Naga National Council. Today, you have 11 groups. Partly, these groups reflect the policy of intelligence agencies to divide and rule. So therefore, they thought that by dividing and ruling and multiplying these groups, you could stop insurgency. Now, the situation from 1958 to now is far more complex. And in my opinion, far more dangerous for the unity and security of India and for the region. I mean region of South Asia. In the broader context of the talks between the different rebel groups and the Indian government, has some kind of a rule over here? But I think that there is no framework for peace talks. Peace talks have begun with different terms and conditions with different groups, depending on the groups' own political power and ability to negotiate. There is no transparency. There is no accountability in any of the peace processes. So there is, peace process is more or less an effort for the path of the counterinsurgency. It's not a path of political solution to very serious problems of Indian democracy and Indian nation building. So the context right now is of the Hornbill Festival. Have you ever attended this festival and what kind of a projection of Naga culture does it do? Is it a very textbookish version? No, no. In fact, it's a very politically volatile idea. The Hornbill Festival is projected as a festival of Naga land, not of all Naga. Yes, I have been to the Hornbill Festival. And yes, I was shocked that some of the Naga tribes downstairs, when the troop came to the Naga land festival, they were described as tribal, national, and not as Naga. Therefore, as it is celebrated on December 1, which is the day of Naga land state. And Naga land state, according to many Naga scholars, was a creation for counterinsurgency and dividing Naga people between Naga's of Naga land and Naga's of the other parts of India, which is Manipur Assam Arunachal. So the whole approach to the Naga problem has been one of trying to settle it to counterinsurgency method, which is like divide and rule, misinformation, and such tactics. So we're also noticing that it's not just the recent incident, but there was a rather unprecedented border skirmish between Mizoram and Assam. We have refugees coming into Mizoram from Myanmar. And we have groups which have different positions on drawing the outlines of what constitutes Naga land. Can you just put all of this in context? First of all, is the Northeast region as a whole becoming more volatile than it was a few years ago? So to that question that you've asked, there are many questions. And maybe what we really ought to do is to spell out what is the Northeast area. Sometimes we forget that the Northeast area is joined to India by a border of 22 kilometers. That's it, in what is called the Siliguri Corridon. The rest, 98% of Northeast India, the Northeast region of India, is linked by international borders. All these international borders are volatile. All these international borders are with countries where there are ethnic, religious, racial, national, all kinds of conflicts. Plus, they are international intelligence agencies. So in that kind of context, it is utmost important that the citizens of India living within the Indian border should feel a sense of belonging. And if they do not feel a sense of belonging and they feel alienated, they can be manipulated by various groups, by intelligence agencies, by other Western interests. And that is happening. So yes, and now at the moment, for instance, as you mentioned Myanmar refugees are coming in. And a lot of them are political refugees. But a lot of them are not political refugees. And there is a volatile situation in which some refugees who are actually migrants are competing for land with certain communities which are living on the border. So there is a very, very complex dynamics going on, which is not understood by ordinary people or like you and me in it. So the civil society does not intervene in the way it should. And it lets the government to somehow deal with this problem. And each government, I'm not saying only this government, because this problem is not begun with this government. But this government has complicated the matter with its own understanding. What is the complication that this government in particular is trying to do? So what it is doing is it is trying to have an alliance of Buddhism. It is promoting Buddhism as a means of cementing or creating a unity. And this is an area which is not necessary with this majority area. So there is a policy of using Buddhism as a tool, weaponization of Buddhism against what they think is the main threat to India, which is Islam or militant Islam or political Islam. So you have this kind of situation on the border. So do you think that there are actually intimations of a certain restlessness that were not there just a few years ago? We have Assam also in turmoil for a variety of reasons. So we have these tensions already. Some of it was being sorted out by some kinds of peace talks. But now we have a series of BJP governments, which openly are promoting an idea of Hindu identity. You have a large Muslim population. Some of it may be migrants who have been, who see no possibility because of the changes in the Citizens Act of becoming citizens, which itself provides a very volatile situation. You have rowing girls who are coming in as refugees, not getting refugees later, left again to the hands and very vulnerable to certain Muslim militant groups. So the question is, how do we solve this problem? Can we solve it by a majoritarian authoritarian method? Do we solve it by ethnic democracy? Do we solve it by a democratic structure? Do we solve it by law? Or do we solve it by military solution? What is actually the important thing here is that these settlement discussions have also been going on with Nagaland for quite some time now, 1975, 2015. What are really the roadblocks which are preventing this from really coming to fruition? Well, Nagar peace talks is a far more complex issue, which has been going on from 1907 to now. And we thought that maybe it will be settled in 2013, I think, when they had that August 3 agreement. But we see, again, a heartening of attitude. And again, a total lack of vision. Nagaland movement has now more and more identified itself with a religious identity. It's less a national identity and more a religious identity. Now, for instance, everywhere it is a religious identity which is searching itself. So now, it is a overall, it is Nagaland for Christ. And it's Nagaland for a particular type of Christianity, which is fundamentalist, which is a kind of verb. And therefore, through these processes, it's more and more a religious ethnic identity and not a political civil national self-determination. So yes, it has complicated the matter. Nandita, one very interesting thing is this demand for a separate constitution or a demand for a separate flag, for your own flag. Why does it raise heckles? And where does the demand come from? Can you really explain? This often confuses a lot of people. Well, if you look at it, if people are asking for independence and sovereignty, then flag and a constitution are normally dissembled. Perhaps I do not know, because I have not been involved with the latest round of talks. When I was involved, there was a talk of other issues, like land issue, mineral issue. But today, maybe I do not know, they thought of Kashmir, which has its own constitution and it has its own flag. But I don't think it's such a sensitive issue because every state has its own flag. And in India, every state seems to have its own national song. Mizharam has a national song and Sam has a national song. And they call it national song. They don't call it national anthem. But it's more or less like their national song. And I think the beauty of this country was that you could have a national song, you could have yours, but even all Indians. But today, the idea of India in whatever way we define it has taken a beating. I don't think people talk about the idea of India, except a few of us who were left from another generation. So it is that which is very dangerous if we want to unite India. December 31st is another date for the AFSPA to come up for ending. Do you think the government is going to veer around at some point to withdraw the law, at least from Nagaland? I actually know why people saying that they could withdraw it. Because to me, even if they withdraw it, let's see even if they withdraw it. It's not one law. The same kind of authority I did. They may arrest you one day under Tata. Then they have another law, Pota. Then you have Lupea. Now they have tax rates. And they have rates like in New Zealand. So it's not a law which is the reason for anything. It is a growing authoritarianism in this country. And actually, it's not only in this country. It is all over the world. We see this. And we see that COVID or the pandemic has been used to pass very stringent laws. Aung San Suu Kyi has been given four years for violating COVID law. So it's not a question of armed forces special forces. I think it's much more serious because today the language of human rights has been weaponized. The language of human rights is used to justify wars from Yugoslavia to Afghanistan to Iraq. So when in international community, when there is a weaponization of human rights, then what language with which language do we fight against this? And that is a much more serious problem. Then merely one act, because it is the culture of armed forces special forces, the political culture which has been used for creating immunity, for allowing the armed forces to do whatever they have been doing, this type of counter-insurgency which has allowed murder, rape, theft, looting to take place, defiled a case in 1987. For 27 years, the Indian courts didn't give a judgment. When they gave it, it didn't give any justice. Now we've come to a point when even human rights movement has totally weakened. And human rights discourse, as I said, has been weaponized. Thank you. Thank you for joining us, Nandita, very much. Thanks very much for watching. Subscribe to NewsClick YouTube channel and follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.