Political parties and Naga groups had insisted that the deal be reached before last year`s elections to the Nagaland Assembly. The framework agreement was signed with NSCN-IM, which had threatened to withdraw if the government met with another group. However, after several roundtables, the NSCN-IM agreed to include smaller groups and six groups, in addition to the NSCN-IM, are now formally part of the peace process. Delays were also caused by the request for a separate flag and passport and the issue of armed battalions from Naga. Barely months before the elections in Lok Sabha, it seems unlikely that the agreement will be reached during this term of the central government. The government informed a parliamentary body that it had signed a framework agreement with the National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM) after concluding an agreement within the Federation of India with a “special status”. Muivah accusing Ravi of shaking up the Naga peace process by claiming that the 2015 agreement contained the promise of shared sovereignty, the peace process derailed. However, in some circles, this could also be seen as the impact of the Article 370 stage in Jammu and Kashmir. Just over three years ago, on August 3, 2015, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the signing of a historic framework agreement to end the decades-old Naga insurgency.
However, the peace agreement has yet to be concluded, even though all parties concerned, with the exception of the Government, seem interested in a conclusion. Many details of the 2015 deal are mysterious – while the Naga groups have abandoned the demand for sovereignty and border entrenchment, issues such as a separate passport, flag and army remain unresolved. While the 16-point agreement reached in 1960 between the government and tribal members gave Nagaland a separate state, extracted from the Naga Hills district of neighboring Assam, the 1975 Shillong Agreement aimed to end the insurgency by agreeing to develop a detailed settlement to satisfy the aspirations of the Nagas. The agreement published by the NSCN-IM states that “sovereign power is shared” and that it provides for a “new enduring relationship, including a new relationship of peaceful coexistence between the two entities.” So why did the NSCN (I-M) break its promise to the center? Especially at a time when the interlocutor of the center, R.N. Delighted, did he say that all the important agreements on the peace agreement had been reached last October and that there were only a few small outstanding issues left to be stitched up? It is assumed that Muivah hardened his position on a separate constitution and shared sovereignty by arguing that if India`s constitution prevails in the agreement, Nagaland`s special status could be lost in the future. Thuingaleng Muivah, the secretary general of the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isak-Muivah) or NSCN (IM), said at the signing of the Nagaland Peace Agreement in 2015, Thuingaleng Muivah, the secretary general of the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isak-Muivah) or NSCN (IM), said that he had accepted, when signing the Nagaland Peace Agreement in 2015, that the nagas coexist but would not merge with India. The framework agreement, shared Tuesday as part of a detailed NSCN-IM press release, said: “Both sides have understood the respective positions of the other and are aware of the universal principle that in a democracy, sovereignty belongs to the people. As a result, the Govt. India and the NSCN, taking into account the aspirations of the people to a part of the sovereign power, as defined in the competences, reached an agreement as an honorable solution on August 3, 2015. Mr Ravi signed the agreement on behalf of the Centre in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
The other two signatories were Isak Chishi Swu, who died in 2016, and Thuingaleng Muivah, 86, who is leading the talks. Former secret service bureau officer Ravi was appointed interlocutor in August 2014. . .