In this connection, Thefulhouvi Solo advising that Nagas of Nagaland should not share the same table with Nagas of outside Nagaland. The imagery thesis seems to be faulted on this count. Cannanite Women was not a Jew and hence, customarily not entitled to share the same table with the Israelite. But for the Nagas, be it from Nagaland, Assam, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh or from Myanmar are not under such customary constraints and will share the table wherever it may be. Let us not forget that the enemy has created artificial boundaries to divide and rule the Nagas. Furthermore, there is no comparison to say that because Nagas in pertain cannot claim the rights of British citizens and to conclude that Nagas of outside Nagaland cannot claim to Nagas in Nagaland for constitutional constraint is wrong, for we are one family.
In fact, Nagas were one even during head hunting days much before the advent of the British Rule in this parts of the country. It is the British Government with a view to exploit the region commercially have divided the Nagas according to their own convenience without our permission. However, it has always been our demand to be united as one family and brought under one administrative unit as per the 9th Point agreement and this is also found even in 16th Points agreement. Therefore, it will be sheer mistake to speak of divided Naga house even before the solution of the Naga issue is concluded.
In view of the above, let us be well advice not to fall prey to the nefarious design of the enemy’s divide and rule policy and oppose to share the “crumbs that fall from the table” with our fellow Nagas. Let us remind ourselves once again, the second greatest Commandment as Jesus told us “To love your neighbours as yourself”.
By: T L Angami