Post Ayodhya verdict, BJP has to deal with fear mongering & being prisoners of past

New Delhi, Nov 10 History and memories have one thing in common - new always replaces the old.
Within hours of the historic and unanimous judgement on Ayodhya by the five-member bench, a debate has arisen about 'fear mongering' in the public space. Several BJP leaders, during media interaction and television debate, are trying to underline the need of breaking free from the 'prison' of past prejudices.

While there has been a general appreciation to the court verdict, including from lawyers and a section of Congress leaders, some Muslim leaders, including the likes of Asaduddin Owaisi of AIMIM, has sought to bring in the debate over 'victory' of faith as against facts.

It ought to be noted that the same debate of Faith Vs Facts had cropped up even in 2010 after the Allahabad High Court verdict when Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav had said - ".....a nation state is run by the rule of law and not on the basis of religious faith".

But with regard the verdict of November 9 (Saturday), Congress MP and a lawyer himself Abhishekhmanu Singhvi had said that: "......from paras 508 to 512, the court has analysed in great detail and endorsed the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report which gave clear factual findings on the pre-existence of a big structure beneath the demolished mosque structure; the fact that the earlier structure was non-Islamic; and that it had several motifs and features which related to Hindu culture and religion".
BJP spokesman Sambit Patra said an attempt was being made to suggest that the long years of legal battle and finally the judgement has virtually compelled the Muslims to reconcile what has come.

"....This is not true as Muslim side also contested the case in the court through their lawyers. They were fighting for justice. But ironically evidences, documentary and oral presented before the Supreme Court were in favour of the other side," Mr Patra said.

In fact, in the words of Congress leader Mr Singhvi - ".....it would be unwise, hasty, knee-jerk and irresponsible to launch broadsides of uninformed criticism against this comprehensive judgment".

He also has said - "The Supreme Court thus upheld the conclusion of Justice Sudhir Agarwal (of Allahabad High Court of 2010) that the ASI’s omission to give one crucial finding (namely whether the earlier structure was a temple or not) would not change anything".

Among other things, Justice Agarwal had said - The building in dispute (in Ayodhya) was constructed after demolition of a non-Islamic religious structure.

Mr Singhvi also says: "Several other paras discuss the question of faith and belief which undeniably establishes the fact that the Hindus consider this spot as the birthplace of Lord Ram ( paras 556-558). The relief granted is, however, clearly not founded upon mere faith and belief."

Meanwhile, the BJP leaders have tried to say to raise controversies vis-a-vis Kanshi and Mathura at this juncture would be unjustified.

"Did any BJP leader in last six years hold a press conference to say that we have next Kanshi and Mathura on our agenda....," asks BJP spokesman Mr Patra adding thus trying to create a 'speculative fear' is uncalled for.

"You are only trying to instigate people and fear monger.....," he said.

Others said there is a 1991 law enacted during the tensure of P V Narasimha Rao as the Prime Minister.

The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 said among other things that no person shall convert any place of worship of any religious denomination or any section into a place of worship of a different section of the same religious denomination or of a different religious denomination or any section thereof.

It was clearly aimed at working as a powerful deterrent to change the nature of existing religious places.

It is in this context, several BJP leaders have said that it would be erroneous to create 'a fictituous doubt' in the minds of people especially minorities.

Hence there is talk that the November 9, 2019 judgement did have 'judicial creativity' trying to resolve a problem and thus wrong to say that the judgement of the five-member bench did not take into account 'details' of the matter.

A source said based on 2010 verdict of the Allahabad High Court, it was argued that the figurines of elephant, tortoise and crocodiles recovered during excavation were associated with 'Hindu beliefs' and moreover, such animal figurines are not allowed in the mosque.

The Supreme Court’s unanimous verdict on Ayodhya is remarkable

- Abhishek Singhvi

To analyse, much less critique, a 1,045 page, 805 paragraph and 3.03 lakh word Supreme Court (SC) judgment before the ink on it is dry is neither possible, nor apposite. While a comprehensive critique must await fuller study, a few legal, political and general points are nevertheless in order.

First, we tend to ignore the remarkable achievement of a unanimous Constitution Bench judgment on a highly fractious and divisive issue, riven by law, factual controversy, emotions, archaeological evidence and historical treatises. Far lesser cases have led to 4-1 or 3-2 verdicts. The court must be publicly applauded for this unanimous approach which sends out its own clear and significant message to all segments of Indian society. It also immeasurably enhances the strength and weight of the judgment.

Second, the only correct, efficacious and lasting solution to this highly divisive issue is a binding judgment of the apex court. Neither the best intentioned mediation, nor any bonafide government or a responsible opposition can achieve the quietus and finality which a reasoned apex court judgment can.

Third, it is neither the job of an apex court nor humanly possible in any system to satisfy every litigant or every stakeholder. To be human is to be fallible. More than anyone else, the SC has said so in innumerable judgments. The SC is right because it is final, and not final because it is right. And that can and should never be a ground for uninformed criticism.

ends 

Sena-BJP tussle dates back to Balasaheb days, coincided with Modi's rise

New Delhi, Nov 7  Move over Devendra Fadnavis-Uddhav Thackeray battle, a closer look back at the politics of Maharashtra shows that for certain, the tussle between Shiv Sena and BJP dates back to Balasaheb Thackeray days, and incidentally that one-upmanship coincided with the rise of Narendra Modi.

Shiv Sena was the dominant saffron partner in Maharashtra's politics - which had often shown ideological tilt towards the Left and was almost overshadowed for long by the Congress.
Even the 'Congress-splinter' NCP led by Maratha strongman Sharad Pawar seemed to have better acceptability. But all changed around 2002-03 when Marathi Manoos developed a liking for a 'hero' from a state next door - the neighbouring Gujarat.

Analysing the same on hindsight, it may not be wrong to say that the illustrious Sena supremo Bal Thackeray himself had realised that well. Till the arrival of Modi - largely due to 2002 mayhem - Bal Thackeray was enjoying the uncrowned title of 'Hindu Hriday Samrat'.

But after Modi's success in 2002 elections and as Gujarat was drenched saffron, Modi had easily stolen that priceless epitaph.

It got a quantum leap as Modi could repeat his win in 2007.

Sena watchers in Maharashtra rightly say senior Thackeray had all the political acumen to understand all that and certainly did not approve Modi as BJP's prime ministerial candidate in later years.

It was around 2013 that the Sena also floated the name the then Leader of the Opposition Sushma Swaraj as the prime ministerial candidate for the NDA.

Moreover, after BJP's success in the Lok Sabha polls, the saffron party attributed the entire NDA success story - which included 18 Sena seats - to the Modi wave.

In fact, from 2009 tally, the BJP's tally jumped to 23 from single digit nine and Sena's went up to 18 from 11.

Even otherwise, number of BJP leaders in Delhi and in Maharashtra have generally considered Uddhav Thackeray 'lusterless' and Sena cadres demoralised.

Ram Temple: Ashok Singhal and 'shift' in Hindu mindset

New Delhi, Nov 10 If anything has to go by prophecy and the prediction coming true - even if partly - former VHP stalwart Ashok Singhal should get the prize - obviously posthumously.

Singhal of course enjoyed good rapport with Narendra Modi and after the new mascot of the Hindutva forces was sworn in as the Prime Minister in May 2014 - the illustrious Singhal had said in laudatory tone: "Eight hundred years after power (in Delhi) went away from Prithviraj Chauhan, it did not come back into the hands of a proud Hindu. It has happened now after 800 years".

In July 2013, he had said by 2020, India will be a 'Hindu nation'. Of course - the claim is a bit of exaggeration.

But in socio-political realm, two major Hindutva targets have been achieved --- the abrogation of the Article 370 and a Ram Temple at Ayodhya. Perhaps even six months back, not many Indians thought these would come true. Now, coming to the 'third mission' - the Uniform Civil Code --- a former BJP president and incumbent Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has already ruffled many a feather.

"Aa gaya samay (Time has come)," Rajnath certainly hinted about party's determination when he told reporters on Saturday in reply to a question about the Uniform Civil Code.


Late Singhal was a known protege of the then RSS chief Bala Saheb Deoras and first stole limelight in 1984-85 when as the working president he had organised a "Dharam Sansad".


A much 'ambitious' mission was announced stating that the 16th century Babri Masjid ought to be replaced by a temple dedicated to Ram Lalla, where Maryada Purushottam was born.


Soon came in the Ram Janki Rath Yatra in 1985, also a brainchild of Singhal.


Late Singhal's one line question actually put the 'assertive Hindu' mission on track and the famous query was - "After giving away Pakistan in the name of Islam, why Hindus cannot build a Ram Mandir where Lord Ram was born".


Years later, when he breathed his last in 2015, many of his admirers said that generations after the times of Hindutva icons like Sri Aurobindo or Veer Savarkar, it was Singhal who could indoctrinate in Hindu minds that patriotism could be a 'national religion'.
Mr Modi pushed it further when after the mayhem in Gujarat in 2002 he had said, "There is nothing to feel ashamed about Hindutva".

With Singhal around, a large section of Hindus saw when it came to politics of alleged minority appeasement by the Congress and the 'secular socialists and Leftists', there is a good reason to retaliate and to be assertive.

This was Singhal and power politics and its influence on the Hindutva movement.

Dr Subramanian Swamy, prominent BJP leader, now has his own reason to demand Bharat Ratna for Late Singhal.

"At this hour of victory let us remember Shri Ashok Singhal. Namo Govt must immediately announce Bharat Ratna for him," he tweeted.

Among other facets of Singhal's personality, reference ought to be made to the inherent difference he had with the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-L K Advani duo --- supposed to be two Hindutva protagonists who often tried to chose the middle path.

BJP watchers know, Late Singhal was particularly unhappy with 'hardliner' Advani who after coming to power in 1999 and in the run up to the 2004 parliamentary polls tried to portray himself as a 'moderate' and at times even distanced himself from the 'Hindutva forces'.

In fact in 2000, Advani was forced to make a statement to the media that BJP's link with RSS was like its umbilical cord.     

 
Singhal of course enjoyed good rapport with Narendra Modi and after the new mascot of the Hindutva forces was sworn in as the Prime Minister in May 2014 - the illustrious Singhal had said in laudatory tone: "Eight hundred years after power (in Delhi) went away from Prithviraj Chauhan, it did not come back into the hands of a proud Hindu. It has happened now after 800 years".

Well, the shift in a section of the 'Hindu mindset' had come; and not without good reason.

Crossfire: Gandhi family often violated SPG security code, assert officials

New Delhi, Nov 8  A high-decibel controversy broke out on Friday over the withdrawal of Special Protection Group cover to members of the first family of the Indian National Congress.

Sources revealed here that contradictory to the hype being created over 'vendetta politics', on a number of occasions the Gandhis had made 'undesirable' remarks against SPG and also charged the elite force with collecting their 'personal and confidential information.'

"Since May 2014, Priyanka Gandhi has often levelled allegations that SPG officials were collecting her personal and confidential information and sharing it with unauthorised persons. She even threatened to drag top officials of the SPG to court," the sources said here.
Sources also said that Rahul Gandhi, during his visit to Banaskantha in Bharatiya Janata Party-ruled Gujarat in 2017, violated security norms himself and that could have endangered his life.

He traveled in a non-BR car 'against the security advice of SPG.' There was stone pelting on the non-BR private car of the protectee in which a SPG PSO was injured.
"In many of the 143 foreign visits, Rahul Gandhi had shared the travel itinerary at the eleventh hour preventing the SPG officers from accompanying him," the sources added.

Corridor of Faith: Pakistan's double standards force people to keep fingers crossed

New Delhi, Nov 8 Tit for tat may not always work in strategic diplomacy and more so when India sends  'goodwill' gestures and missives to Pakistan.

These thoughts are likely to cross the minds of stakeholders and observers a day before the historic Kartarpur Corridor inauguration.

Will the Kartarpur Corridor finally happen according to plans?

Some sceptics are already saying in any bilateral agreement, there is also a 'provision' to suspend its operation in case of 'exigencies' including natural disasters.

Sources say all the peace gestures from India - during the Narendra Modi regime and even before - have been met with mere rhetoric, double standards and betrayal from Islamabad either under civilian government or military rulers.
The 'contradictory statements' emanating from Pakistan on various facets related to Kartarpur have made people either keep their lips shut or at best fingers crossed.
"It is a matter of faith and the government and the entire country is taking a leap of faith vis-a-vis paying obeisance at the Kartarpur Sahib corridor," said a Bharatiya Janata Party source.
Sources said the ruling party and the central government feel "all will go as per plans".
They also point out that notwithstanding its hawkish image, the Modi government, too, in terms of giving scope to peace efforts with Pakistan has in last five years time and again shown 'magnanimity', but things did not work according to plans.

"One may find political rhetoric but in terms of offering olive branches to Islamabad, Prime Minister Modi had extended invitation to Nawaz Sharif for his 2014 swearing in and also opened up an unpublicised dialogue at the National Security Advisor level. But things could hardly move," the source said.

Kartarpur survived despite Pulwama, Art 370 as 'power larger than' Imran pushed it

New Delhi, Nov 6 India on Wednesday said it does not see agreeing to the Kartarpur project as a 'mistaken decision' and rather considers it to be a 'corridor of peace and an instrument to move ahead' in establishing a peaceful and harmonious relationship with Pakistan.

But those in the know of things say India's security establishment is "very very conscious" of the pitfalls as there have been  'sporadic reports' of Sikhs radicalisation in the Gurudwaras there.

To a question, the source said having sat over the project for 19 years, since August 2018, the Pakistan government took up the Kartarpur project with some kind of a 'military zeal'.

"It was done with great deal of enthusiasm....," the source said, adding that it ought to be appreciated that
the Kartarpur project survived two major bilateral crisis - the Pulwama terror strike and also the abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir.

"There were escalated rhetoric on everything else but the Kartarpur corridor survived. That only shows that power larger than the popular government and the civil leadership in Pakistan has been pushing it," the source maintained. 

Against this backdrop the source clarified - "We are doing everything to ensure that there is security compromise".

"However, the big picture remains we have concerns about Pakistan has been attempting to achieve its sinister and larger objectives, but we see opening of the Kartarpur Corridor as essentially a positive step for the pilgrims," the source maintained.

It has been clarified from New Delhi that the request to open the corridor - about 4.7 kilometres from the Pakistan-India border - is pending since 1999 when the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Akali Dal leader Parkash Singh Badal had raised it in the month of February during the famous Bus Yatra to Lahore.

It is important to note that when it comes to Pakistan, it ought to be remembered that it is a huge propaganda machine and has often tried to abuse media as well.
Indian security agencies and officials seem to appreciate that Pakistan on one hand has tried to project its 'softer face' in terms of welcoming minorities and improving people to people ties - but the "mask has sometime slipped".

"In fact, on occasions the unstated objective has come out in the open. Everyone recalls how Pak Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said it was a 'googlie' and then President of Pakistan had said Kartarpur was a great chess move".
However, the Government of India says, "The corridor project is linked to people's faith and hence India took a conscious decision".

From New Delhi's perspective, the project is seen as a 'corridor of and an instrument to move ahead'.

It was taken up with good intention and thus could not be seen as a mistake...," the source said . Nevertheless , Pakistan's intent and India's security concerns are of paramount importance.      

The apprehensions of Indian agencies have been endorsed by Punjab Chief Capt Amarinder Singh who said lately that he always doubted the intention of Pak spy agency ISI.

"It is understood that Pakistan's strategic move has been to have a better leverage in possibly promoting separatist movement in Punjab. They could try to leverage the issue of Khalistan and there are talks of linking the entire matter to some Kashmiri terror groups," the source explained.

Moreover, there have been many moves to drive a wedge between Sikhs and Hindus between the Modi government and Punjab government, which is under Congress rule.

There was deliberate attempt to play up the role of former cricketer Novjyot Siddhu for instance. There were also display of separatist videos.

No clarity on Siddhu's travel to Kartarpur, Centre submits Manmohan's name in list

New Delhi, Nov 6 The Government of India has submitted a list of 550 plus pilgrims, including the likes of former Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh and Punjab Chief Minister Capt. Amarinder Singh, to Pakistan government for November 9 maiden travel of first batch of pilgrims to Kartarpur.

However, according to sources here, there is no clarity yet on whether former cricketer-turned-politician and Congress leader Navjyot Singh Siddhu would be going.

".....If his name is among 550 plus submitted coinciding with the 550th birth anniversary of Guru Nanak Devji, he does not need political clearance.....Otherwise every individual politicians would need political clearance even to travel to Nepal," a source said.

Mr Siddhu, a former Punjab Minister and who quit the government over his differences with

Chief Minister Capt Amarinder Singh, has approached the Ministry of External Affairs for the necessary clearance.

Mr Siddhu has been invited by Pakistan Prime Minister and also a former cricketer Imran Khan to attend the November 9 inaugural function.

Meanwhile, government sources said 'concerns' about security and protocol related to VVIPs such as Manmohan Singh and Capt Amarinder Singh has been raised with Pakistan.

"We are yet to get any response yet....," the source said.

Kartarpur, a project pushed by Pak Army not Imran: govt source

New Delhi, Nov 6  The 'Kartarpur corridor' a one-way project between India and Pakistan to facilitate travel of pilgrims of all faiths got the initial push by Pakistan Army and not the incumbent Prime Minister Imran Khan, a government source said here on Wednesday.

However, the Government of India says "The corridor project is linked to people's faith and hence India took a conscious decision".

The source in the know of things, said from Indian government's perspective, the project was initiated way back in 1999 but the western neighbour was not agreeing to it.

However, in August 2018, authorities in Pakistan had given a nod for the corridor to facilitate Indian pilgrims visiting Kartarpur Sahib Gurudwara in that country.

"The clearance predates to Imran Khan coming to power....so obviously we know, who cleared it," the source said, adding that it was a project of Pakistan Army.

"....it was an initiative that really came from Pakistan Army," the source said.

But from the government of India's perspective, the project is seen as a 'corridor and peace and an instrument to move ahead'.

"It was taken up with good intention and thus could not be seen as a mistake...," the source said nevertheless Pakistan's intent and India's security concerns are of paramount importance.

There have been 'sporadic reports' of Sikhs radicalisation in the Gurudwaras there, the source added.

Maharashtra Big Picture: Who wins bigger battle Fadnavis or Sharad Pawar?

New Delhi, Nov 5  Maharashtra politics has only got murkier after Sonia Gandhi-Sharad Pawar and Amit Shah-Devendra Fadnavis meetings.
Things are far from clear on the formation of new government, but a question that is seeking answer is - in the ultimate who wins the bigger battle - Devendra Fadnavis or Sharad Pawar.

For long Maharashtra has been a virtual 'fiefdom' of Marathas and the NCP founder and often his capacity has been 'overestimated' too; but since 2014, the incumbent Chief Minister Mr Fadnavis has sought to change the scenario.

Many would even call Fadnavis 'a new generation Pawar' - a description Mr Fadnavis does not endorse nevertheless.

Politically, he earned huge kudos when Prime Minister Narendra Modi told a 'victory meet' gathering in Delhi on October 24 that to remain in office for five years - a record in last five decades - has been by itself a great achievement for Mr Fadnavis.

From caste point of view, Mr Fadnavis is state's only second Brahmin CM and politically he has made things difficult for others.

Against him in the political chessboard is veteran 'Maratha' Sharad Pawar (79) - who braved lashing rains and addressed election meetings and personally led the NCP's battle from the front.

Those in the know of things say - a 'weakened Congress' and Sena's enhanced 'bargaining power' with BJP has actually given a "sharper edge" to Sharad Pawar.

The present scenario suits Pawar politics.

Sharad Pawar loyalists also say Mr Fadnavis has erred in making personal attack against him as the Maratha strongman still has come cards close to his chest.

NCP's tally in the new House is 54 - numerically two less than Sena's and less than 50 per cent of BJP.

But it is ten more than the Congress and hence the talk of the town is 'Pawarsahib' is on his comeback trail.

Several of his lieutenants deserted him during polls and had changed flank. They included Radhakrishna Vikhe-Patil, Udayanraje Bhosale, Ganesh Naik, Harshvardhan Patil, Shivendrasinh Bhosale and Vaibhav Pichad.

"Pawar was written off a bit too early....," Congress leader Ashok Chavan said although it is true that before elections some Congress leaders had also mocked at Pawar saying NCP will have to merge with Congress.

Mr Pawar, who floated NCP on the issue of foreign origin of Sonia Gandhi, has enough political flexibility to have worked with UPA for ten long years as a Minister.

In 1999 itself, within six months of formation of NCP, he did not mind his party sharing power with Congress.

Mr Pawar has been in touch with Sena leadership right from the day the results came in on October 24 but when asked whether NCP and Congress would back Sena to keep BJP at bay - his response was typical of his signature style -"no body has sought our support, first let that request come".
At 49, Mr Fadnavis certainly represents the new generation in state BJP having gone beyond 'Pramod Mahajan-Gopinath Munde-Nitin Gadkari' era.
As plus points, he enjoys clean image with more of a free and frank personality unlike many others and enjoys the backing of RSS, Prime Minister and BJP chief Amit Shah.

blogger

But what left many in BJP and outside his own party stunned is that Mr Fadnavis has managed to survive not only due to these 'assets'. His foremost credit has been to manage the contradictions of Maharashtra politics.

True, in the run up to the polls during campaign, Mr Fadnavis has been more than candid.

"The era of Sharad Pawar ji's politics is over," he said once. Maharashtra watchers say he tried to chew more than he could bite.

Chief Minister was unhesitant. "The kind of politics Mr Pawar would play of making and breaking is over now. Such politics won't work, generations have changed. People do not accept such politics now".

Answer to these complex issues remain in the womb of time.
Many of those familiar with what goes on in Mantralaya - the seat of power - in Mumbai say - Mr Fadnavis in fact developed his own model of governance something based on 'Modi model'.

He created a team of advisors and bureaucrats and concentrated power in the Chief Minister's Office(CMO).
Politically, he sidelined probable rivals Vinod Tawde, Prakash Mehta and Eknath Khadse.
After polls, he even snubbed Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray when he said there was no understanding between the two parties for rotational Chief Ministership.
However, it will be too early to suggest that he has won.

Mr Fadnavis met Amit Shah here on Monday and said a BJP government will be formed soon, but many claim to have noticed that he did not look very happy.

Naga Peace: Consultations with NE states were done in past as well

New Delhi, Nov 2 Close on the heels of reported 'breakthrough' in Naga peace parleys, focus on drafting 'final Naga Peace Pact' has shifted on consultation with stakeholders and especially three-Naga inhabited states of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh.

However, it will not be first time that three states will be consulted on matters related to Naga insurgency. 

In 2000, the then Vajpayee government first held the talks with as many as four Chief Ministers - three of these states and also E K Mawlong from Meghalaya. Of course, September 27-28 meeting in 2000 was not out any special concern for these states but was triggered by the necessity. 

The centre had intelligence inputs that any decision to extend ceasefire in Manipur would provoke large scale protest. 

The NDA government, however, had agreed to concede to NSCN (IM) demand to extend the provisions of Naga Ceasefire beyond the territorial boundary of Nagaland. 

At later stage, the apprehensions were proved correct as in the violance in summer of 2001, even the Manipur state assembly complex was attacked. 

Prime Minister Vajpayee and the then Home Minister L K Advani got all the flak and came under attack from vocal Congress leaders like Manishankar Aiyar, but the real fault guy was K Padmanabhaiah, the then peace negotiator, and also a former Union Home Secretary. 

In fact, Padmanabhiah also in later period came under severe criticism from R N Ravi, present Nagaland Governor and the interlocutor at talks since 2014. 

Sources say the Vajpayee-Advani duo had showed maturity in consulting Meghalaya Chief Minister even though the state has 'no Naga-inhabited areas'.Meghalaya's involvement at the consultation was however considered important  there were reports that NSCN-IM had continued to provide 'operational support' to the Meghalaya-based outfit Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council (HNLC).

Other Chief Ministers who were consulted were W Nipamacha Singh (Manipur), Prafulla Kumar Mahanta (Assam) and Mukut Mithi (Arunachal Pradesh). Of course, the NDA dispensation had its reasons not to talk to Nagaland Chief Minister S C Jamir (of Congress) on the matters as NSCN (IM) had 'extremely bad' relations with Jamir allegedly for his soft corner for NSCN (Khaplang).

These were times when the Congress veteran had time and again said he was only being 'harassed' as "I have never met Khaplang".

True consultations are vital for any negotiations to resolve 'insurgency' challenges in a region like northeast India.

But these are easier said than done. "Often the interests clash and there are overlapping issues," says a source.

The essential issue that ought to be kept in mind is that the insurgency in Nagaland has 'thrived' due to cross-border implications not only within India but also beyond international boundaries.

While China's role has been a question in 1970s - when NSCN was floated after Naga insurgent leaders visited China; Myanmar and Bangladesh too had emerged primary safe havens.

However, in recent times things have changed in Bangladesh and geo-political situation has changed with respect to China and Myanmar also. 

So, sources say as consultation will be made with key northeastern states, the government apparatus will do well to keep a track on NSCN (K) - which had enterted talks process in 2001 but walked away in 2015 and now remains 'functional' in Myanmar region.

Security agencies know there will be need for effective coordination between all states in the region and also with 'friendly regime' in Bangladesh and Bhutan. 
However, there is a given advantage for BJP-led regime in the centre as in all these three crucial states - Manipur, Arunachal and Assam - the saffron party has its own Chief Ministers.

Yet, no final word can be said as BJP Chief Minister N Biren Singh has been more than categorical and has said “We will even sacrifice our lives if Manipur is disintegrated".

Manipur and 'first' BJP CM Biren could make a difference in Naga peace deal

New Delhi : Now that Naga peace talks have ended on a 'positive note' and the ball is in Prime Minister Narendra Modi's court to take a final call on a report from interlocutor and Nagaland Governor R N Ravi, perhaps the neighbouring state of Manipur and one politician can make some difference.
Of course - the unrest in Manipur after 'cease work' paralysing the state on Thursday had left the BJP central leadership and especially Union Home Minister Amit Shah irked.

On Thursday evening - as the Naga peace talks 'entered' the final and crucial stage - Mr Shah ordered mandarins in his ministry to issue a statement stating that no final word has been said or could be said until the states of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh have been consulted.

It was a strongly worded statement and specific use of the word 'rumour' and 'credence' even had left many Naga leaders confused.

This actually has a background and here comes the role BJP's 'first' Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh.

Prior to the developments on Thursday, Home Minister and BJP president held audience with CM Biren Singh and a delegation of Manipur leaders from various parties.

The Chief Minister had led a delegation of all Manipur political parties and they had presented their views to Mr Shah on "the Naga peace talks and it's impact on Manipur".
The impact of protest on Thursday (Oct 31) was felt in at least nine districts - six in valley region inhabited mostly by Meiteis and in three Kuki-inhabited hill districts of Chandel, Churachandpur and  Kangpokpi.

Known for taking decisive stance and quickly, Mr Shah knew how to bring down the temperature and the angst against the Centre.

In the BJP circle, it is said Chief Minister Biren Singh enjoys good working relations with the party national president.Thus it did not require much of talking to do and Mr Shah easily grasped the gravity of the matter.
A former BSF personnel and once a local journalist, Mr Singh has his unique flamboyant style of politics.
During his stint in Congress too, he has been mercurial and assertive about his stance and had once 'influenced' the Congress high command decision to replace a pradesh Congress chief.
The virtual 'veto' from Home Ministry has now possibly set the ball rolling for consultation on Naga peace deal with the states of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh.

The Arunachal Pradesh government has already welcomed the central government's decision to consult all stakeholders.