On Sunday, the faction of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland led by S.S. Khaplang announced that it was ready for a dialogue with the Government of India and for a ceasefire with Indian security forces in all areas dominated by the Nagas.

The announcement is not surprising: A ceasefire from the Khaplang side has been in force since last Christmas. So this is just an extension of that process. In addition, it should be noted that the Indian security forces have declared a ceasefire with all Naga factions, including the Khaplang faction, since last year.

The importance of the announcement lies not in the decision to pull back the military wing, a situation which existed anyway, but in the proposal to open a political dialogue with New Delhi. Until the announcement, the Khaplang group had maintained that it would not interfere in the discussions between the Indian Government and its rival faction, the NSCN led by Issak Chisi Swu and Thiuengelang Muivah.

Those talks began in the mid-1990s with Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao and then were followed up by H.D. Deve Gowda before a formalised structure of negotiations began between the Government delegation led by a representative of the Prime Minister and the Naga group led by Th. Muivah, who is the Kilo Kilsoner or Prime Minister of the `Government of the Republic of Nagaland.'

These talks with Muivah have stuttered along for nearly three years without any tangible movement toward a settlement. Part of the problem has been the insistence of the Muivah-Swu group that the Government should talk only with their faction and not with any other group. They claim to have exclusive representation of the Nagas.

This is strongly disputed not just by the Khaplang faction but by many NGOs and others working at the field level in Nagaland and Manipur, where the Nagas live in large numbers. Indeed, over the past decades, the Naga movement appears to be split along personal and ethnic lines as well as along that of the ``ideologically pure.''

As with all political parties, each group claims to represent the people. But Muivah's camp is dominated by the Tangkhul tribe, of which Muivah is a leader. Isaak Swu is a Sema which has representation both in Nagaland and Manipur. But the problem is that the Tangkhuls are largely in Manipur and hardly have a physical presence in the present state of Nagaland.

It is of course another matter that the I-M group declares (and this ideological line is also followed by the Khaplang faction) that those areas where Nagas constitute a majority should be part of a greater Nagaland which they define as Nagalim. This proposal has met with fierce opposition from the neighbouring states of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur which see their existence and special status threatened by such demands and claims.

Assam is already one-third of its original size, shrunk from the once-proud state which covered virtually all of the North East. That it has lost so many of its communities and its lands to other states, all new, is a reflection of the chauvinism and bias with which the Assamese-speaking elite conducted itself for generations, alienating the tribes of the hills and plains without understanding their sensitivities and, all the time, demanding recognition of Assamese demands.

But the demands of Khaplang go beyond just talks and territorial claims. His group has sought the carving out of Naga areas in Arunachal Pradesh as a special Union Territory. All who know the situation in the hills of Nagaland and Manipur also know that there are demands to repeal the ``black laws,'' especially the Armed Forces Special Powers Act which gives security forces sweeping powers to search, arrest and shoot without warrants.

As far as the Naga groups are concerned, one can only believe seeing their moves and counter-moves that all of their ideology and positions flows from their ethnic identities. Thus, Khaplang is a Konyak Naga although he is technically a resident of Myanmar. But his movement commands the support of the Konyaks and their sub-tribes, which comprise the largest of the Naga tribes.

There are questions about why Khaplang has chosen this moment to raise the question of a separate ceasefire with the Government of India. There are those who would see the hand of the Congress Party government in Nagaland, under Chief Minister S.C. Jamir, in this new development. Groups in the Congress Party are said to be close to the Khaplang faction. But the fact of the matter is that Khaplang suffered several severe setbacks in the past year.

Militarily, his command has come under acute pressure from the tough Myanmar army which attacked and overran his General Headquarters near the Myanmar-India border. He lost his Number Two, Daly Mongro, in an assault by armed groups near the Naga capital town of Kohima last August, a killing put at the door of the other faction. And for years, the Khaplang army has been under the pressure of the Swu-Muivah faction, smarting from what they regard as the dishonour and death of hundreds of cadres at the hands of the rival group in 1988. In that assault, Muivah barely escaped but many of his followers were killed. That incident has not yet been forgotten.

So in addition to the demands for a Naga homeland, there are these fratricidal conflicts that are tearing the Naga society apart. Indeed, what is ironic is that over the past years since the ceasefire with the groups began the armed confrontation and clashes are not between the Indian army and the insurgents but among the different Naga groups. The most recent incident was in Nagaland last week when the Muivah group fought a pitched battle with the Khaplang fighters. Extortions of professionals, government officials and businessmen by all sides has left a very unpleasant taste in the mouths of many Nagas who want to live in peace, without harrassment either from the secufrity forces or the militants.

Until these deep bitternesses and political divisions are healed, with all sides facing up openly and squarely to their mistakes instead of always blaming the other side, there cannot be progress in any dialogue. For if the Naga-India issue is to be resolved, it must first be resolved among the Nagas so that they speak unitedly and frankly, without fear or favour. Until they come together and talk with each other and then with the Government of India, negotiations will remain stalemated even when Muivah comes out of the Thai prison where he has been held since the end of January for travelling on false passports and jumping bail.

The Government of India side must hasten slowly. This is an issue that is not less than 50 years old. There is no need to add fuel to suspicions that New Delhi seeks to divide the Nagas even further. A Shillong-type accord that leaves some groups out will not be acceptable to the Naga public. What is required is statesmanship to rise above the petty and the divisiveness that is tearing that society apart. And the Government must keep the door open for talks and more discussions for that is the only way to resolve this problem.