Th. Muivah’s return to Somdal reflects the unfinished story of Naga nationalism and the enduring struggle for sovereignty and peace.
A Reflection on Assertion of Sovereignty, Identity, and the Limits of Negotiated Peace in Northeast India
Abstract
Thuingaleng Muivah’s return to Somdal, his native village in Manipur’s Ukhrul district, marks not only the homecoming of a nonagenarian Naga leader but also a symbolic turning point in the Naga political movement. As General Secretary of the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isak-Muivah), Th. Muivah, fondly known as Avakharar among the Tangkhuls, has for over five decades been central to the articulation of the Naga struggle for sovereignty, identity, and self-determination. His legacy, however, remains deeply complex—both as a custodian of a narrative of right to Naga nationhood/long-suppressed aspiration and as a figure associated with prolonged violence and internal divisions.
This article traces in brief the historical, constitutional, and political trajectory of the Naga movement, examining the continuities between the colonial and postcolonial state’s engagement with the hills, the evolution of the freedom struggle, and the challenges that persist despite successive peace negotiations.
Muivah’s return home encapsulates the paradox of a people’s unending search for peace with dignity.
I. Introduction
The image of Th. Muivah, frail yet defiant, returning home to Somdal after decades, has stirred both nostalgia and introspection across the Naga Hills. For many, his presence evokes the unfinished nature of a movement that has defined the socio-political landscape of Northeast India for more than half a century. As the last surviving member of the triumvirate that led the NSCN through its formative years, Muivah’s return is a reminder that while the man ages, the questions he embodied remain unresolved: identity, shared sovereignty, and reconciliation.
II. Historical Roots: The Naga Question Before the Republic
The Naga political consciousness Roots: The Naga Question Before the Republic predates Indian independence. The 1929 memorandum submitted to the Simon Commission articulated the Nagas’ distinct identity and their desire not to be incorporated into an alien administrative framework, but to be left alone with their destiny as a sovereign Nagas nation. The subsequent formation of the Naga National Council (NNC) in 1946 consolidated these thoughts. On 14 August 1947, the NNC declared Naga independence, followed by a plebiscite in 1951, which it claimed affirmed the Naga people’s desire to be a sovereign nation. The Government of India’s refusal to recognise these claims led to the outbreak of insurgency in the early 1950s, the imposition of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act in 1958, and widespread militarisation of the region.
III. The Shillong Accord and the Birth of the NSCN
The Shillong Accord of 1975 sought to end hostilities by securing the freedom fighters’ acceptance of the Indian Constitution and the surrender of arms. However, the accord’s language of “acceptance” was seen by many as capitulation. Muivah, then the NNC’s Assistant General Secretary, condemned it as a betrayal of the Naga cause. In 1980, he, alongside Isak Chishi Swu and S.S. Khaplang, formed the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN), advocating assertions of Naga sovereignty of all Naga-inhabited areas under the concept of Nagalim. The split of 1988 between the Isak-Muivah and Khaplang factions brought about a period of internecine violence, turning the movement inward even as it continued to resist the Indian state.
IV. The Constitutional Compact: Autonomy and Its Limits
The creation of Nagaland state in 1963 was an attempt by the Indian state to institutionalise political accommodation under Article 371-A, providing significant safeguards relating to the protection of customary laws, social practices, and ownership of land and resources. These provisions were designed to ensure that the tribal societies of the hills would not be subsumed under the majoritarian currents of the plains. However, for Muivah and many within the NSCN (IM), these guarantees were geographically and conceptually limited. They applied only to the territory of Nagaland, leaving out Naga populations in Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, and Assam. The assertion of sovereignty of the Naga nation, consisting of all Naga-inhabited areas, thus became both the ideological core and political impasse of the movement.
V. From Resistance to Negotiation: The Long Ceasefire
The ceasefire agreement of 1997 between the NSCN (IM) and the Government of India heralded a new phase. Peace talks held in foreign and domestic venues continued intermittently. The 2015 Framework Agreement, signed by NSCN (IM) leaders and government representatives in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, was lauded as a breakthrough. Yet, the accord’s contents remain largely undisclosed. The insistence by the NSCN (IM) on a separate flag and constitution for the Nagas has been met with firm opposition from the central government, which maintains that India’s sovereignty is indivisible. Parallel negotiations with the Naga National Political Groups (NNPGs) have further fragmented the peace process.
VI. Muivah’s Legacy: Between Conviction and Consequence
Th. Muivah’s life encapsulates the contradictions of revolutionary politics in a postcolonial democracy. To his followers, he remains the custodian of a vision grounded in collective dignity and historical justice. To his detractors, he represents the futility of uncompromising idealism that prolonged suffering that hinders reconciliation. The decades of conflict witnessed profound social consequences: displacement, internal mistrust, and a weariness with militarisation. Within the Naga community, the politics of factionalism and the erosion of traditional authority have produced a crisis of moral legitimacy that no ceasefire has fully healed.
VII. Return to Somdal: A Symbolic Closure
In his homecoming to Somdal, Muivah seeks not political theatre but personal closure. For the people of Ukhrul, his presence is a poignant reminder of an era that shaped their identity and pain in equal measure. His frailty stands in contrast to the unyielding idealism of his youth; yet, in that contrast lies the enduring tension between dream and reality that defines the Naga political experience. This homecoming unfolds against a landscape where the younger generation’s aspirations are shifting—from sovereignty to stability, from insurgent politics to participatory governance. Whether Muivah’s life’s work will find vindication or fade into legend depends not on his final days but on the political imagination of those who come after him.
VIII. Conclusion: The Unfinished Chapter
As the sun sets over the Naga hills, the legacy of Th. Muivah remains suspended between reverence and reckoning. His return home is less a conclusion than an inflection point in a story that continues to test the meaning of autonomy and shared sovereignty within India’s federal and plural framework. The Naga question, in its essence, is a search for recognition—of history, of difference, and of dignity. Whether through Article 371-A, peace accords, or the language of assertion of sovereignty, or fight for freedom, the underlying demand has always been for respect of a people’s right to self-determination. Muivah’s long life, now nearing its end, reminds the Indian state and the Naga movement alike that peace cannot be achieved by exhaustion alone; it must be anchored in empathy and truth.
Ngaranmi Shimray