In his article “The Unveiling of Colours” published on 10th April 2026, Z. Lohe raises concerns about the direction of the Naga political issue.
Share
In his article “The Unveiling of Colours” published on 10th April 2026, Z. Lohe raises concerns about the direction of the Naga political issue. He suggests that certain individuals and institutions are influencing or even weakening the process. At first glance, this may appear to be a strong and bold argument. However, when examined more closely, it becomes clear that such a view oversimplifies a much larger and more complex reality.
The Naga political issue is not something that can be explained by focusing on one person, one group, or one organisation. It has taken shape over many decades. There have been multiple rounds of talks, several agreements, and continuous engagement between Naga political groups and the Government of India. Because of this long history, the issue cannot be reduced to personal disagreements or selective criticism.
In recent discussions in the Nagaland Legislative Assembly, a clearer and more balanced picture has emerged. Chief Minister Dr. Neiphiu Rio has repeatedly stated that the issue has now reached a stage where it must be resolved through talks at the highest level of the Government of India. In simple terms, this means that the matter is no longer just about discussions or negotiations at lower levels. It now requires a final decision from the top leadership. This shows that the issue is serious, mature, and close to a stage where decisions must be made.
At the same time, MLA Achumbemo Kikon, Secretary General, NPF, has raised important concerns during Assembly discussions. He has pointed out that even though meetings and talks with the Government of India are taking place, there is still a lack of clarity. People do not know when the final solution will come, or what shape it will take. This uncertainty is what worries many. His message is simple: talks alone are not enough—there must be results.
He has also warned against what can be called “piecemeal solutions.” This means solutions that address only parts of the problem instead of solving it fully. Such partial arrangements may create more confusion or even division among people. His concern reflects a wider feeling among many Nagas—that the final solution should be complete, fair, and acceptable to all sections.
When we look at both these positions together, they actually complement each other. On one hand, there is recognition that talks have progressed and now need top-level decision-making.
On the other hand, there is a reminder that the outcome must be clear, inclusive, and meaningful. Both views highlight the same truth: the process must now move forward towards a final solution.
This brings us back to the argument made by Z. Lohe. By focusing on certain individuals and dragging institutions like the GB Federation into the discussion, the article shifts attention away from the real issues. The real questions are much bigger. What exactly is being negotiated? Why has it taken so long to reach a conclusion? What kind of solution is being considered? And most importantly, will that solution be acceptable to the people?
These are the questions that truly matter. Focusing on personalities or assigning blame does not help in answering them. Instead, it creates confusion and divides attention.
It is also important to understand that the Naga political issue is not just about politics. It is about identity, history, and the future of the people. That is why it requires careful handling, honest discussion, and responsible writing. Every statement or article on this issue carries weight and can influence public opinion.
At this stage, what people expect is not more debate about who said what, but clarity about where the process is heading. There is a growing feeling that enough discussions have already taken place. What is needed now is a clear, transparent, and time-bound outcome.
The Government of India has been part of this process for many years, and meetings have been held at different levels. Now, as even the Chief Minister has pointed out, the issue requires attention at the highest level. This means that decisions should not be delayed further. The people are waiting, and their expectations are high.
In conclusion, the Naga political issue cannot be understood through a narrow or selective lens. It is a shared concern that belongs to all Nagas. It deserves discussion that is thoughtful, balanced, and focused on solutions rather than distractions. While criticism and debate are important, they must aim to bring clarity, not confusion.
As things stand today, the message from both the government and legislators is clear: talks must lead to results. Engagement must lead to resolution. And above all, the final outcome must be one that is honourable, inclusive, and lasting.
Only then can the long journey of negotiations truly come to an end, and a new chapter begin.
Press Bureau,
Naga People's Front.