The Naga political question is one of the longest-standing political issues in South Asia and its modern political expression can be traced to the formation of the Naga Club in 1918.
The Naga political question is one of the longest-standing political issues in South Asia. Its modern political expression can be traced to the formation of the Naga Club in 1918. The aspiration for a distinct political identity was articulated before the Simon Commission in 1929, when Naga representatives submitted a memorandum expressing their desire to be left to determine their own political future rather than being incorporated into a system of governance imposed from outside.
During the final years of British rule, the political future of the hill and frontier regions of Northeast India was the subject of considerable discussion. Various proposals were put forward, including the idea of a Crown Colony for some of the excluded and partially excluded areas. Naga political leaders, however, did not accept such proposals as an adequate solution to their political aspirations. On 14 August 1947, the Naga National Council declared Naga independence, one day before India became independent on 15 August.
The years that followed witnessed a deepening political confrontation between Naga nationalists and the Government of India. The Naga plebiscite of 16 May 1951 was presented by Naga nationalists as a demonstration of the people’s preference for political independence. For several years, the Naga political movement largely pursued its objectives through political and non-violent means. However, by the mid-1950s, the conflict had increasingly taken an armed character.
The enactment of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act in 1958 and its subsequent application in the Northeast marked a particularly painful phase of the conflict. The armed confrontation resulted in extensive human suffering, displacement, destruction of villages and property, and long-lasting psychological trauma. The consequences of this history continue to influence Naga society and political consciousness.
From Political Struggle to Internal Fragmentation
The greatest crisis confronting Naga politics today, however, is not merely the historical conflict with the Indian state. It is the internal fragmentation that has progressively weakened the political movement itself.
Over the past several decades, the Naga political struggle has witnessed repeated divisions, competing organisations, rival claims to legitimacy, and bitter struggles for political and institutional control. What began as a collective political aspiration has gradually become fragmented along organisational, tribal, regional and personal lines.
The existence of numerous armed factions, each with its own leadership and institutional structure, has created a deeply confusing political situation. The phenomenon of having multiple leaders claiming the authority of presidents, prime ministers or army chiefs has become a matter of public concern and, increasingly, public ridicule. More importantly, it raises a fundamental philosophical question: How can a political movement achieve its larger historical objective when its own leadership remains so deeply divided?
The problem is not simply the number of organisations. The deeper problem is the erosion of a shared political vision.
A movement that once derived its strength from a collective sense of identity and political purpose has increasingly been weakened by factionalism, competition, allegations of extortion, corruption, personal enrichment and internal violence. Such developments have seriously damaged the moral credibility of the political movement.
It is particularly tragic when individuals who claim to be fighting for a people’s political rights become associated, in the public imagination, with coercion, taxation, extortion and criminality. Whether every such allegation is justified is a matter requiring evidence and due process; nevertheless, the widespread perception itself is politically damaging. A liberation movement cannot retain public legitimacy if ordinary people begin to fear those who claim to represent them.
The Tragedy of Internal Violence
One of the most disturbing developments has been the occurrence of violence among competing Naga groups. The killing of Nagas by Nagas represents one of the deepest contradictions of the present political situation.
The original political struggle was justified in terms of protecting Naga identity, dignity and political rights. But when the struggle produces internal violence, mutual suspicion and fear among the very people whose interests it claims to defend, its moral foundation is seriously weakened.
The question therefore needs to be asked openly: What has happened to the original vision?
A political struggle cannot be sustained indefinitely by guns, coercion and fear. Nor can political legitimacy be inherited merely from historical claims. It must continually be renewed through ethical conduct, public accountability, democratic participation and concern for the welfare of the people.
The Cost to Naga Society
The consequences of prolonged political uncertainty and internal fragmentation extend far beyond politics. They directly affect economic development, education, employment, infrastructure and the future of the younger generation.
Investors and entrepreneurs require security, stability, predictable laws and a peaceful social environment. Where multiple organisations exercise competing forms of authority, where businesses face numerous demands and where political uncertainty remains pervasive, economic investment naturally becomes difficult.
The result is a vicious cycle. The absence of industries and productive economic activity contributes to unemployment. Unemployment encourages migration and dependence. The lack of employment opportunities pushes educated young people to seek opportunities outside the Naga areas. Meanwhile, inadequate infrastructure continues to constrain economic growth.
The greatest victims of this situation are ordinary citizens, particularly young people.
A generation of educated Naga youth is growing up with enormous aspirations but limited opportunities. They deserve an economy capable of providing meaningful employment, entrepreneurship, technological development and professional opportunities. Political discourse that does not address these practical questions risks becoming increasingly disconnected from the everyday realities of the people.
The Crisis of Overground Politics
The crisis is not confined to underground organisations. Overground politics too faces serious challenges, including corruption, factional competition, excessive personalisation of political power and the absence of a long-term developmental vision.
Democratic politics should provide an alternative to the politics of the gun. Unfortunately, if electoral politics itself becomes dominated by money, patronage, identity-based mobilisation and personal ambition, the distinction between underground and overground political cultures becomes blurred.
What Naga society needs is not simply a change of political personalities but a transformation of political culture. The central question should no longer be merely: Who will lead? It should be: What kind of society do we want to build?
From Gun Culture to Intellectual Culture
The Naga political question requires a new method of engagement. The armed struggle, whatever its historical justification may have been, has reached a point where its continuation risks causing greater internal damage than political benefit.
The time has therefore come to seriously consider replacing the culture of armed confrontation with a culture of intellectual and democratic struggle.
Intellectual struggle does not mean surrendering political aspirations. On the contrary, it means pursuing them through reason, scholarship, diplomacy, constitutional engagement, democratic institutions, international understanding, civil society, economic development and moral leadership.
The Naga intelligentsia has an especially important responsibility in this transformation. Universities, colleges, churches, civil society organisations, writers, intellectuals, journalists, lawyers and young professionals must participate in a serious examination of the Naga political question.
Naga political thought must move beyond emotional slogans and historical grievances towards rigorous questions of political philosophy: What is self-determination? What constitutes a nation? What are the limits of sovereignty? How should collective rights be reconciled with individual rights? What kind of federal or autonomous arrangement can protect identity while enabling peaceful coexistence? What ethical principles should govern political leadership?
These questions cannot be answered through the barrel of a gun.
A New Political Ethics
The Naga crisis is ultimately also a crisis of political ethics. Political freedom without moral responsibility can become another form of domination. Leadership without accountability can become personal rule. Nationalism without an ethical foundation can degenerate into tribalism and exclusion. Political power without concern for the common good can become an instrument of self-enrichment.
The future of Naga politics therefore requires a new ethical framework based on truthfulness, accountability, humility, reconciliation, justice and concern for the common good.
The younger generation must be encouraged to think beyond factional boundaries. The Naga identity cannot be reduced to tribal identity alone. The different Naga communities need to rediscover what they share while respecting their legitimate differences.
A genuine political movement must unite people rather than continually dividing them.
What Is the Way Forward?
There is no single or easy solution to the Naga political question. But several steps are essential.
First, all forms of internal violence must end. The killing of Nagas by Nagas is indefensible and destructive to the credibility of the political movement.
Second, Naga political organisations must seriously pursue unity. Differences of ideology and strategy can exist, but they must be addressed through dialogue rather than violence.
Third, political organisations must become accountable to the people. Financial transparency, institutional responsibility and respect for the rule of law are indispensable for rebuilding public confidence.
Fourth, the political dialogue with the Government of India must continue peacefully and democratically. Historical grievances and political aspirations should be articulated through negotiation, constitutional processes and democratic institutions.
Fifth, economic development must become a central component of the Naga political agenda. Roads, education, healthcare, industries, entrepreneurship, technology and employment cannot remain secondary concerns.
Sixth, the intellectual community must assume greater responsibility. Naga universities and scholars should encourage serious research into Naga history, political philosophy, constitutionalism, economics, peace studies and conflict resolution.
Finally, Naga politics must rediscover the idea of the common good. The purpose of politics is not the accumulation of power, wealth or personal prestige. Politics exists ultimately for the welfare, dignity and freedom of the people.
A Moment for Introspection
The Naga political movement has reached a critical historical juncture. Its greatest challenge may no longer be simply how to negotiate with an external political authority; it is how to overcome its own internal contradictions.
History has given the Naga people a powerful political legacy. But history alone cannot determine the future. The future will depend upon the choices made today.
The proliferation of factions, internal violence, corruption, extortion, unemployment and political opportunism cannot be allowed to define the Naga future. Nor can the younger generation be asked indefinitely to inherit the conflicts and divisions of previous generations.
The time has come for serious introspection.
The Naga people need a politics that is intellectually mature, morally responsible, economically constructive and democratically accountable. The struggle for political rights must be accompanied by a struggle for education, development, justice, human dignity and social transformation.
The gun may command fear, but it cannot create a just society. Intellectual courage, moral leadership and democratic engagement can.
The real question before the Nagas today is therefore not merely how to achieve political settlement, but how to build a society worthy of the political freedom, dignity and self-respect for which generations have struggled.
That is the challenge of the present moment—and perhaps the most important test of Naga politics in the twenty-first century.
Xavier Pfokrehe Mao
Professor, Department of Philosophy, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong