Recent signals from Kohima and New Delhi suggest that the Naga political process is returning to the political table where it belongs. Chief Minister Dr Neiphiu Rio’s announcement that the Centre will resume engagement at both political and ministerial levels, together with the appointment of retired IPS officer Ajit Lal as Northeast Advisor, points to a renewed seriousness in addressing what has long been a stalled dialogue. These steps indicate that the issue is being treated with the political attention it deserves, and that both the state and the Centre are seeking to move beyond law and order approaches.
While immediate physical integration of Naga areas may not be feasible, the emphasis on emotional, cultural, and social integration reflects a pragmatic approach to achieving a durable settlement. In this context, the oppositionless government, formed specifically to find a solution to the Naga political issue, appears to be making meaningful progress. The current political configuration, where Congress has no presence in the state legislature and the lone opposition is limited to a Lok Sabha MP, has created a rare moment of convergence. Even the lone Lok Sabha MP, despite being in opposition, has on many occasions seemed to align with the agenda of the ruling government, although largely on developmental issues rather than directly on the Naga political question. This convergence is promising, but the absence of a strong legislative opposition also serves as a reminder that democratic accountability remains a challenge. While unity is critical for negotiation, a government without active opposition can risk unchallenged decision-making, and this balance must be kept in mind.
At the same time, the diversity of voices among Naga political groups, civil society, and other stakeholders cannot be overlooked. Differing ideologies and public statements reflect the vibrancy of Naga democracy, but they can also send mixed signals that weaken the collective negotiating position, as the Chief Minister has rightly pointed out. The challenge lies in ensuring that these voices are brought constructively to the table, with transparency and mutual respect, without undermining unity of purpose.
Taken together, these developments are reasons for cautious optimism. For Nagas, the moment calls for political maturity. It is a time to engage critically, maintain unity in negotiation, and ensure that all stakeholders contribute constructively to shaping a path forward. Dialogue, responsibility, and measured optimism will determine whether this renewed momentum leads to meaningful progress for the Naga people and their long-standing political aspirations.
