A tryst with destiny

On December 1, 1963, the quiet hill town of Kohima-once the epicentre of the historic Battle of Kohima-awoke to a brilliant bright Sunday morning marking Nagaland’s formal entry as the 16th state of the Indian Union. Excitement mingled with apprehension as public gathered to witness President Dr. S. Radhakrishnan inaugurate the new state, brought into being through the 1960 Sixteen-Point Agreement between the Naga People’s Convention (NPC) and the Government of India. On this anniversary, it is fitting to remember the architects of that pivotal moment-the leaders of the NPC whose courage and foresight altered the course of Naga history. Nagaland’s statehood emerged from a period marred by immense suffering. Through the 1950s, Nagas across the Naga Hills district under Assam and the Tuensang Frontier Division under the North-East Frontier Agency (NEFA) endured harsh military operations, dislocation, and brutalities. Entire villages fled into the jungles seeking refuge. It was in this climate of fear and devastation that educated Naga leaders united to form the NPC, determined to end the violence and secure a political future that offered dignity and stability. After three conventions, they drafted the Sixteen-Point Memorandum-an audacious framework that would ultimately shape the new state of Nagaland. The cost of this political vision, however, was profound. NPC president Dr. Imkongliba Ao, who had led the delegation and become a symbol of the new political course, was assassinated on August 26, 1961, in Mokokchung. His martyrdom underscored the deep divisions and high stakes of the era. Despite the skepticism, hostility, and charges of betrayal they faced, NPC leaders persisted, believing that thousands of families trapped in tragic circumstances deserved a chance at a better future. In 1962, Parliament approved the creation of the state, and on December 1, 1963, Nagaland was born. Six decades later, questions continue to surface about the choices made and not made. What might have been the fate of the Naga political movement had Nagaland remained under Assam? Without statehood, the Nagas of the Naga Hills might still be administered from Assam, while the people of Tuensang could have remained under today’s Arunachal Pradesh. Statehood undeniably expanded opportunities and political agency for all sections of Naga society. Yet the central question persists: has statehood been a boon or a burden? While it laid the foundation for representation and development, the larger Naga political issue remains unresolved. Successive governments have consistently advocated for a peaceful, inclusive settlement-passing resolutions, forming forums of legislators, and playing the role of facilitator. Two major agreements-the 2015 Framework Agreement and the 2017 Agreed Position-signalled progress, and talks were declared concluded on October 31, 2018. Still, a final settlement remains suspended, not for lack of dialogue but for lack of political will. The contrast with Mizoram is instructive. The 1986 Mizo Accord was achieved within two years with the active involvement of the state government, resulting in lasting peace. By comparison, the Naga political negotiations have stretched over a quarter century, and despite breakthroughs, a conclusion remains elusive. As Nagas of Nagaland reflect onstatehood, they must also confront the responsibilities that come with it. The story of 1963 was one of courage; the challenge today is to summon the same resolve to explore in bringing the long political journey to a just and honourable closure.