Daily gaga

As the northeastern region of India continues to experience steady and tangible progress, it is deeply concerning that Nagaland, despite its inherent advantages in power, road, air, and rail infrastructure, has made limited strides in these critical areas. Politically and in the realm of social discourse, Nagaland remains highly active, often ahead of its neighbors. However, such engagement, while significant in its own right, has not translated into a robust economic foundation. In stark contrast, Manipur-often characterized as one of the region’s most conflict-ridden states-has achieved notable progress in infrastructure development, moving visibly ahead of Nagaland and others in key sectors. Nagaland, however, appears increasingly absorbed in issues that, though not insignificant, have eclipsed the urgent need for economic and infrastructural advancement. While the state government continues to seek external investment, the prevailing environment-charged with divisive, non-economic concerns—seems to have deterred genuine investors. This challenge is compounded by the plight of long-established businesses in Dimapur, many of which have operated for over five decades. These businesses now face a stifling reality: daily negotiations with an array of nearly 100 groups, unions, and committees demanding unauthorized taxes, fees, and royalties. This hostile climate has pushed many to consider relocating to neighboring Assam or other states with more stable, investor-friendly ecosystems-places free from self-appointed parallel authorities that undermine legitimate enterprise. The proliferation of unofficial taxation and rampant extortion has created a suffocating environment, discouraging both local entrepreneurship and external investment. Rather than prioritizing reliable power supply to support and grow businesses, or repairing the deteriorating conditions of urban roads, or completing the long-delayed four-lane highway between Dimapur and Kohima-which has entered its tenth year-efforts seem increasingly diverted. The state’s governance, instead of addressing practical developmental needs, remains focused on politically charged, non-economic agendas that have consumed years without yielding tangible outcomes. One such diversion is the call for unity around a political solution-a strategy likened to placing all hopes in an unstable basket. Ironically, this call has been met with increased factionalism; from four factions in 2003, the number has ballooned to nearly 30. Similarly, the focus on prohibition has inadvertently created a thriving black market for alcohol, with the legal market estimated between ₹400 to ₹500 crore annually, and the illegal one likely far surpassing that figure. Moreover, the revival of the Inner Line Permit (ILP) enforcement in Dimapur, Chümoukedima, and Niuland has triggered apprehension among the business community and laborers alike. The reservation policy debate, too, threatens to intensify an already volatile landscape. Nagaland stands at a crossroads, urgently needing to reorient its priorities-from reactive politics to proactive governance. Real progress demands a focus on infrastructure, entrepreneurship, vocational training, digital connectivity, and financial access. Economic growth should not be viewed as a betrayal of cultural identity but as its sustenance. Without a deliberate shift in public discourse and policy toward constructive development, Nagaland risks being left behind-not only by its neighbors but by the future itself. Reclaiming that future requires an end to polarization and passive complicity. It demands that the voices of unity, reason, and justice rise above the noise of conflict and propaganda. Only then can Nagaland move forward with purpose and resilience.