Winds of change

With the Centre finally moving to deliver on its promise of a special administrative arrangement for Eastern Nagaland, the question now being asked across the state is simple and unavoidable, will this also become the moment when the larger Naga political issue moves closer to a final settlement ?.The decision to create the Frontier Nagaland Territorial Area(FNTA), following years of demand spearheaded by the Eastern Nagaland People’s Organisation(ENPO), is more than an administrative adjustment. It is a political signal and also suggests that the government of India is willing to explore new governance models within the constitutional framework, particularly for regions that feel neglected, underrepresented, or structurally disadvantaged. It has also revived speculation that other areas within Nagaland could seek similar arrangements, where local governance is strengthened and responsibility becomes more clearly defined. It is true the the government of Nagaland had backed the ENPO demand all throughout. Eastern Nagaland’s place in these debates is historical not accidental. The region, comprising Mon, Tuensang, Longleng, Kiphire, Shamator, and Noklak, holds a distinctive historical role in the evolution of the Naga movement. The Naga political issue became a competing view, not out of intent, possibly by T.Sakhrie’s view that military solution was not the solution and that the option was for a working relationship with India for socio-economic development of the Nagas. Since the 1960s, people have voted in elections every five years, and have increasingly accepted that governance and development cannot be separated from constitutional engagement. Over time, the larger public mood has shifted away from the imperatives of violence and uncertainty, toward a desire for stability, prosperity, and dignity. This is why the present development matters as it confirms that FNTA was achieved in 2026 through a constitutional and administrative mechanism and non-violence. Even Nagaland state came into beign through sustained peaceful negotiations in 1963. Political aspiration, whether framed as rights, identity, or self-rule, cannot be viewed through the prism of armed struggle. It has to be pursued through peaceful negotiation, and through a settlement with the government of India that fits within the Indian Constitution while still granting meaningful authority for local law-making, cultural protection, and self-governance. The younger generation is also changing the ground realities. Many young people today are not emotionally anchored to the old narratives of conflict. Their lives are shaped by education, employment, migration, and modern aspirations. Any group claiming to represent the will of the people must therefore be measured against the realities of public participation, elections, and daily choices, not against slogans from another era. Over the decades, the disconnect with the true ideology has witnessed its tangential deviation towards anti-social and lawless acts inimical to social peace and harmony that are totally abhorrent to Naga values. It becomes even more disturbing when such actions are wrapped in religious language, including the misuse of slogans like “Nagaland for Christ.” Faith cannot be a shield for coercion, and nationalism cannot become a licence to exploit one’s own people. If the moment is to mean anything, it must point to a future where the Naga issue is resolved through realism and democratic legitimacy. The public is not asking for another cycle of fear. It is asking for a settlement that matches today’s reality and protects tomorrow’s hope.