India as a state faces a number of issues on different frontages. India’s diversity, which is a salient feature of the nation, also keeps challenging the unanimity of the country. The Nagaland conundrum is one of such issues and is bit different in nature because of its topography, chequered history along with its social and political convolutions. This paper intends to discuss Nagaland and several other related aspects.
Alfred Stephen and other scholars thoroughly analyze the issue of Nagaland and found that the leadership of Naga insurgency has failed in producing a unified insurgent organization as it was seen in Mizoram. Lack of coordination in different Naga insurgent groups and clash of their interests have weekend this issue and their goal (Stepan, Linz & Yadav, 2011). Whenever one organization enters into dialogue with the government, other group refuses to continue ongoing peace process. Social and political differences in the state of Mizoram and Nagaland are also a major reason of complicated Naga conundrum. An interesting finding shows how almost 75 percent Mizos used to speak mizo language while only 13 percent Nagas speak Ao, a Naga lingua. Another finding is that almost all Mizo leaders belong to a particular place of Mizoram while Naga leaders come from different parts of the state. Insurgent leaders have also failed in concentrating on one demand, different leaders have different demands. Such differences are major factors why the case of Mizoram is different from the one of Nagaland.
After analyzing the abovementioned issue, it is good to conclude that circumstances of Nagaland and Mizoram are different and this is the major reason why the Naga insurgent leadership failed in gaining what Mizo leaders successfully accomplished.
Reference
A. Stepan, J. J. Linz & Y. Yadav, 2011. Crafting State-Nations: India and Other Multinational Democracies. Maryland: JHU Press.
