Syllabus: GS-II & V: Issues Relating to Federalism

Why in the news? 

A major rally under the Naga Common Platform at Chumoukedima has demanded a final political solution to the Indo-Naga issue based on the Framework Agreement (2015) and the Agreed Position (2017).

More About the News

• A fresh wave of public mobilisation has emerged in Nagaland, with civil society groups, elders, and community leaders urging the Union Government to conclude the long-pending Indo-Naga peace talks. 
• The rally, organised by the Nagaland Gaonbura Federation Peace Committee and major Naga apex organisations, underscored the growing impatience over the delay despite agreements signed nearly a decade ago.

What is the Issue in Nagaland? 

• The central political issue in Nagaland revolves around the long-standing demand for a “Greater Nagalim”. 
• “Greater Nagalim” is an envisioned homeland proposed by the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN-IM). 
• This demand seeks to integrate all Naga-inhabited areas into one administrative and political unit. The proposed Greater Nagalim includes:
  • Large parts of Assam (such as Charaideo, Sivasagar, Golaghat, Jorhat etc).
  • Naga-inhabited regions of Arunachal Pradesh (Tirap, Changlang, Longding).
  • Parts of Manipur’s hill districts (Ukhrul, Senapati, Tamenglong, Chandel).
  • Small portions of Myanmar’s Sagaing Region, where Naga tribes live.
• This territorial claim lies at the heart of the political conflict because neighbouring states strongly oppose any alteration of their boundaries. 
• Manipur, Assam, and Arunachal Pradesh have repeatedly asserted that they will not cede even an inch of land, making the demand politically unviable.
• The NSCN-IM began an armed insurgency in the 1980s to achieve this goal, leading to severe violence and instability. 
• In 1997, the Government of India and NSCN-IM signed a ceasefire agreement, marking the beginning of formal peace negotiations. 
  • This ceasefire brought a major reduction in violence but did not resolve the territorial and sovereignty-related demands.
• Since then, periodic negotiations have taken place, resulting in the Framework Agreement (2015) with NSCN-IM and the Agreed Position (2017) with the NNPGs. However, the peace process remains stalled because of various reasons.

Thus, the core issue in Nagaland today is not just insurgency, but reconciling identity, territory, sovereignty, and federalism within the Indian constitutional framework.

Why Nagaland is Calling for a Conclusion Now

The Indo-Naga negotiations have stretched for 28 years, creating fatigue among citizens. Concerns over parallel tax regimes imposed by armed groups, livelihood uncertainties, and lack of political clarity have driven communities to demand a conclusive settlement.

Hundreds gathered with placards such as:

• “Settle Naga issue for posterity”
  
• “Implement Framework Agreement”
  
• “Stop ignoring Naga political issue”
  

Speakers emphasised that the prolonged stalemate is hurting ordinary people more than anyone else.

Understanding the Key Agreements 

1. The Framework Agreement (2015): Signed between the Government of India and NSCN (Isak-Muivah), the agreement:

• Recognises the unique history and identity of the Nagas.
• Commits both sides to a shared sovereignty model within the Indian constitutional framework.
• Envisions a decentralised, flexible political arrangement.
• Aimed at facilitating stronger ties among Nagas across the region

2. The Agreed Position (2017): Signed with the Working Committee of Naga National Political Groups (NNPGs), it:

• Accepts the Indian Constitution as the basis for settlement.
• Advocates for package-based political, administrative and cultural safeguards.
• Focuses on “future competencies” to be devolved to Naga institutions.

Together, these two documents represent the broadest consensus ever achieved among negotiating parties.

Why the Issue Remains Unresolved

Despite significant progress, several challenges persist:

• Demand for a Separate Flag and Constitution: NSCN (IM) insists on a distinct flag and constitution, while the Government maintains that sovereignty symbols cannot be granted outside the Indian constitutional framework.

• Lack of Transparency: Both agreements remain partially undisclosed, creating mistrust among stakeholders.

• Multiple Armed and Political Groups: Reconciliation between NSCN (IM) and the NNPGs remains incomplete, slowing the process.

• Parallel Taxation by Groups: Senior citizens at the rally highlighted that “national taxes” imposed by Naga factions hurt ordinary livelihoods.

Current Status of the Naga Peace Process 

• Negotiations remain deadlocked since 2019.
• NSCN (I-M) maintains that the Government must uphold the core spirit of earlier commitments made during the Framework Agreement.
• A final, comprehensive peace accord has not yet been reached, despite over two decades of continuous dialogue.
• The process has further slowed because no full-time interlocutor has been appointed since 2021, resulting in reduced momentum and prolonged uncertainty.

Why the Framework Agreement Still Matters

• It is the only agreement signed at the highest political level.
• It recognises the distinct historical rights of the Naga people.
• It demonstrates mutual acceptance that violence cannot solve political issues.
• It lays the foundation for a non-territorial, cultural, and administrative Naga entity across Naga-inhabited areas.
  

Way Forward

Experts believe the way forward must include:

• Transparent disclosure of negotiation details.
• Reconciliation between all Naga political groups.
• Creation of a time-bound roadmap for autonomy and institutional reforms.
• Strengthening of peace committees and tribal bodies to maintain public participation.
• Ensuring that economic development accompanies the political settlement.

The rally clearly expressed that keeping the issue unresolved indefinitely is no longer acceptable to the people of Nagaland.

Exam Hook: Mains Question

“Discuss the significance of the 2015 Framework Agreement in resolving the Indo-Naga issue. Why has the peace process remained inconclusive despite multiple agreements?”

SOURCE