Syllabus: GS-I & V: Regionalism

Why in the news?
Public debates around “One Northeast” have resurfaced in policy circles, cultural platforms and media spaces. However, scholars and activists argue that the idea oversimplifies the deep diversity, complex histories and internal contradictions of the northeastern States.

Inventing a Region: The Administrative Birth of ‘Northeast’

The term Northeast is not a historical identity but an administrative creation shaped by colonial and postcolonial governance. It emerged as:

• A frontier zone requiring strategic control;
• A bureaucratic category, institutionalised through the North Eastern Council (NEC) and the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (DoNER);
  
• A later cultural label used in festivals, tourism promotions, and national discourse.
  

This bureaucratic packaging has tended to flatten the internal complexities of a region home to over 200 ethnic groups, dozens of languages and distinct political histories.

Why a Single Northeast Identity Fails

1. Diverse Histories, Divergent Realities

Each State has its own political memory and social conflicts:

• Manipur grapples with hill–valley divides and ethnic contestations.
  • The 2023 Meitei–Kuki conflict is the strongest example of Manipur’s deep hill–valley divide.
• Assam navigates identity politics, migration concerns and linguistic assertion.
  • The Assam Movement (1979–1985) and the subsequent Assam Accord (1985) reflect Assam’s struggle with migration and identity.
• Nagaland negotiates ceasefires and sovereignty questions.
  • The 1997 Ceasefire between Government of India and NSCN(IM) and ongoing negotiations for a Final Naga Peace Accord.
• Tripura carries the trauma of demographic change.
  • Between 1947 and 1971, large-scale migration from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) transformed Tripura’s demography.
• Arunachal Pradesh seeks infrastructural inclusion while guarding cultural boundaries.
  • Trans-Arunachal Highway project and rapid border-area infrastructure have improved connectivity but sparked concerns over cultural dilution.
• Mizoram expresses a unique religious nationalism shaped by church institutions.
  • Mizo National Front (MNF) movement (1966–1986) evolved partly through the influence of powerful Baptist Church networks, which shaped Mizo nationalism.

A single regional identity cannot represent these diverse political imaginations.

2. Representational Hierarchy

The slogan “One Northeast” often allows a small, urban elite to speak on behalf of the entire region, while marginal voices—tribal women weavers, tea garden labourers, Chakma refugees, interior villages—remain unheard.

3. The Mirage of ‘Unity in Diversity’

This phrase often hides power imbalances. Unity becomes the ideal; diversity is tolerated, not celebrated. In the Northeast, this mindset leads to erasure of smaller groups in favour of a homogenised narrative.

4. External Gaze and Stereotyping

National media portray the region as a “problem zone” during conflict and a “success story” during peace, keeping it trapped in the Centre’s interpretive frame.

New Voices, Old Frameworks

A new generation of artists, writers and digital creators—from YouTubers in Garo Hills to podcasters in Kohima—challenge old stereotypes. But even their expressions risk being absorbed into the “Northeast brand,” which commodifies cultural diversity rather than understanding it.

The missing link:
There is weak intra-regional dialogue.
Assamese media rarely cover Mizoram beyond border disputes; Naga artists seldom collaborate with Karbi filmmakers; Tripura’s concerns seldom feature in Meghalaya’s discourse.

Real regionalism requires the Northeast to first listen within, before speaking outward.

Towards a Grounded Regionalism

A meaningful regional identity must:

• Respect difference, not erase it;
  
• Prioritise grassroots voices—farmers, workers, teachers, border communities;
  
• Focus on genuine cooperation on migration management, climate resilience, ecology, education and river-basin governance;
  
• Move beyond Delhi-centric validation and develop State-to-State partnerships.
  

The region’s strength has always been its capacity to negotiate difference, not forced sameness.

Important Terms Explained 

• Regionalism: Political and cultural assertion of a region’s identity and autonomy.
• Ethnic Diversity: Coexistence of multiple linguistic and cultural groups within a territory.
• Homogenisation: Treating diverse groups as if they were the same.
• Centre–Periphery Relations: Power imbalance between the Central Government and border regions.
• Administrative Regionalisation: Creation of regions for governance convenience rather than cultural coherence.
  

Exam Hook – Key Takeaway 

Discuss why the Northeast cannot be treated as a single, homogenous political and cultural unit. What are the implications of such homogenisation on regional identity and governance?

Source