A former insider in the Myanmar peace process and a European conflict resolution lawyer once asked me, “Which Naga organization do we contact to discuss the Naga issue?” I replied, “All.” This seemingly simple exchange demonstrates a deeper truth about Naga politics: a long-standing lack of unified leadership and a breakdown in communication systems capable of engaging a diverse Naga population across geographic and political divides.
Historically, the absence of a centralized—or at least a strong—pan-Naga institution has hampered cohesive advocacy and strategic coordination among the Nagas. Earlier efforts, such as Naga Week in 1993 and the formation of the Naga Hoho in 1998, sought to unify fragmented voices through physical gatherings and face-to-face deliberation, transcending imposed boundaries. However, these models have struggled to maintain legitimacy amid the growing ethnic complexities within the Naga community. The disassociation of various ethnic bodies from the Naga Hoho reflects a broader crisis in Naga civil society: foundational or established institutions are losing their resonance, while new forms of authority have yet to fully emerge.
However, there are signs of shift in progress. Digital and social interactive platforms, particularly WhatsApp, Facebook, and Zoom, have begun to reconfigure how Nagas communicate, deliberate, and mobilize—both within and across borders. These platforms, while informal and sometimes chaotic, have opened up alternative arenas of participation, where previously marginalized voices can now contribute to shaping pan-Naga narratives.
The virtual commemoration of the Naga Declaration of Independence on August 14, 2022, hosted by the Global Naga Forum (GNF), marked a significant moment in this transition. With participants ranging from indigenous Sámi artists in Norway to U.S. diplomats and Nagas globally, the event transcended national borders and traditional hierarchies. The presence of global indigenous and diplomatic actors also reframed the Naga question within broader human rights and decolonial frameworks. Crucially, the organizing backbone of these events was digital interaction. GNF’s various social media channels and discussion groups served as incubators for ideas and action, enabling both centralized coordination and decentralized, real-time deliberation.
Similarly, public responses to incidents like the Oting killings catalyzed grassroots protests—such as the post-Oting Walkathon in January 2022, which was sparked by public sentiment circulating online. The Naga Solidarity Walk from Kohima to Tahamzan (Senapati) in July 2022, held under the theme “One People, One Destiny,” was also initially discussed and planned in the GNF WhatsApp group according to a reliable source, and received support from various Naga organizations across both sides of the border.
This evolving digital civic sphere has also created space for policy engagement and critical analysis. Publishing platforms such as the International Council of Naga Affairs (ICNA), which reaches audiences in over 100 countries, now provide venues for dialogue and debate. Initiatives like “A Dialogue on Naga Affairs” offer structured conversations featuring both Naga and non-Naga voices, producing policy-oriented reflections that were previously confined to elite circles. The ICNA survey report titled “The State of Naga Affairs” provides ground-level data and insights into the current realities and perspectives of the Naga people.
Still, tensions persist. Foundational and Legacy institutions remain fractured, and digital spaces have not yet produced a unified political body capable of coordinated action. Differences between Naga organizations remain visible, and in the short term, a consolidated pan-Naga authority appears unlikely. Yet, these platforms are no longer peripheral—they are central to how Naga identity, politics, and public opinion are now being constructed. Digital engagement has disrupted previous norms of deliberation, challenging who gets to speak, how issues are framed, and who consumes them. What was once confined to elite circles is now increasingly participatory and visible.
The key insight here is this: authority and legitimacy are being renegotiated—not replaced—within emergent digital ecologies. The Naga experience reflects a broader trend in indigenous and postcolonial societies: a shift away from foundational or legacy governance structures—whether traditionally decentralized, like the Naga village republics, or more centralized forms elsewhere—toward networked, participatory, and often contested modes of political engagement and representation. In the absence of a strong, united pan-Naga body on the ground, one question continues to echo across various forums: who do you call if you want to discuss Naga affairs?
About the Author: Augustine R. is an independent analyst and researcher specializing in international relations and geopolitical affairs. With a background in international relations, trade, and development, his interests span global security and economic diplomacy. He closely examines the India-Naga-Myanmar political conflict, Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) strategic nexus and the evolving foreign policy dynamics within the U.S.-China-India relationship triangle. View all articles by the author.
Featured Image: Representative image/Participants in the Naga Solidarity Walk, which concluded on July 29, 2022 in Tahamzan(Senapati) / Photo: GNF
ICNA reserves all rights to the content submitted. The author’s views are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of icna.nl
This article is a revised version of an earlier piece titled “The Nagas lacked a unified voice, but that may be changing with the adoption of digital and social interactive platforms,” authored by Augustine R. and originally published by the International Council of Naga Affairs (ICNA) on October 11, 2022.