After Thuingaleng Muivah: What Next for India’s Longest Insurgency?
At 92, Thuingaleng Muivah remains the most recognisable face of the Naga political movement. The General Secretary of the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN-IM) has outlived most of his contemporaries from the founding generation. His recent emotional return to his ancestral village in Manipur after more than five decades has once again placed the future of India’s longest-running insurgency under sharp focus. As Muivah’s health declines, questions about succession, organisational unity, and the long-stalled peace process have become urgent.
A Movement Older Than Independent India
The Naga demand for recognition of their distinct identity predates 1947. What began as assertions of self-determination evolved into one of Asia’s most protracted conflicts, marked by phases of intense fighting, factional splits, and eventually a ceasefire. The NSCN-IM, formed after the 1988 split from the Khaplang faction, emerged as the most influential armed group. It entered a ceasefire with the Government of India in 1997 and signed the Framework Agreement in 2015.
Muivah, born in Somdal village in Ukhrul district of Manipur, survived serious injuries in earlier decades and lived much of his life in exile or underground. He has consistently argued that any lasting solution must respect Naga history and aspirations. The 2015 Framework Agreement was hailed as a breakthrough at the time, yet nearly eleven years later it remains unimplemented, with the core disagreements over a separate Naga national flag and constitution still unresolved.
Muivah’s Recent Homecoming and Frail Health
In October 2025, Muivah returned to Somdal after more than sixty years. The visit was deeply symbolic. Hundreds gathered to welcome the man many still refer to as “Avakharar” or eldest father. Too weak to deliver a long address himself, his message was read by his deputy, VS Atem. It carried a familiar refrain: generations may pass, but the nation and its cause endure. He reiterated that the Nagas have not surrendered their sovereignty and will defend their position to the last.
The homecoming occurred against a backdrop of visible physical decline. Muivah had been hospitalised in Dimapur earlier in 2025 for age-related complications. Despite his frailty, the carefully choreographed return served as a powerful reminder of his enduring personal authority within large sections of the Naga movement.
The Collective Leadership Model
NSCN-IM has sought to prepare for the inevitable transition through a collective leadership structure. This includes Yaruiwo Q. Tuccu as Chairman, Kedalo Tongmeth Wangnao, Muivah himself as Ato Kilonser, and VS Atem as Deputy Ato Kilonser. Recent joint council meetings in 2026 have publicly reaffirmed support for this arrangement and reiterated commitment to the 2015 Framework Agreement as the foundation for any settlement.
While this model provides institutional continuity on paper, many observers remain sceptical about its ability to hold the organisation together once Muivah is no longer the dominant figure. The Tangkhul community, to which Muivah belongs, already has internal divisions within the NSCN-IM. Historical splits and more recent tensions along the Myanmar border suggest that personal authority has often mattered more than formal structures in maintaining cohesion.
The Core Impasse in Peace Talks
The central disagreement remains straightforward yet deeply symbolic. NSCN-IM insists that any final agreement must include recognition of a separate Naga national flag and constitution. The Indian government has offered substantial autonomy, special constitutional safeguards, and development packages but maintains that these must operate within the framework of the Indian Constitution. It has ruled out anything that implies sovereignty or parallel national symbols.
Talks have dragged on for years with periodic rounds of engagement but no breakthrough. The ethnic violence in Manipur since 2023 has further complicated the environment, affecting Naga-inhabited areas and adding layers of mistrust. NSCN-IM leaders have accused the Centre of using other dynamics to weaken their position. At the same time, public sentiment in many Naga areas reflects growing fatigue with uncertainty, extortion, and the lack of economic progress.
Younger Nagas, who have grown up largely under the ceasefire, often express greater interest in jobs, education, infrastructure, and normal governance than in prolonged political confrontation. This generational shift is quietly reshaping the ground reality even as veteran leaders maintain their stated positions.
What Could Happen After Muivah?
Several scenarios appear plausible once Muivah’s personal influence recedes.
A best-case outcome would see the current window used for a negotiated settlement. With Muivah still able to lend legitimacy and the collective leadership in place, both sides could find creative compromises on the flag and constitution issue while delivering tangible autonomy and development benefits. Indian officials have described the present period as perhaps the last realistic opportunity for a durable accord.
A more likely medium-term picture involves gradual fragmentation. Without Muivah’s unifying presence, NSCN-IM could splinter further along tribal or regional lines. Its overall negotiating power would diminish, while smaller factions or cross-border elements continue low-level activities. Some sections might eventually integrate into mainstream politics or fade, while others persist in diminished form.
Another possibility is a prolonged period of uneasy stability. Ceasefire norms, improved security infrastructure, and demographic changes make a return to pre-1997 levels of intense conflict improbable. However, unresolved political grievances could sustain sporadic incidents, internal rivalries, and criminalised activities that burden local communities and businesses.
The Stakes for the Northeast
The Naga question is not merely about one organisation or one leader. It touches on broader issues of identity, federalism, and development across the Northeast. Prolonged uncertainty has deterred investment, complicated governance in mixed areas, and kept generations focused on political struggle rather than economic opportunity.
A settlement, even an imperfect one, could unlock significant progress. It would allow resources currently absorbed by security and parallel structures to shift toward infrastructure, education, and job creation. Conversely, further drift risks entrenching fatigue and disillusionment, particularly among the youth who will inherit whatever arrangement emerges.
A Potential Turning Point
Muivah’s long life has spanned the entire arc of the modern Naga movement — from armed struggle through ceasefire to the current uneasy stalemate. His generation carried the weight of historical memory and personal sacrifice. The next phase will be shaped by leaders who must balance that legacy with the practical aspirations of younger Nagas who want both identity and opportunity.
Whether the coming years bring a final political settlement or another period of managed uncertainty will depend on the willingness of all stakeholders to bridge the gap between stated positions and achievable outcomes. The Naga aspiration for dignified recognition of their history and identity is unlikely to disappear. The question is whether it finds expression through a lasting political arrangement or continues to simmer amid organisational fragmentation.
For the people of Nagaland and Naga-inhabited areas, the end of one era could mark the beginning of genuine closure — if sincerity and realism prevail on all sides. The alternative is more of the same: symbolic gestures, stalled talks, and a generation still waiting for the peace their elders have long sought.
About The Author
