Naga organisations in Myanmar’s Naga Self-Administered Zone have issued a joint statement opposing India’s construction of border fencing between Boundary Pillars 172 and 173, saying the project cuts through Tangshang Naga-inhabited areas near the Pangsau Pass and risks severing longstanding cross-border ties.
The statement, released by the United Tangshang Naga Council (UTNC) and endorsed by four local bodies—including the Naga Tradition, Literature and Culture Committees of Nanyun and Pangsau townships, the Tangshang Naga Baptist Churches Council and the Tangshang Naga Students Association—said the fencing and related fortifications fall “squarely within Tangshang Naga-inhabited territory” under Nanyun township.
The groups fear the project could divide villages and families and affect the local economy along the Indo-Myanmar borderlands.
Naga communities have lived across what is now the international border “since time immemorial,” the organisations stressed.
New Delhi has stepped up fencing parts of the 1,643-km border after announcing plans to dismantle the Free Movement Regime (FMR) in 2024, which previously allowed travel up to 16 km into either country without visas.
‘One People One Homeland’
The Tangshang bodies said the fence places psychological and social pressure on borderland communities and amounts to “a strategic attempt to divide and erase our identity.” They argued that the construction ignores the lived reality of Naga communities, where the frontier is viewed as a mere administrative line bisecting a continuous ethnic landscape.
While colonial-era demarcations for administrative purposes split Naga villages, they noted, this did not alter their shared identity as “one people and one homeland.”
“Any attempt to deny or undermine our oneness as a people will not intimidate the Tangshang Nagas,” the organisations said.
They said they expected a “great democracy” like India to uphold indigenous rights, including free movement for tribal communities separated by the border. “No matter what visible structures are erected, the invisible unity of our blood and identity as one people cannot be erased,” the statement added.
The UTNC urged New Delhi to halt construction, recognise indigenous presence on both sides of the boundary and avoid measures that could deepen divisions. The groups said restrictions could disrupt traditional movement for social, cultural and religious activities.
Concerns in India’s Northeast
The Tangshang Naga council’s opposition follows concerns raised by Naga organisations in India’s Northeast, who warn that fencing and the scrapping of the FMR will impede customary mobility, undermine local trade and inflame long-standing grievances in the region.
The United Naga Council, the apex body representing Naga communities in Manipur, has strongly objected to the FMR rollback, saying the policy was crucial to maintaining the historical, social and cultural integrity of the Naga people inhabiting contiguous border areas. The organisation said the decision to scrap the FMR violates the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
The Tenyimi Union called the fencing “divisive” and said it would harm socio-economic ties. In March 2024, the Nagaland Legislative Assembly passed a resolution opposing both the scrapping of the FMR and the border fencing project.
Similarly, the Khiamniungan Tribal Council petitioned the Indian prime minister to suspend fencing and restore the FMR. Opposing the move, Konyak chief Angh Tonyei Phawang said his ancestral house straddles the border: “Movement of our family members within the house is also international.”
In Mizoram, the Zoram People’s Movement-led government unanimously opposed revocation of the FMR in a 2024 assembly resolution, though its stance has softened since then. However, Mizo civil society organisations continue to protest the scrapping of the FMR.
In Manipur, marred by ethnic strife, the central government’s announcement to revoke the FMR was welcomed by the Biren Singh-led government. However, Kuki-Zo communities with cross-border ties have been opposing the move.
Nagaland Government Seeks Review
Nagaland Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio has repeatedly urged New Delhi to reconsider the project and consult affected communities, saying many Naga families maintain farms and households on either side of the border.
Rio has described the rollback of the FMR and the proposed fence as “very serious” for border residents and warned that the measures could rupture historic ties. In the state assembly, he backed a resolution opposing the initiative and said he would lead a delegation to meet India’s Home Minister.
Deputy Chief Minister T.R. Zeliang has echoed these views, saying that fencing would undermine India’s Act East Policy by disrupting local trade and reducing access to essential services like healthcare and education.
Wider Implications
While the Indian government says the fence is intended to enhance security and curb illegal trade, critics among Naga civil society maintain that the approach overlooks the complex ethnic and cultural geography of the Indo-Myanmar borderlands.
“For Naga communities whose ancestral territory spans the frontier, the fencing is seen not only as a security measure but as a challenge to historical patterns of identity and kinship,” said a Mon district resident.
Naogang Ngansa, president of the Naga Students’ Organization, Myanmar, told EastMojo that the consensus in Naga-inhabited areas of Myanmar is against the border fencing. “Nagas do not want any physical barrier separating their homeland,” he said.
“Nagas in Myanmar continue to bear the brunt of colonial-era boundaries, reinforced by the governments of India and Myanmar. NSO has repeatedly questioned the Myanmar government’s silence on the border fencing undertaken by the Indian government,” he added.
“The invisible unity of our people cannot be erased by any authority,” the UTNC said, summing up concerns that could intensify if the issue is not addressed through dialogue.
Also Read: Will an alliance between AIUDF and AIMIM work in Assam?