Recently, there has been a strange phenomenon in Indian right-wing media. A speech given by Mizoram Chief Minister Lalduhoma at an event in the United States in September 2023, widely circulated and discussed across Northeast India months ago, has suddenly ignited a firestorm in the national fringe media—two months later and subsequently on mainstream media and social media.
This delayed reaction, fuelled by sensationalist headlines, particularly from right-wing outlets, raises more questions about the nature of our national discourse than the content of the speech itself.
It also reveals how disconnected “mainland” India remains from the Northeast, despite the information age that promises news and opinions travel at the speed of light.
The speech in question was delivered by CM Lalduhoma at “Mizo Day,” an annual event organised by the Mizo diaspora in the United States. For anyone familiar with Mizoram and the broader Zo ethnic identity, the significance of this event is obvious. The Mizo diaspora—like many other Indian diaspora communities—gathers to celebrate their culture, reflect on their shared identity, and discuss their political future.
This year’s event was significant given the troubled situation in Myanmar, where many Chin people have been displaced due to ongoing conflict with the military junta.
Lalduhoma, the Chief Minister of Mizoram, attended the event as the chief guest. That shouldn’t have raised any eyebrows. Mizoram, after all, is home to over a million Mizos, and their diaspora in the US is growing.
The event was an important moment for the Mizo community to come together, and it also provided a platform for the Indian government’s interests to intersect with the concerns of the Mizo people, especially given the geopolitical dynamics of the region.
Lalduhoma explicitly mentioned that he was there with the acknowledgement of the Ministry of External Affairs and was accompanied by representatives of India in the U.S. He further noted that the event was accounted for by the Ministry, which would accompany him as he toured Mizo communities in the U.S., highlighting the dedication of the Government of India, which clearly understood the potential importance of the event.
However, the way this speech has been twisted in recent media reports suggests a staggering level of ignorance about the Northeast, the Mizo people, and the political landscape they navigate.
As Lalduhoma spoke of unity among the Zo people—spread across India, Myanmar, and Bangladesh—he was not, as some have bizarrely suggested, advocating for a novel separatist idea. Rather, he was explicitly calling for unity that transcends borders, a heart set on “single administration within India”.
He praised the Modi government for its support in handling the humanitarian crisis caused by the influx of over 40,000 refugees from Myanmar and Bangladesh into Mizoram. He expressed gratitude to the Mizo diaspora for their help and emphasised the need for the community to remember their shared heritage.
What part of this speech could warrant the hysterical headlines now circulating in certain corners of the national media? To those who have listened to the speech, the answer is nothing. Yet, the way it has been portrayed suggests a deeper problem—one that reveals more about the insecurities of some ‘mainland’ commentators than anything about Mizoram or its Chief Minister.
Lalduhoma’s call for Zo unity was not a call for political secession but for cultural reconciliation. The Zo people, who share a common heritage, were divided by the colonial borders that still shape the region today. This is not a radical or new idea. Almost every major ethnic group in the Northeast has its version of a reunification narrative, born from the historical reality that they were often arbitrarily split between different nations during the partition of India.
The Mizo community—like the Nagas and others—has long dreamt of reconnecting with their ethnic kin across borders. But unlike some more hardline movements in the region, the Mizo vision of reunification is far more flexible, more open to interpretation, and crucially, it is not necessarily at odds with Indian sovereignty all the time.
Lalduhoma himself, according to many Mizo commentators, represents a more moderate stance within Mizo politics, blending Indian nationalism with a sense of Zo identity. He’s a leader who has often spoken about finding a place for Mizo identity within the Indian framework.
For someone who values both Mizo unity and India’s broader unity, the sensationalist misinterpretation of his speech is especially ironic—and a stark reminder of the biases and gaps that persist in national discourse.
Unfortunately, these misunderstandings are not new. Ever since the Manipur crisis, there has been a noticeable increase in inflammatory media coverage of the Northeast and Mizo people in particular, often casting the region in the light of separatism or “anti-national” sentiments.
The Manipur unrest has, for some outlets, become an excuse to lump together unrelated events in Mizoram, as if the complexities of one conflict apply wholesale to the neighbouring state. This lazy, blanket reporting strategy not only distorts the truth but also fuels prejudice, as we’re now witnessing in the treatment of Lalduhoma’s Mizo Day address.
In reality, Lalduhoma’s speech and interaction were carefully calibrated to promote both Mizo unity and India’s interests. He encouraged the Zo people, particularly the Chin community, to find reconciliation with the Arakan Army, a group that currently controls much of Myanmar’s Rakhine state—a region where India has strategic investments.
Some suggest Lalduhoma’s remarks align with a broader Indian strategy to establish friendly ties with ethnic groups in Myanmar’s conflict zones, given the instability of the Burmese junta. But such high-level diplomatic messaging can easily be lost on, or misrepresented by, media commentators who lack understanding of the Mizo political landscape.
The fact that none of the Indian government representatives accompanying Lalduhoma voiced any concerns about his speech suggests that this entire media uproar is, at best, a manufactured controversy. If these commentators were genuinely interested in India’s interests, they might see Lalduhoma’s speech as a form of “soft power”—leveraging ethnic ties for diplomatic influence.
Instead, what we’re witnessing is a disturbing willingness to stoke cultural tensions for clicks, clicks that further fuel long-standing prejudice against Mizo people on social media.
Racism against the Northeast has often been called out, but it is clear that specific biases against the Mizo people remain unaddressed. Sensationalised reporting on Mizo political affairs perpetuates outdated prejudices, and it only underscores the importance of supporting responsible, local journalism that understands the nuances of the Northeast.
India can only strengthen its unity by embracing the diverse identities of its people, especially in regions like the Northeast, where each community has its history, culture, and aspirations. Rather than allowing misinformed narratives to dominate national discourse, it’s time for the media to build genuine connections with the Northeast. The disconnect is real, but it doesn’t have to be permanent.
Lastly, someone responsible needs to put a leash on fringe media, especially those that present themselves as leaning towards the right (which I refuse to believe considering the hate they often show towards people of the country), before they find success in breaking this country into multiple pieces, both in the heart and in politics.
Opinions expressed in this article are of the author and do not reflect EastMojo’s opinion on the matter.
Also Read: Mizoram CM Lalduhoma cites Zo unity as key reason for U.S. visit
Stop whitewashing him, you dumbass. We all know what he said and his propaganda. We won’t ever let a single state break out of this Christian conspiracy by CIA