WR THEN THE NAGALAND PEACE MISSION expired ingloriously during the first week of May, i966, and the Naga Baptist Church Council appointed a Nagaland Peace Commission in its stead, the world took little notice. Nagaland is no Vietnam and its civil war, in spite of the thousands of lives it has claimed, has never rated much attention outside India. What are the issues, and who are the protagonists in the curious conflict within India's youngest and smallest state? Briefly stated, the issue is national independence for Nagaland, as demanded by a vociferous segment of the state's 370,000 citizens. In I956 ardent nationalists in Nagaland set up the Naga Federal Government, which they claim is the legitimate government of Nagaland. The Naga Federal Government (NFG) maintains that when the British left India, Nagaland was not part of India, but under direct British occupation. Hence, India's independence from Great Britain did not confer upon her sovereignty over Nagaland. In the words of the Naga independence leader A. Z. Phizo: We shared our house with the British and when they vacated, the whole house became ours once more.1 Furthermore, the NFG representatives argue that since the Nagas are culturally, ethnically and racially different from the Indians, they have an inherent right to govern themselves.2 The leaders of the NFG learned their nationalist rhetoric from skilled masters, and they learned their lesson well; it is with obvious satisfaction that they quote chapter and verse from the Indian independence movement whenever the occasion arises. The Indian Government, on the other hand, is implacably committed to the view that Nagaland forms an integral part of