This article examines how the India–Myanmar border in Mizoram is being reimagined and contested amid stateled securitization measures, with a focus on their impact on Zo communities whose familial, cultural, and religious ties span both sides. It asks how policy shifts, such as the 2024 suspension of the Free Movement Regime (FMR) and plans to fence the border, alter local notions of security, mobility, kinship, and belonging. Drawing on policy documents, media reports, and scholarly literature, the analysis situates these developments within a framework that views borders as socially produced and negotiated. The article defines core concepts of security (as territorial control and discourse), mobility (as everyday movement and exchange), kinship (as transborder family networks), and belonging (as identity and place in the borderland) and uses these to interpret how Mizoram's communities experience and respond to securitization. By examining state strategies and local responses, opposition by the Mizoram government and civil society, the study contributes to debates on postcolonial border governance, Indigenous rights, and federalism in South Asia. It argues that borders are experienced not only as imposed lines of separation but also as lived spaces of connection, where security imperatives collide with enduring kinship ties and local agency.

The demand for Article 371 in Meghalaya, a north eastern state in India, has emerged as a significant constitutional and political issue, with proponents arguing that it would enhance indigenous protections and autonomy beyond the Sixth Schedule. Led by the Voice of the People Party (VPP), the demand reflects concerns over central legislative interventions, resource control, and cultural preservation. However, drawing from the experiences of Nagaland (Article 371A) and Mizoram (Article 371G), this viewpoint evaluates whether Article 371 is a viable solution or a governance-unsettling and normatively dissonant proposal. The analysis finds that while Article 371 offers symbolic safeguards, its implementation risks jurisdictional conflicts, governance inefficiencies, and political resistance from the central government, particularly post-Article 370’s abrogation. Instead, strengthening the Sixth Schedule–through amendments prioritizing Autonomous District Councils autonomy, improved funding mechanisms, and governance reforms–provides a more practical and constitutionally coherent approach. This viewpoint argues that enhancing the existing framework aligns with Meghalaya’s governance needs without inviting constitutional uncertainty.

India’s achievement in launching the Chandrayaan 3 lunar mission marks a turning point in its space exploration endeavours, with far-reaching implications that extend beyond technological success. This article discusses the strategic importance of Chandrayaan 3’s successful landing on the lunar surface, emphasizing its implications for India’s technological advancement, defense capabilities, education sector and economic growth. Furthermore, it delves into the challenges faced by the Indian space program, including limited budget allocations, technological dependencies, and market access. Drawing insights from global space initiatives, the article proposes strategic recommendations for realizing India’s full potential in the space domain, such as substantial investment, expertise in human spaceflight and private sector participation. Through a comprehensive analysis of Chandrayaan 3’s multidimensional impact, this article contributes to the scholarly discourse on space exploration and underscores India’s growing prominence in the global space community.