 |
| Manipur Violence fight for survival and peace |
The violence that deluged Manipur beginning May 3, 2023, and continuing into 2025, represents far more than a spontaneous ethnic clash over resources. While the immediate trigger was the protest following the Manipur High Court’s directive regarding the Meitei community’s long-standing demand for Scheduled Tribe (ST) status, this proximate cause quickly dissolved, revealing deep, fundamental conflicts of interest tied explicitly to separatist demands and powerful vested economic forces. The Meitei perspective holds that the violence was not merely reactive but a planned offensive engineered by elements seeking political fragmentation and protection of illicit cross-border enterprises.
For the Meitei community, who are restricted from purchasing land in the hill districts under existing laws, the primary concern is existential: the defense of Manipur’s historical, inviolable territorial integrity. Civil society groups, notably the Coordinating Committee on Manipur Integrity (COCOMI), have maintained an uncompromising stance against any division of the state. This political line in the sand is a defense of Manipur’s shared history as a unified princely state and its constitutional status within India.
Also Read | Why the Union of India Remains Opposed to Ladakh's Statehood: A Betrayal of Democratic Promises
The central conflict is driven by the Kuki-Zo communities' demand for a separate administrative unit or a Union Territory (UT) with a legislature. This demand, galvanized immediately following the outbreak of violence, fundamentally transforms a state-level dispute into a challenge against the very geographical integrity of the Indian state. The persistence of this separatist agenda is viewed by the Meitei community as the single greatest impediment to peace, indicating that the violence has been weaponized as a tool to achieve political balkanization, often necessitating ethnic cleansing to create homogenous zones required for separation. The slow and tentative response from New Delhi in decisively addressing this separatist pursuit—a hidden political consideration often attributed to avoiding further political instability or undermining the sitting state government —has only served to prolong the uncertainty and exacerbate the crisis.
Beneath the surface of ethnic rivalry lies a severe conflict rooted in demographic pressures and organized economic crime. The Meitei community views the situation as a defense against a demographic siege caused by massive, unchecked illegal immigration from Myanmar (Chin-Kuki origin), which has led to significant demographic shifts and the unauthorized establishment of hundreds of new villages since 2006.
Also Read | Slovenia Sanctions Netanyahu in EU First Over War Crimes Allegations
Crucially, the conflict erupted soon after the state government intensified its War on Drugs policy, a unanimous resolution of the Legislative Assembly. This campaign involved the destruction of over 18,000 acres of illegal poppy cultivation between 2017 and 2023. This attack on the narcotics trade, coupled with eviction drives against illegal encroachments in Reserve and Protected Forests, which primarily impacted the Chin-Kuki community, directly challenged the financial and territorial basis of organized drug cartels. The scale of the violence, therefore, appears to be a violent counter-reaction by powerful, armed vested interests seeking to protect their multi-million-dollar illegal enterprise and occupied forest lands, a factor explicitly linked by the Chief Minister to foreign nationals and cross-border narcoterrorism.
To stabilize the state and protect indigenous rights from this demographic threat, Meitei civil society groups consistently demand the urgent implementation of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and a thorough review of the 2001 census to filter out illegal immigrants and correct electoral imbalances.
A further complication is the continued existence and alleged misuse of the Suspension of Operations (SoO) agreement with Kuki-Zo insurgent groups. Meitei groups have vehemently demanded the abrogation of this pact, alleging that groups under the SoO umbrella violated ceasefire ground rules, utilized their designated camps for militant coordination, and engaged in acts of terror.
The failure of the Centre to terminate the SoO agreement, despite these serious allegations of misuse, functions as a "hidden political consideration." It allows armed groups to maintain operational space while simultaneously pursuing separation and illegal economic activities. This reluctance to dismantle the militant infrastructure represents a political compromise that prioritizes a fragile, security-driven stalemate over the necessary enforcement of law and order and accountability for violence.
Lasting peace in Manipur demands an end to political ambiguities and decisive constitutional action. Stability is contingent upon three non-negotiable actions: first, the Central government must unequivocally uphold the territorial integrity of Manipur against any separatist proposal; second, the implementation of the NRC is essential to address the core issue of illegal immigration and safeguard indigenous demographics; and third, the immediate termination of the SoO agreement is required to disarm and hold accountable all militant groups who have allegedly weaponized the peace process. Only through these measures can Manipur address the deep-rooted conflicts of interest that lie beneath the surface of this enduring crisis.
This Article is Authored by Adnan Khan Yumkhaibam currently pursuing PG Political Science in Manipur University
Good
ReplyDeletePost a Comment