Opinion: Social discourse a far cry in Manipur
Unless we understand the gross imbalance in sharing sociopolitical power among the ethnic groups, resolving conflicts is impossible
By Geetartha Pathak
After a brief lull, Manipur is burning again as fresh reports of violence are coming from across the State. This time, students are leading the agitation, demanding the withdrawal of additional central forces citing their failure to restore peace despite the conflict continuing for over a year and a half. They also protested against the government’s decision to shut educational institutions and have called for the protection of the State’s “territorial and administrative integrity”. The protest was held against the backdrop of the recent drone and missile attacks in the Imphal valley that killed three people.
However, Lt Gen PC Nair, a retired DG of Assam Rifles, said in a media interview that no drones or rockets were used in the attacks. He also labelled Manipur Police as “Meitei Police”, hinting at their alleged partisan role in the ethnic conflict. The Manipur Police dismissed it and said that there was evidence of drone and hi-tech missile attacks.
Current Violence
The divide between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities has created a deep fissure in the ethnic landscape of the State. A Kuki cannot cross the buffer zone even if the person is a police officer, an armyman or a politician. Limkholoi Mate, a former armyman belonging to the Kuki-Zo community, was beaten to death in Imphal West district on the night of September 9, 2024, when he accidentally entered a Meitei majority area.
So deep is the mistrust between communities that there are allegations that the security forces and law enforcement agencies are divided along ethnic lines. Journalists and intelligentsia are also divided on the conflict not only along ethnic lines but also on their perception, which is influenced by wide propaganda. Allegations and counter-allegations by investigating agencies like the National Investigative Agency (NIA) and militant organisations like the NSCN-IM, which signed a ceasefire and framework agreement with the government, are also intriguing. ‘The Hindu’ reported in May that a chargesheet filed by the NIA alleged that the “China Myanmar Module” of NSCN-IM helped two banned Meitei outfits to infiltrate Manipur to fuel ethnic violence.
On the other hand, the NSCN-IM on May 15, accused the Indian security forces of helping Kuki militant groups wage a war against Meitei revolutionary groups in Myanmar. The NSCN-IM also alleged that the security forces used the Kukis as frontal forces to engage in bloody discord against the Nagas giving all logistic support to the Kuki militant groups.
Why will the security forces which are under direct control of the central government help the Kuki militants when the Modi government has shown full confidence in the Biren Singh government notwithstanding the latter’s abject failure to bring peace in State? It shows that there is an interplay of many interests behind the Manipur violence which should be segregated to understand the role of stakeholders of the conflict.
Fault Line
The fault line lies in many unique patterns of population distribution across different geographical areas, majoritarian concentration of power and a perceived threat to the so-called territorial and administrative integrity and different religious identities among the ethnic groups. The Meiteis, a predominantly Hindu group, comprise 51% of Manipur’s population but hold only 10% of the land in the State. On the other hand, Kukis and Nagas, mostly Christians, comprise 40% of the population but occupy 90% of the land. Due to their larger numbers, Meiteis have a larger share of representation in the Assembly, encouraging Meitei majoritarianism. Meitei Chief Ministers have been ruling the State since 1990. Kukis and Nagas feel underrepresented in the political setup. Manipur’s minorities also point out that the bulk of the State’s Budget and development work is focused on the Meitei-dominated Imphal valley.
Nagas were at the focus of the conflict in Manipur for years. The Kuki Zo community came to the arena of conflict later. The demand for territorial and administrative power arose in the wake of a ceasefire agreement with the NSCN (IM) in 2001 which incorporated, among others, a fresh clause: “without any territorial limits”. Now the ceasefire will apply to all Naga-inhabited areas, including Manipur. The ceasefire agreement by the then Atal Bihari Vajpayee government set the Manipur, particularly the Imphal valley, on fire. The proposed map of Nagalim in the agreement covers almost two-thirds of what is now the State of Manipur, apart from areas of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh and Myanmar.
The failure of the government in dousing the fire of conflict in Manipur amid criticism from the emboldened opposition and pressure from outside and within the country can be attributed to the BJP government’s Hindutva outlook and obduracy.
Common Narrative
The same narrative of branding all Bengali-speaking Assamese Muslims in Assam as Bangladeshi and all Muslims as a threat to the existence of the so-called indigenous people of Assam by the BJP government is being applied against the Kuki-Zo community. The high population growth of Muslims in Assam and Kukis in Manipur is attributed to the increasing influx of people from across the border, though experts say that this growth is triggered by the low level of education and backwardness of a particular ethnic group. Illegal infiltration may not be ruled out but is not responsible for so high population growth in both cases.
Understanding the ethno-social conflict in the Northeast needs intense study of its history and analytical mind. The Centre has considered these conflicts as a simple law and order situation. There are overlaps in asserting identities and their rights among the ethnic groups and sub-groups, which are immediate reasons for many clashes between Nagas and Kukis, Kukis and Meiteis and even within the Meitei and Kuki-Zo group. The Meitei-Pangal Meitei (Muslim Meitei) conflict is an example of inter-conflict. In 1993, the Meitei-Pangal conflict in Manipur left around 100 people dead and caused many to be displaced. It was sparked by attacks on Muslim settlements and businesses by Meitei mobs in the Lilong area of Thoubal district. Another such inter-clan conflict is Kuki Paite or Kuki-Zomi in 1997-98 when 352 people died and more than 13,000 were displaced.
Unless we understand the gross imbalance in sharing sociopolitical power among the ethnic groups living together in a common geographical area and keep focusing on narco-terrorism and sophisticated assault rifles which are just the outer shell of the conflicts, bringing peace in Manipur is impossible. The government must encourage social discourse involving all ethnic groups and their political bodies. It’s only negotiated settlement without a rigid stand that can take along everyone.
We must have the wisdom to choose where we are going. English author and poet Lewis Carroll said “If you don”t know where you’re going, any road will take you there”. The recurring violence in Manipur is passing through such a road and the Modi’s Nero factor looming large over the sky of Manipur is adding to uncertainty.
(The author is a senior journalist from Assam)
