7 min readSep 13, 2024 12:23 PM IST
First published on: Sep 13, 2024 at 07:10 AM IST
It is an astonishing fact that for virtually 17 months, the republic of India has let the conflict in Manipur deepen and expand. The proximate cause of the conflict was a controversial court order in March 2023 recommending the inclusion of Meiteis in the list of Scheduled Tribes. In the immediate aftermath, more than 60,000 people were displaced, there were close to a 100 deaths, and scores of buildings were burnt. There has been more violence since. A horrific video of assault on women briefly provoked the Supreme Court into its episodically whimsical but ultimately meaningless acts of legal chivalry. It was not clear then whether what moved the Court and country was genuine moral outrage or merely embarrassment. Even in the face of that attention, the prime minister maintained a pusillanimous silence.
The scale of our indifference to Manipur bears more calling out. Just think about all that has transpired in the last 17 months. You would have thought that the firing of drones and now the deployment of anti-drone technology, the use of rockets, deepening militia conflict, armed groups using terror against each other, brutal killings, journalists being fired at, internet and communication shutdowns, frequent confrontations between police and civilians, all in an area that is not just vital to India’s security but also central to its approach to the east would command the nation’s mind and attention. Students in Manipur have been protesting in large numbers, there have been torchlight processions, women’s marches and demands for the resignation of MLAs. It is as if an active civil society is banging its head against a brick wall.
Suhas Palshikar (‘Why Manipur is Far Away’, IE, September 12) ably explained how the dominant ideas of state and nation that have gained currency under the BJP exacerbate both the conflict in Manipur and our indifference to it. But it is not just the BJP. While the Opposition Congress party has consistently raised the issue, the media has, for the most part, been complicit in this cloak of invisibility. Its ability to outrage over trivia is matched by its puny silences in the face of real conflict and atrocity. Manipur has a long history of ethnic conflict, between the Nagas and Kukis in the Nineties being just one example. The BJP gained a foothold in the Northeast by artfully creating a broad electoral coalition, including getting Kuki support. The contradictions between different ethnic groups over land, reservation, control of legal and illegal trade, were always going to be difficult to manage. It is also clear that these alliances of opportunism cannot withstand the weight of the BJP’s majoritarianism. It eventually showed its true colours, exacerbating the conflict between Meiteis and Kukis.
But here is a deeper puzzle: Even in terms of the BJP’s own majoritarian politics, its behaviour over Manipur is shockingly bizarre. For one thing, let us look at the quotidian issue of chain of command.Who is actually in command in Manipur? There is something quite constitutionally astonishing about the fact that a sitting chief minister submits a representation to the governor of his own state demanding that the Unified Command be given back to the CM. At one level, it is amazing that the political and constitutional significance of this demand has not been noted. It is an indictment of the Centre, including the Union home minister.
Chief Minister Biren Singh bears a great deal of responsibility for the current crisis. His demand that the NRC be implemented with a base year of 1961 is a recipe for disaster. It fits in with the broader use of the NRC template that the BJP is perfecting in the Northeast. But the governance structure in Manipur seems curiously anomalous. There is formally no President’s Rule, but Unified Command was given to officials apparently not answerable to the CM. Who are they answering to? Much of the protests in Manipur are directed against the security advisor. There has been confusion over practically everything, including the status of the Suspension of Operations Agreement. Article 355 was apparently, for weeks, secretly brought into force. This little episode tells you something about the governance dead-end that is Manipur. In normal circumstances, any state with this level of unrest might have been a plausible candidate for President’s Rule. But we have a bizarre situation where the Centre is already running things without claiming to. In effect, therefore, President’s Rule will be the rule of the same incompetence that we have now. So, the puzzle is not just BJP’s ideology. It is that the BJP cannot as much as create a simple chain of command that its own party can align with. The curious puzzle is whether this is weaponised incompetence, deliberate use of confusion in governance, or just plain incompetence?
Meanwhile, the situation on the ground is deteriorating unimaginably. At least judging by the English language Manipuri press and informed observers, the ethnic lines are hardening, not softening. The three cardinal mistakes of policy are being repeated. We know that any situation that is presented as a zero-sum conflict between unified ethnic groups, whether over land, jobs or political dominance, never ends well. Excessive securitisation of what are essentially political conflicts is a recipe for more violence and oppression. Civil society discourse where ethnic groups like Kukis and Meiteis, often with encouragement of the state, are dehumanising each other, exacerbates conflict. Manipuri civil society has been quite vocal in its protest against the government. But whether it now has the resilience to withstand the hardening of ethnic lines is very much an open question.
So back to the puzzle of the BJP’s stakes in keeping the conflict simmering. It certainly has a stake in majoritarianism. But the BJP has got to know that, in Manipur, its strategy will also engulf its own core constituency amongst the Meiteis. A successful government in Manipur would have consolidated the BJP’s own authority. Is the design more sinister then? Is it essentially to use disorder to buttress the argument of its ecosystem that all political conflicts in India are now products of a vast foreign conspiracy? It is the BJP that now needs instability to license more repression. Rather than admitting its failure, it will use the disorder to license more authoritarianism. Manipur will be used in national politics, but in the wrong way.
The writer is contributing editor, The Indian Express
Who is actually in command in Manipur? There is something quite constitutionally astonishing about the fact that a sitting chief minister submits a representation to the governor of his own state demanding that the Unified Command be given back to the CM. 
Share
