In Manipur, old wounds call for repair, not containment
In February, the return of a popular government in Manipur after a prolonged spell of ethnic violence and the imposition of President’s Rule came as a welcome reset. When the Yumnam Khemchand Singh government took office, it raised hopes of both administrative stability and political reconciliation. That promise is yet to be realised. A fortnight after two Meitei siblings were killed in a projectile attack in Tronglaobi village, massive protests, shutdowns, clashes with security forces and calls for boycotts indicate that the change in leadership is yet to translate into meaningful transformation on the ground.
The fault lines in Manipur are the result of a larger pattern of administrative abstinence that predates the current crisis. Dipping indices of employment, education and healthcare have long given rise to a virulent identity politics and hardening narratives of victimhood among the state’s Meiteis, Kuki-Zos and Nagas. Unlike his predecessor N Biren Singh, Khemchand Singh has made efforts to reach out to all communities since he took office. Last month, he met with leaders of the Kuki-Zo Council. On Friday, he visited the Ukhrul district, calling for dialogue between the Tangkhul and Kuki communities. But the persistence of unrest — there was a suspected militant attack the day after his visit — and the visible mistrust — there have been calls for a “boycott” of the ruling party by civil-society groups — suggest that the fractures of the past two years remain largely unhealed.
The emphasis must now shift from containment to repair. Thousands remain displaced, a reminder that the crisis is both humanitarian and political and that rehabilitation must move to the centre. The CM’s efforts at bridge-building underline that channels for engagement exist and can be expanded. What is required now is open, sustained dialogue with all stakeholders, an urgent clampdown on the free flow of weapons in the state and the foregrounding of an administration that is even-handed and emotive in its response, rather than merely reactive.
- 1The Manipur situation highlights challenges in post-conflict governance, where a new government under Yumnam Khemchand Singh must shift from mere containment to political repair. This requires sustained, even-handed dialogue with all stakeholders, including Meitei, Kuki-Zo, and Naga communities, to address deep-seated mistrust and administrative failures, demonstrating that a change in leadership alone is insufficient to resolve ethnic fault lines.
- 2The prior imposition of President's Rule in Manipur invokes Article 356 of the Constitution, used when a state's constitutional machinery fails. The ongoing unrest and free flow of weapons test the state's capacity to maintain public order, potentially requiring stringent measures under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) to curb violence and prosecute offenders involved in attacks and communal clashes.
- 3The editorial links Manipur's ethnic violence directly to adverse socio-economic conditions, including poor employment, education, and healthcare indices. This illustrates how economic deprivation fuels virulent identity politics and victimhood narratives. The large-scale displacement of people underscores the humanitarian crisis, making rehabilitation and equitable development crucial components of any sustainable peace plan, beyond just political negotiations.
- 4The conflict in a border state like Manipur has significant international relations implications, particularly for India's 'Act East' policy and relations with Myanmar. The cross-border ethnic ties of communities like the Kuki-Zos and the illicit flow of weapons highlight the geopolitical dimension of internal security. Maintaining stability in the Northeast is imperative for India's regional security and diplomatic engagement.