The government’s interventions on the Manipur violence in the Parliament do not address the root causes of the unprecedented ethnic cleansing in the state.
Speaking on the no-confidence vote, Union Home Minister Amit Shah made two points – that the Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh must be retained because he was “cooperating” with the Centre and that illegal immigrants from Myanmar caused ethnic clashes. Both are half-truths. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s long reply gave less than 10 minutes to Manipur. He reduced the Manipur issue to “unforgivable” crimes against women. Without a roadmap for peace and reconciliation, his assurances of re-establishing peace lacked credibility.
The following facts stand against the home minister’s testimonial that the CM of Manipur has been cooperating with the Centre. In March this year, two months before the violence began, N Biren Singh’s Cabinet unilaterally withdrew from the Suspension of Operations (SoO) or ceasefire agreement with two Kuki militant outfits — the Kuki National Army and the Zomi Revolutionary Army. According to a report in The Wire, as a party to the tripartite SoO agreement, the Centre was on the verge of signing a peace accord with the Kuki groups on May 8, offering to create an autonomous regional council within Manipur.
Biren Singh and his predominantly Meitei constituency have been opposed to a Kuki autonomous council. Fortuitously, the Meitei-Kuki ethnic clashes began on May 3, five days before the accord was reportedly to be signed. The more the violence changed the ground situation, the less Biren Singh’s government had to worry about the Centre’s initiative as the chances of an autonomous council receded.
Was the “looting” of over 4,500 sophisticated arms and large amounts of ammunition from police armouries in Imphal and Bishnupur another indicator of “cooperating” with the Centre? Both areas where unarmed civilian mobs looted weapons were Meitei-dominated. There is substantial pictorial evidence in the public sphere of Meitei youngsters sporting sophisticated weapons bearing armoury markings during arson against Kuki properties in the presence of the Manipur police. It is unprecedented that the looting of weapons is being viewed benignly by the state government, which has offered amnesty to those who return them or deposit them in drop-boxes!
Two Meitei youth organisations – Arambai Tenggol and Meitei Leepun – have led the attacks on tribals. Both display close association with the ruling BJP. Arambai Tenggol members are easily recognisable as they dress in black, sport a red Meitei insignia, and move in gangs on motorcycles. They are believed to have organised the looting of the police armouries. A social media post by an Arambai Tenggol member, Subhash Khwairakpam, claimed, “Weapons given to us by Meitei police is (sic) still with us. We will use it (sic) to cleanse tribals from the valley area. Peace is now a distance (sic) future. Meitei yaiphare (greetings/victory).”
The Arambai Tenggol, initially a grouping of surrendered Meitei insurgents, now actively recruits from the community and displays pictures on social media of their meeting with the Chief Minister and with the titular King of Manipur, Leishemba Sanajaoba, now a BJP Rajya Sabha MP. Videos of new recruits of Arambai Tenggol being sworn in at his residence are available on the MP’s Facebook wall.
The Meitei Leepun is headed by one Pramot Singh, who boasted of being “well-connected” in an interview with The Week. He claimed that more than a thousand group members had received arms training and that the “ongoing war is unavoidable.” He even rationalised the crimes against Kuki women, saying that although it was against Meitei values, “in times of war, many incidents can occur, and being new to this, people are now learning.” Yet, these organisations have neither been banned nor their leaders arrested.
The circumstances under which an FIR was registered on August 5 by the Manipur police against the Assam Rifles further challenge notions of a “cooperative” CM. Assam Rifles is operationally under Army command but reports to the Union Home Ministry. The FIR for “obstruction of duty” and “criminal intimidation” – still not withdrawn — could not have been filed without political clearance. In fact, the state BJP leadership and party MLAs have written to the Centre twice for the removal of the Assam Rifles from the state. Today, the state’s police, bureaucracy, government and legislature are divided along ethnic lines. Can the failure to prevent a schism in governance structures and setting the police against the Assam Rifles be presented as “cooperation” with the Centre?
The division of the state into the Meitei and Kuki-Chin areas has been forced by popular violence. It is rooted in conflicting narratives produced by the two ethnic communities. The Meitei see themselves as the guardians of Manipur and its integrity, now under siege. They malign all Kukis as illegal immigrants, poppy growers and “narco-terrorists”. The Assam Rifles is portrayed as a protector of the Kukis alone, although it has rescued all those trapped in adverse areas during the clashes, irrespective of ethnicity. The Kuki counter-narrative is that they cannot hope for justice under a Meitei dispensation. Unless they are questioned and reconciled — there are still sane elements on both sides — peace cannot return.
Unfortunately, the state government’s decisions have fed these opposing narratives. They include new notifications and rules regarding reserve forests, protected forests, wetlands and surveys to redraw the boundaries of tribal villages. Without any rehabilitation plans, all Jamabandis, pattas, dags and other documents issued earlier to villages under reserved and protected forests were cancelled, and residents faced eviction. Singh’s government also did not immediately appeal against a curious Manipur High Court ruling, recommending Scheduled Tribe status for the largely Vaishnavite Meiteis.
Ethnic tensions were clearly on the boil well before May 3, when the rioting began. Therefore, it is disingenuous of the prime minister to define the Manipur conflict only by crimes against women, reducing a political problem to one of law and order. The cases of sexual violence in Manipur are not ordinary – they are akin to war crimes by one ethnicity against another. The reasons for the ongoing ethnic war have to be identified and addressed. The home minister and the prime minister have offered Parliament no insights on how they intend to do this.
Jiten Yumnam: Nuances of mining plan in Manipur
How Manipur Is Forced To Parade Their Losses To An Ignorant India
Naga body brings Kukis, Meiteis under one roof; ‘Solidarity and Prayer Watch for Manipur’
Fractured memories of Manipur: myths, history and personal encounters
After the truth-shower 