These are some of Manipur’s darkest times. Nearly two months after a bloody feud between two of its major communities – Meiteis and Kukis – broke out, there is still no sign of normalcy in sight. Although no longer widespread, sporadic violence and mayhem at the foothills where villages of the two communities rub shoulders – once in friendship and now in bitter enmity – are still reported.
There have been over 100 lives lost and an estimated 45,000 people are now living in community run relief camps. With the impression the state is incapable of restoring normalcy, initial respite from fear of violence among many in these camps has given way to despair. Now this despair is beginning to turn into anger capable of fuelling further escalation of the conflict. Or else, it can also end up directed at the establishment. The emerging popular impression is, while the state government is clueless and the Central government lacks commitment.
In a disturbing development, the two warring sides now perceive government forces as partisan. Kukis think state police constabularies, including the armed Manipur Rifles, favour Meiteis, and the latter are convinced Central paramilitary forces, in particular the Assam Rifles, support Kukis. A completely avoidable ugly confrontation on June 2 between Manipur police commandos and a unit of the 37-Assam Rifles which almost resulted in a gunfight has made things worse.
In this incident, a detachment of the AR arrived and provocatively blocked off the office of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, SDPO, Sugnu, parking two armoured personnel carriers at its gate. When things were poised to get out of hand, the AR team retreated. In all likelihood, this was just a localised friction created by an overzealous post commander, nonetheless it left in its wake very damaging optics, particularly because this happened just two days after Union home minster, Amit Shah’s three-day visit to the state beginning May 28.
In a welcome step, as promised by Shah, a 3-member enquiry committee headed by retired Gauhati High Court chief justice, Ajai Lamba, has been formed to establish the causes of the crisis and fix responsibilities. However, another initiative of setting up a 51-member peace committee headed by the state Governor, Anusuiya Uikey, is running into early but expected hiccups, and many in the list are withdrawing. The allegations are, there are too people of known political affiliations in it.
Kuki members named in the committee have also objected to the inclusion of the state chief minister, N. Biren Singh, who they claim is anti-Kuki and a mastermind of the present crisis. The inclusion of the CM in this committee however indicates the Centre is not inclined to replace him or impose President’s Rule in the state, quite contrary to anticipations by many, probably because this is a BJP state.
The present crisis is also revealing the complex matrix of ethnic relationships in the state, particularly between its three major communities Nagas, Kukis and Meiteis. It is clear now the faultlines go beyond ethnic boundaries. Hence there is also a hill-valley divide which corresponds roughly with the tribal-nontribal divide, in which Nagas and Kukis are on one side and the Meiteis on the other. The hills form 90 percent of the state’s land mass and are deemed exclusive for those recognized as Scheduled Tribes. The 10 percent valley is where the non-tribal Meiteis are confined, and is open to settlement by any Indian, including hill tribes. A growing section of the Meiteis are now demanding ST status for Meiteis as well, claiming this would level out perceived discrepancies like this.
Both Nagas and Kukis are opposed to this demand, but this has not given the two any closer fraternal ties. In the May 3 rally to oppose the Meitei demand, Nagas did not cross the red line in their relationship with Meiteis as did Kukis in Churachandpur district, going on an arson rampage on Meitei settlements after a rumour spread that a Kuki war memorial site had been burnt down by Meiteis. The state is now in a raging inferno from the fire that spread from that afternoon. Despite “feelers” from Kukis for alliance to make this a hill versus valley conflict, it is apparent Nagas have decided to remain neutral.
But this neutrality is nuanced. On June 9, Manipur’s 10 Naga legislators, met the Union home minister for consultations. They assured him their service in bringing back normalcy in the state, but also added if any concession were to be made to the Kuki demand for a separate administration, no land Nagas consider as theirs must be touched.
Since Kuki villages are spread across all the state’s hill districts, and because Nagas consider all hill districts except Churachandpur as their ancestral domain, this assertion obviously will be a wet blanket to dampen the Kuki demand, even in the very unlikely circumstance of Meiteis agreeing to the proposal. Indeed, in the 1990s, a decision of the United Naga Council to evict Kukis villages who they consider as tenants in their land, resulted in a bloody conflict costing more than 800 lives.
This neutrality is reminiscent of what Herbert B. Swope wrote in his Pulitzer Prize winning articles from Germany in 1916 for The World, New York, reproduced in the first volume of Outstanding International Press Reporting edited by Heinz-Dietrich Fischer de Gruyter. Swope said Germans at the time were bitter about America’s proclaimed neutrality, a year before America too joined the World War-I, because they felt the American neutrality with Germans came from the head, while with the Allies, it was determined by the heart.
Nagas have indicated they are not ready to side with Kukis in this conflict, but this does not mean they have no differences with the Meiteis. The challenge before Manipur and its people therefore is to work for a consensus on administrative structural adjustments as and when the current fratricidal frenzy ends. In a state home to 34 plus recognized linguistic communities, peace necessary will be premised on mutual accommodation within what is their shared destiny.
This article was first published in The Tribune. The original can be read HERE
Editor, Imphal Review of Arts and Politics and author
