Manipur Violence: Examining Ethnic Tensions, Historical Grievances, and the Path to Peace

Introduction

Manipur, has been witnessing escalating ethnic violence and prolonged unrest. Recent clashes stem from socio-political and historical tensions between the valley-dwelling Meitei community and hill-dwelling tribal groups (Nagas and Kukis). The situation has further deteriorated following the Manipur High Court’s directive to consider granting Scheduled Tribe (ST) status to the Meiteis, sparking protests and violent confrontations.

Current Affairs: Latest Developments

1. Jiribam Clashes:
   • Ten suspected militants under theKuki-Zo umbrella were killed in a clash with security forces in Jiribam district.
   • The violence reportedly began after armed attacks onMeitei settlements, a CRPF post, and a local police station, escalating the ethnic divide.
2. Shutdowns in Hill Districts: Following the Jiribam incident,Churachandpur and Kangpokpi, dominated by Kuki-Zo communities, observed shutdowns, signaling intensifying discontent among the tribal population.
3. Eviction Drives: Evictions ofKuki settlers in protected forest areas have led to violent protests, with the state government labeling these settlements as illegal and linked to poppy cultivation.
4. Anti-Drug Campaign: The government’santi-drug drive has targeted illegal opium farms, further straining relations between the Meiteis and Kuki-Zomi groups.
5. Humanitarian Concerns: Thousands remain displaced due to violent clashes, highlighting the need for urgent humanitarian intervention and long-term solutions.

Historical and Ethnic Context

1.    Ethnic Composition of Manipur:

• Valley Region:

• • Constitutes 10% of Manipur’s landmass, dominated by the Meitei community (64% of the population).
  • The valley elects 40 out of 60 MLAs, reflecting political dominance.

• Hill Region:

• • Comprises 90% of the land, inhabited by tribal groups (Nagas and Kukis) forming 35% of the population.
  • These areas elect 20 MLAs.

• Cultural Divide:

• • Meiteis are predominantly Hindu, with a smaller Muslim population, while the tribal groups are largely Christian.

Root Causes of Violence

1.    Demand for ST Status by Meiteis:

• Historical Recognition: Meiteis were recognized as a tribe before 1949 but lost this status after Manipur’s merger with India.
• Preservation of Identity:
  • Concerns over demographic changes and shrinking ancestral lands.
  • Fear of being marginalized, as the Meitei population declined from 59% in 1951 to 44% in 2011.
• Economic Concerns: Desire for job reservations and protection from outsider land ownership in the valley.

2.    Tribal Opposition to Meitei ST Status:

• Demographic and Political Advantages: Meiteis already dominate the state’s politics, economy, and administration.
• Land and Resource Concerns: Tribal groups fear losing land rights in the hills and job opportunities to Meiteis.

3.    Forest Evictions:

• Illegal Settlements: Eviction drives in Churachandpur-Khoupum Protected Forest labeled Kuki villages as illegal settlers, allegedly linked to drug cultivation.
• Tribal Protests: Kuki groups claim the evictions violate Article 371C, which safeguards the rights of hill residents.

4.    Drug Menace:

• Anti-Drug Campaign: Government actions targeting poppy cultivation in tribal areas have added to ethnic tensions.

5.    Myanmar Refugee Crisis:

• Impact of the Myanmar Coup (2021): Refugees crossing into Manipur have heightened fears of demographic changes, especially in Kuki-dominated areas.

Geography of Violence

1. Valley vs. Hills Divide: The valley is surrounded by low hills, inhabited by15 Naga tribes and the Chin-Kuki-Mizo-Zomi group, which includes Kukis, Thadou, Hmars, and others.
2. Historical Tensions: The British brought theKuki-Zomi from the Chin Hills of Myanmar to act as a buffer between the Meiteis and Nagas, laying the foundation for inter-ethnic conflict.

Recent Flashpoints

1. Delimitation Process (2020): Census data contested by Meiteis, while tribal groups claimed underrepresentation in the Assembly.
2. Forest Encroachments: Tribal groups accused of illegal settlements inreserved forests.
3. Economic Disparity: Tribal areas, despite forming90% of the land, receive less development focus compared to the Imphal Valley.

Way Forward

1. Addressing ST Demand:

• Criteria Evaluation:
  • Use recommendations from committees like:
    • Lokur Committee (1965): Focus on primitive traits, distinct culture, and backwardness.
    • Bhuria Commission (2002–2004): Address tribal land, forests, and governance.
    • Virginius Xaxa Committee (2013): Tackle issues like education, health, and migration.

2. Humanitarian and Governance Measures:

• Border Surveillance: Strengthen monitoring of Myanmar refugees to prevent demographic imbalances.
• Inclusive Development: Ensure equitable resource allocation for hill and valley regions.
• Repealing AFSPA: Improve human rights standards by repealing the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA).

3. Community Reconciliation: Foster dialogue between Meitei and tribal communities to address grievances and build trust.

4. Economic Upliftment: Invest in livelihood programs and promote sustainable economic activities to reduce reliance on poppy cultivation.

Conclusion

The violence in Manipur reflects deep-seated ethnic, political, and economic tensions, exacerbated by demands for ST status, land disputes, and socio-political inequalities. Resolving these issues requires a balanced approach that prioritizes inclusive governance, community engagement, and equitable development to ensure long-term peace and stability in the region.

MAINS QUESTION

Examine the role of insurgent groups and ethnic militancy in exacerbating internal security challenges in Manipur.