Manipur beyond the headlines : The failure of selective liberalism
|
M Biswanath Sinha
When Manipur enters the National conversation, something curious often happens. Principles that are defended loudly elsewhere suddenly become selective. Outrage becomes cautious.
Accountability gets lost in ideology, distance, and convenient narratives. Manipur has suffered enough from this.
For years, the State has been spoken about more than it has been listened to. It is often viewed through television debates, social media trends, and political camps. Yet the people of Manipur are not characters in someone else's story. They are citizens with memories, experiences, grievances, and political judgement.
To understand Manipur honestly, seven uncomfortable truths must be acknowledged.
1. The Problem of Selective Reporting
One of the biggest problems in the discussion on Manipur is the uneven way conflicts are reported. The contrast between the coverage of the 2023 Meitei-Kuki conflict and the Naga-Kuki tensions of 2026 is telling. During the 2023 violence, many National commentators quickly reduced a complex conflict to simple binaries such as tribal versus non-tribal or Christian versus Hindu. The current tensions fit neither framework. Both Nagas and Kukis are tribal communities. Yet National attention has been far more limited.
This raises an important question. Were earlier narratives driven by a genuine understanding of Manipur, or by categories that were easier to sell to a wider audience ? Good journalism must apply the same standards everywhere. Human rights cannot be defended selectively. If rights matter, they must matter for all communities, not only when a story fits a preferred narrative.
2. Identity Politics Is Not Governance
Manipur is a land of many identities. Meitei, Naga, Kuki, Pangal and several smaller communities. Hill and valley. Tribe and non-tribe. Different languages, faiths, and tra- ditions. These identities matter. They shape belonging and memory. But iden- tity alone cannot govern a State.
Too often, leaders speak about protecting communities while failing to deliver roads, jobs, healthcare, education, law and order, or reconciliation. Fear is mobilised, but governance is neglected. This is not the failure of one party or one Government. It has become a political habit. The people of Manipur understand identity. They must also recognise when identity is being used to hide incompetence.
3. Manipur Is More Than a Security Concern
For decades, many policymakers have viewed Manipur mainly through the lens of security. Border management, insurgency, migration, and ethnic conflict dominate official thinking. Security is important. No one disputes that. But a State cannot be governed only as a frontier outpost. Citizens cannot be reduced to security variables.
Manipur needs quality schools, stronger healthcare, better roads, digital connectivity, tourism, entrepre- neurship, sports infrastructure, and fair development in both the hills and the valley.
Peace lasts when opportunities are shared. Deve- lopment must stand alongside security, not behind it.
4. Symbolism Is Not Women's Empowerment
Manipur is rightly known for the public role played by women. The Meira Paibis, market women, mothers' groups, and women-led movements have shaped the State's social and political life for generations.
But visibility should not be confused with empowerment. At times, public outrage has been selective. Some crimes become major causes. Others receive little attention. It is a fact that some victims are embraced. Others are forgotten.
This is not a criticism of women's movements. It is a call for consistency. The recent violence showed how easily empathy can follow ethnic lines. When concern depends on who the victim is, justice itself becomes weaker. True empowerment means defending the dignity, safety, and rights of every woman, regardless of community or political affiliation.
5. Beyond the Beauty
For many Indians, Manipur is known for its green hills, Loktak Lake, rich culture, and sporting achievements. All of these are real and worth celebrating. But they do not tell the whole story. Behind the beauty lies a system weakened by corruption, patro- nage, poor accountability, and leakages in public programmes. Development funds do not always become development on the ground.
The result is visible across communities. While public debate is dominated by ethnic politics, another divide is growing quietly - the divide between the privileged and the ordinary citizen.
This is true across all the ethnic groups. Across the hills and the valley, a small, connected elite has prospered while many people continue to struggle with unemployment, poor infrastructure, weak public services, and limited opportunities. Ethnic grievances are real. But they should not distract from governance failures that affect everyone.
6. Identity Cannot Excuse Failure
Whenever difficult questions are asked, a familiar response often appears: outsiders do not understand Manipur. There is some truth in that. Many outsiders do not fully understand the State's history, geography, and emotional land- scape.
But this argument is too often used to avoid criticism. History matters. Culture matters. Past injustices matter. Yet none of these can excuse poor leadership, violence, bad decisions, or the failure to solve public problems.
Across communities, criticism is sometimes portrayed as an attack on identity. Every disagreement becomes a threat. Every failure is blamed on outsiders. This may win sympathy, but it does not improve people's lives. It is possible to respect Mani-pur's history while deman- ding accountability from its leaders. Identity should help communities move forward, not shield failures from scrutiny.
7. The People Are Watching
Perhaps the greatest mistake made by outsiders is assuming that the people of Manipur can be managed through lectures, slogans and rhetoric.
They cannot, because people know who appeared only for photographs. They know who deepened divisions and who worked for peace. They know which activists became partisan and which leaders remained silent when leadership was needed.
Memory in Manipur is long. Its people have lived through insurgency, blockades, militarisation, econo- mic hardship, and repeated political disappointments. They are not passive audiences waiting to be instructed. When the time comes, they judge for themselves.
What India Must Learn
Manipur is not a laboratory for ideological experiments. It is not merely a headline, a border State, or a battleground of competing narratives. It is home to citizens who deserve what every Indian deserves: security, dignity, justice, opportunity, and functioning institutions.
If liberal values mean anything, they must apply in Imphal as much as in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, or Bengaluru. If Nationalism means anything, it must include empathy for regions that are too often treated as distant frontiers. If democracy means anything, it must listen before it lectures. The tragedy of Manipur is not only the violence it has endured. It is also the selective way much of India has responded to that violence.
Yet there is still hope. Across communities, ordinary citizens continue to seek peace, fairness, coexistence, and honest Government. Their voices deserve far more attention than they receive. Understanding Manipur requires neither romanticism nor prejudice. It requires honesty, balance, and the courage to face difficult realities.
That is a lesson not only for liberals, but for nationalists and everyone in between.
(The writer is a senior professional with experience in the social sector and corporate world. The views expressed are personal.)
When Manipur enters the National conversation, something curious often happens. Principles that are defended loudly elsewhere suddenly become selective. Outrage becomes cautious.
Accountability gets lost in ideology, distance, and convenient narratives. Manipur has suffered enough from this.
For years, the State has been spoken about more than it has been listened to. It is often viewed through television debates, social media trends, and political camps. Yet the people of Manipur are not characters in someone else's story. They are citizens with memories, experiences, grievances, and political judgement.
To understand Manipur honestly, seven uncomfortable truths must be acknowledged.
1. The Problem of Selective Reporting
One of the biggest problems in the discussion on Manipur is the uneven way conflicts are reported. The contrast between the coverage of the 2023 Meitei-Kuki conflict and the Naga-Kuki tensions of 2026 is telling. During the 2023 violence, many National commentators quickly reduced a complex conflict to simple binaries such as tribal versus non-tribal or Christian versus Hindu. The current tensions fit neither framework. Both Nagas and Kukis are tribal communities. Yet National attention has been far more limited.
This raises an important question. Were earlier narratives driven by a genuine understanding of Manipur, or by categories that were easier to sell to a wider audience ? Good journalism must apply the same standards everywhere. Human rights cannot be defended selectively. If rights matter, they must matter for all communities, not only when a story fits a preferred narrative.
2. Identity Politics Is Not Governance
Manipur is a land of many identities. Meitei, Naga, Kuki, Pangal and several smaller communities. Hill and valley. Tribe and non-tribe. Different languages, faiths, and tra- ditions. These identities matter. They shape belonging and memory. But iden- tity alone cannot govern a State.
Too often, leaders speak about protecting communities while failing to deliver roads, jobs, healthcare, education, law and order, or reconciliation. Fear is mobilised, but governance is neglected. This is not the failure of one party or one Government. It has become a political habit. The people of Manipur understand identity. They must also recognise when identity is being used to hide incompetence.
3. Manipur Is More Than a Security Concern
For decades, many policymakers have viewed Manipur mainly through the lens of security. Border management, insurgency, migration, and ethnic conflict dominate official thinking. Security is important. No one disputes that. But a State cannot be governed only as a frontier outpost. Citizens cannot be reduced to security variables.
Manipur needs quality schools, stronger healthcare, better roads, digital connectivity, tourism, entrepre- neurship, sports infrastructure, and fair development in both the hills and the valley.
Peace lasts when opportunities are shared. Deve- lopment must stand alongside security, not behind it.
4. Symbolism Is Not Women's Empowerment
Manipur is rightly known for the public role played by women. The Meira Paibis, market women, mothers' groups, and women-led movements have shaped the State's social and political life for generations.
But visibility should not be confused with empowerment. At times, public outrage has been selective. Some crimes become major causes. Others receive little attention. It is a fact that some victims are embraced. Others are forgotten.
This is not a criticism of women's movements. It is a call for consistency. The recent violence showed how easily empathy can follow ethnic lines. When concern depends on who the victim is, justice itself becomes weaker. True empowerment means defending the dignity, safety, and rights of every woman, regardless of community or political affiliation.
5. Beyond the Beauty
For many Indians, Manipur is known for its green hills, Loktak Lake, rich culture, and sporting achievements. All of these are real and worth celebrating. But they do not tell the whole story. Behind the beauty lies a system weakened by corruption, patro- nage, poor accountability, and leakages in public programmes. Development funds do not always become development on the ground.
The result is visible across communities. While public debate is dominated by ethnic politics, another divide is growing quietly - the divide between the privileged and the ordinary citizen.
This is true across all the ethnic groups. Across the hills and the valley, a small, connected elite has prospered while many people continue to struggle with unemployment, poor infrastructure, weak public services, and limited opportunities. Ethnic grievances are real. But they should not distract from governance failures that affect everyone.
6. Identity Cannot Excuse Failure
Whenever difficult questions are asked, a familiar response often appears: outsiders do not understand Manipur. There is some truth in that. Many outsiders do not fully understand the State's history, geography, and emotional land- scape.
But this argument is too often used to avoid criticism. History matters. Culture matters. Past injustices matter. Yet none of these can excuse poor leadership, violence, bad decisions, or the failure to solve public problems.
Across communities, criticism is sometimes portrayed as an attack on identity. Every disagreement becomes a threat. Every failure is blamed on outsiders. This may win sympathy, but it does not improve people's lives. It is possible to respect Mani-pur's history while deman- ding accountability from its leaders. Identity should help communities move forward, not shield failures from scrutiny.
7. The People Are Watching
Perhaps the greatest mistake made by outsiders is assuming that the people of Manipur can be managed through lectures, slogans and rhetoric.
They cannot, because people know who appeared only for photographs. They know who deepened divisions and who worked for peace. They know which activists became partisan and which leaders remained silent when leadership was needed.
Memory in Manipur is long. Its people have lived through insurgency, blockades, militarisation, econo- mic hardship, and repeated political disappointments. They are not passive audiences waiting to be instructed. When the time comes, they judge for themselves.
What India Must Learn
Manipur is not a laboratory for ideological experiments. It is not merely a headline, a border State, or a battleground of competing narratives. It is home to citizens who deserve what every Indian deserves: security, dignity, justice, opportunity, and functioning institutions.
If liberal values mean anything, they must apply in Imphal as much as in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, or Bengaluru. If Nationalism means anything, it must include empathy for regions that are too often treated as distant frontiers. If democracy means anything, it must listen before it lectures. The tragedy of Manipur is not only the violence it has endured. It is also the selective way much of India has responded to that violence.
Yet there is still hope. Across communities, ordinary citizens continue to seek peace, fairness, coexistence, and honest Government. Their voices deserve far more attention than they receive. Understanding Manipur requires neither romanticism nor prejudice. It requires honesty, balance, and the courage to face difficult realities.
That is a lesson not only for liberals, but for nationalists and everyone in between.
(The writer is a senior professional with experience in the social sector and corporate world. The views expressed are personal.)