Communal violence or something else?
|
The widespread violence that broke out on the fateful day of May 3, 2023 is refusing to die down even after two years and ten months. Although the clash that raged on for over two years between Kukis and Meiteis seemed to have been contained to some extent with the imposition of Central or President’s Rule in the state which paved way for the return of a new popular Government, a fresh violence broke out at Litan, Ukhrul district. The state, with all its innumerable security forces, could not control the violence for days even though Litan is not far away from the state capital. It was Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla himself who stated on the floor of the State Assembly that 272 companies of central armed police forces have been deployed in Manipur following the widespread violence that erupted in May 2023, in addition to the state police and huge numbers of Assam Rifles and army already stationed in the state. The fact that all these huge armed forces could not control the Manipur violence for years including the recent Litan clash which fortunately remains localized till date evokes some serious questions. A large number of people have already started questioning whether the Manipur violence is really a communal violence or something else, far bigger and complex. While citizens have been repeatedly questioning the sincerity of the government of India in tackling the crisis, several civil society organisations have been refusing to call the Manipur violence a communal conflict. They have been claiming that it is a proxy war. The inability of the huge number of central armed forces to contain the violence for years and rein in the militants who have been terrorizing civilians repeatedly lends some sort of credibility to the assertion that the protracted violence is a proxy war. In addition, there were repeated allegations of central forces not being neutral during the over two-year old Meitei-Kuki conflict. The same allegation surfaced again in the recent Tangkhul-Kuki violence at Litan from Tangkhul women. If one takes into consideration the state’s failure to control the violence and rein in militants, the allegations of security forces’ partisan attitude and the proxy war claims, one cannot help asking whether the violence in Manipur is a reflection of geopolitics of some big powers.
In this context, one needs to acknowledge the fact that no other factor has produced a more profound impact on the political history of Manipur than its geo-strategic location. Starting from the colonial period, Manipur always occupies a crucial site in the geopolitics of contending imperial powers. It was on account of its geo-strategic location that one of the bloodiest chapters in the history of World War II was fought in her territory. Geopolitics of imperial powers coupled with its strategic location, played a pivotal role in shaping the history of Manipur. After the conquest of Burma (now Myanmar) in the early part of 1942, Japan launched a massive military offensive against British India through Manipur and it led to the Battle of Imphal, which is often termed as one of the fiercest battles fought between the Japanese forces and Allied forces in the World War II. Manipur had nothing to do with the geopolitics of either Japan or Britain but it was subjected to heavy bombardment by both the sides and Manipur suffered colossal losses. If the civil society organisations’ claim of Manipur violence being a proxy war is true, we fear certain global and regional powers have been playing out their nasty geopolitics on the soil of Manipur again, albeit through mercenaries this time. If it is true, India certainly has vested interests in the Manipur violence. If the huge number of central armed forces’ failure to rein in militants directly involved in propagating and prolonging the violence is any indication, New Delhi has no intention to antagonize the ethnic armed organizations of Myanmar including the Chin-Kuki-Zo groups who have been fighting against the military junta. Manipur violence has certainly all the elements of being a complex game of geopolitics.
In this context, one needs to acknowledge the fact that no other factor has produced a more profound impact on the political history of Manipur than its geo-strategic location. Starting from the colonial period, Manipur always occupies a crucial site in the geopolitics of contending imperial powers. It was on account of its geo-strategic location that one of the bloodiest chapters in the history of World War II was fought in her territory. Geopolitics of imperial powers coupled with its strategic location, played a pivotal role in shaping the history of Manipur. After the conquest of Burma (now Myanmar) in the early part of 1942, Japan launched a massive military offensive against British India through Manipur and it led to the Battle of Imphal, which is often termed as one of the fiercest battles fought between the Japanese forces and Allied forces in the World War II. Manipur had nothing to do with the geopolitics of either Japan or Britain but it was subjected to heavy bombardment by both the sides and Manipur suffered colossal losses. If the civil society organisations’ claim of Manipur violence being a proxy war is true, we fear certain global and regional powers have been playing out their nasty geopolitics on the soil of Manipur again, albeit through mercenaries this time. If it is true, India certainly has vested interests in the Manipur violence. If the huge number of central armed forces’ failure to rein in militants directly involved in propagating and prolonging the violence is any indication, New Delhi has no intention to antagonize the ethnic armed organizations of Myanmar including the Chin-Kuki-Zo groups who have been fighting against the military junta. Manipur violence has certainly all the elements of being a complex game of geopolitics.