Has India Failed Manipur?

As Manipur enters the second year of an unrelenting crisis, a haunting question looms large over the national conscience—Has India failed Manipur? The silence and inaction from the central leadership in the face of one of the most prolonged internal conflicts in recent Indian history is not just disheartening; it reveals an uncomfortable truth about how the northeastern state is perceived within the broader Indian union.
The recent terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, drew swift condemnation from the highest levels of Indian leadership. Statements from the Prime Minister and Union Ministers poured in, assuring justice, mourning the victims, and reaffirming India’s commitment to fighting terrorism. Rightfully so. The nation must stand united against terror and any form of terrorist activities, and swift responses from leadership are necessary in times of national tragedy.
But juxtapose that with the silence that followed the horrific events of November in Manipur, where six women, including three minors, were abducted and murdered by armed militants operating with impunity. No statement from the Prime Minister. No national outrage. No special session in Parliament. No visits from senior Union Ministers. The nation’s media, barring a few exceptions, turned a blind eye. This sharp contrast in response raises deeply unsettling concerns.
It has now been over 23 months since the ethnic conflict erupted in Manipur, resulting in the loss of hundreds of lives, displacement of over 60,000 people, destruction of homes, churches, and temples, and the complete breakdown of law and order in several districts. And yet, the national response remains lukewarm at best. Not a single concrete step has been taken to restore constitutional order in the hill districts that remain under the control of heavily armed groups. The so-called buffer zones have only served to deepen segregation, rather than restore peace.
In Kashmir, the government speaks of reclaiming Pakistan-occupied territories. But in Manipur, five Indian districts are practically being governed by non-state actors, and yet this alarming reality finds no mention in parliamentary debates or national security discourse. If the integrity of the nation is paramount in one region, why is it negotiable in another?
The Constitution of India promises equality, security, and dignity to every citizen, regardless of geography. But when constitutional provisions cease to exist in large parts of a state for nearly two years—when people live without access to basic rights, justice, or security—what then is the meaning of statehood? When central leaders avoid even acknowledging the extent of the crisis, the people of Manipur are left to wonder: Are we truly a part of this country, or are we second-class citizens of a Union that has forgotten us?
The alienation in Manipur is not born out of separatist tendencies, but from repeated experiences of neglect. The people of the state have time and again expressed their loyalty to the Indian Union. They vote, they serve in the armed forces, they excel in sports and culture, and they contribute to the idea of India in every possible way. Yet, when their homes burn and their daughters are taken, they are met with silence.
The lack of decisive intervention, justice, and national empathy points to a grim reality. Either Manipur is being willfully ignored for reasons best known to the corridors of power, or it is being seen as expendable in the larger scheme of national politics. Both possibilities are equally painful.
It is high time the Indian leadership acknowledges the crisis in Manipur not as a local ethnic issue but as a national emergency. The integrity of the Indian state, the faith of its citizens, and the promise of the Constitution hang in the balance.
Because if Manipur is not safe, then the idea of India itself is incomplete.