Manipur and the Politics of Belated Concern

After over two years of silence, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s expected visit to Manipur marks a moment of reckoning—not just for the conflict-ravaged state but for the moral credibility of the Union Government. Since violence erupted on May 3, 2023, Manipur has seen the loss of over 250 lives, mass displacement, targeted arson on places of worship, deep human rights violations, and a near-collapse of its socio-economic fabric. The Prime Minister’s absence throughout this period has been deafening, and his decision to visit now inevitably raises questions: Why did it take so long? And is this sudden attention aimed at genuine peacebuilding, or is it a calculated move to facilitate the return of a “popular government” ahead of looming elections?
For 18 months, as the crisis deepened, the Centre’s inaction signaled something more dangerous than neglect—it suggested indifference. While Manipur burned, the Prime Minister engaged in high-profile foreign diplomacy, visiting capitals from Washington to Paris, carefully cultivating India’s global image as a rising superpower. Back home, his silence over Manipur became symbolic of a deeper abandonment. Civil society, opposition leaders, and international observers repeatedly pointed out the leadership void.
So why the sudden change of tone and direction now? Several factors appear to be converging. First, the political demand for change is growing louder. In April 2025, a collective of 21 MLAs—including representatives from BJP, NPP, NPF, and independents—petitioned the Prime Minister to end President’s Rule and install a popular government. This letter was not just a bureaucratic nudge but a direct political challenge. Second, with assembly elections likely on the horizon, BJP’s electoral calculus may now favour an image of hands-on leadership. A visit from the Prime Minister could help reassert central authority, revitalize BJP’s organisational strength in the state, and pre-empt opposition narratives of central neglect.
Meanwhile, the Centre is also feeling the weight of institutional and diplomatic pressure. National media has relentlessly covered the breakdown in governance. Civil society coalitions like the North East Students’ Organisation have called for direct engagement from the Prime Minister. Even the European Parliament took note, spotlighting the Centre’s responsibility in restoring order. Against this backdrop, Modi’s visit appears less a spontaneous act of leadership and more a necessity dictated by political, administrative, and international urgency.
However, the real question is whether this visit will deliver substance or remain symbolic. A meaningful intervention must start with acknowledging the pain of all communities—Meitei, Kuki, Naga, and others—through a visible presence that radiates empathy, not just authority. Beyond presence, the Prime Minister must chart a roadmap for reconciliation. That includes announcing an all-party peace committee, establishing fast-track investigation teams to probe communal violence, halting controversial proposals such as the extension of ST status, and ensuring that institutional fairness is restored across the board.
Yet the elephant in the room remains: why was this not done sooner? The delay reflects more than indecision; it underscores the dangerous intersection of political calculation and communal volatility. The Centre may have initially believed that Chief Minister N. Biren Singh’s government could weather the storm, but it failed to anticipate the ethnic fault lines’ deepening and the erosion of state legitimacy. The resignation of the Biren Singh-led BJP government in early 2025—almost two years after the crisis began—exposed how long the state was left to spiral.
The Prime Minister’s global ambitions, frequently showcased through his role in international diplomacy, stand in stark contrast with the inaction toward an internal humanitarian crisis. The failure to act promptly in Manipur reveals a troubling blind spot: the Centre’s inability, or unwillingness, to prioritise domestic harmony over global image-making.
Now, if the Prime Minister willingly prepares to step onto Manipur’s soil, he carries the burden of unmet expectations and accumulated anger. This visit cannot be a political spectacle designed to score points ahead of elections. It must be the beginning of a comprehensive healing process, backed by clear timelines, legal oversight, and inclusive decision-making. Anything short of that will only reaffirm what many in Manipur already fear—that the Centre remembered them only when it became politically convenient.
The Prime Minister’s visit is a moment to rewrite that narrative. It is a chance to move beyond optics, to apologise not just with words but with actions, and to lead a roadmap that restores not just governance but faith. If done right, this visit could mark the first real step in ending the state’s longest nightmare. If done wrong, it may only deepen the wounds.