Dialogue, after all, is an essential tool for resolving conflicts and finding peaceful solutions to complex issues. However, the condition put forward by the Kuki-Zo Council to initiate political dialogue —seeking a Union Territory with a legislature carved out from Manipur’s territory—is not only problematic but also poses a direct threat to the state’s territorial integrity.
Manipur’s historical and political landscape underscores the significance of its territorial integrity. The state’s merger with India in 1949 was a pivotal moment, marking the consolidation of its political boundaries within the Indian Union. Any move to alter these boundaries, even under the framework of Article 239A of the Indian Constitution, would not only undermine this agreement but also set a dangerous precedent for other states with similarly contentious demands.
If the Government of India considers dialogue essential to resolving the current crisis, it must be conducted without preconditions that compromise Manipur’s territorial integrity. Any concession to such demands would risk alienating the state’s majority population and destabilizing the region further. An unconditional dialogue should emphasize the preservation of Manipur’s political boundaries while addressing the grievances of all communities involved. The emphasis must be on building trust through transparency, inclusivity, and a commitment to justice for victims of violence from all sides. Additionally, this dialogue should prioritize immediate humanitarian relief and reconciliation measures to alleviate the suffering caused by the ongoing crisis.
The central government, particularly the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), faces a critical test of leadership in this crisis. Its response to the Kuki-Zo Council’s demand will not only shape the future of Manipur but also determine the party’s credibility in addressing sensitive regional issues. A firm rejection of any demand for territorial division, coupled with an insistence on unconditional dialogue, could restore public trust in the BJP, which has faced criticism for its handling of the situation so far. On the other hand, any indication of conceding to such demands could lead to widespread disillusionment among the people of Manipur. The political opposition, civil society, and grassroots movements would likely intensify their resistance, further polarizing an already divided state. The BJP’s ability to navigate this crisis will not only affect its standing in Manipur but also have broader implications for its governance in other conflict-prone regions of India.
Another critical aspect of the crisis is the role of Suspension of Operations (SoO) militants. Before initiating any dialogue, the Government of India must bring these armed groups under control. Allowing militant factions to operate unchecked undermines the state’s sovereignty and complicates the process of peaceful negotiation. The disarmament and rehabilitation of these groups should be a precondition for any meaningful dialogue. The failure to address the activities of SoO militants has already contributed to the erosion of trust between communities. Their involvement in violent incidents has exacerbated tensions and created an environment of fear and insecurity. The central government must act decisively to neutralize these threats, ensuring that dialogue occurs in a climate conducive to peace and stability.
The ongoing crisis in Manipur is deeply rooted in historical grievances, economic disparities, and inter-ethnic tensions. Addressing these underlying issues requires a multifaceted approach that goes beyond dialogue with the Kuki-Zo Council. Key steps include ensuring equitable development across all regions and communities in Manipur to reduce feelings of marginalization and competition over resources. Strengthening governance, addressing corruption, improving public administration, and ensuring fair representation for all communities can build trust in state institutions. Initiatives aimed at fostering dialogue and understanding between different ethnic groups can help bridge divides and reduce communal tensions. Ensuring accountability for human rights violations and providing justice to victims of violence is crucial for healing and reconciliation.
The demand for dialogue to resolve the Manipur crisis presents an opportunity for peace but must be approached with caution and clarity. The condition set forth by the Kuki-Zo Council for a Union Territory with a legislature is unacceptable and risks further destabilizing the region. The Government of India must assert that Manipur’s territorial integrity is non-negotiable while fostering an inclusive and unconditional dialogue to address the grievances of all communities. By taking a firm stance against territorial division, bringing SoO militants under control and addressing the root causes of the crisis, the central government can lay the foundation for lasting peace in Manipur. The path forward is fraught with challenges, but with decisive and principled leadership, it is possible to restore trust, promote harmony, and ensure justice for all. This is the need of the hour to prevent Manipur from descending further into chaos and conflict.
Manipur crisis: Dialogue a much, but should not be with a condition
154