Manipur’s Crisis: The urgent need for military action amid geopolitical intrigues

The ongoing crisis in Manipur has reached a critical juncture, revealing a complex web of geopolitical interests and internal challenges that India can no longer afford to overlook. What might have initially been perceived as a localized communal riot is now emerging as a strategic flashpoint with far-reaching implications. The involvement of foreign powers, particularly the United States and China, in what appears to be a proxy struggle for dominance in South Asia, adds layers of complexity to an already volatile situation.
There is a growing concern that sections of India’s strategic community have underestimated the crisis in Manipur. The assumption that the unrest could be managed as a mere internal security issue, contained within the state’s borders, reflects a dangerous underestimation. This crisis has roots extending deep into historical, ethnic, and religious divides, but it is the external dimension that now poses a significant threat to India’s sovereignty and security.
Analysts have suggested that armed Kuki militants might be harbouring ambitions of creating a separate Christian state by drawing territories from Manipur, Mizoram, Myanmar’s Chin State, and Bangladesh’s Chittagong Hill Tracts. This vision, however improbable it may seem, gains a chilling plausibility when viewed against the backdrop of historical insurgencies and the current geopolitical environment. Both China and the USA have vested interests in the region, and the crisis in Manipur presents an opportunity for them to exert influence.
The accusations against China regarding the supply of Chinese-made drones to armed Kuki militants underscore the possibility of indirect Chinese involvement. This aligns with China’s broader strategy of destabilizing India by exploiting internal conflicts, a tactic consistent with its regional ambitions, particularly in Myanmar and the northeastern states of India. On the other hand, the United States, with its strategic interest in countering Chinese influence in South Asia, might also be playing a more covert role. Allegations of U.S. interference in Bangladesh’s internal politics lend weight to the theory that the U.S. could be supporting certain factions within India, including in Manipur, to create internal chaos. This approach could be part of a larger strategy to keep India engaged with internal strife, limiting its ability to challenge U.S. interests in the region or align more closely with China.
The implications of these external interventions are profound. The crisis in Manipur is no longer just an internal security matter but a critical national security issue that threatens the stability of the entire northeastern region. The organized nature of the militancy, the use of advanced weaponry potentially supplied by foreign powers, and the escalating violence necessitate an immediate and decisive military crackdown. The state’s security forces must be bolstered with the necessary resources to combat not only local insurgents but also any external threats that may arise. Without swift and strong military action, the situation could spiral further out of control, exacerbating the instability in the region.
The younger generation of strategists in India, those shaping the vision of a “New India,” must recognize the gravity of the situation. The old paradigms of crisis management are no longer sufficient. The Manipur crisis requires a recalibration of India’s internal and external security strategies, with a focus on countering foreign influence while addressing the legitimate grievances of the local population. India’s response must be multifaceted, combining military, diplomatic, and political strategies. While military action is essential, it must be complemented by diplomatic efforts to engage with both China and the USA, making it clear that interference in India’s internal affairs will not be tolerated.
Politically, the government must address the root causes of the unrest in Manipur. Engaging with local leaders and communities to build trust and ensure that development and security initiatives are inclusive is crucial. The focus should be on winning hearts and minds while maintaining a firm stance against those who seek to destabilize the state. The crisis in Manipur is a stark reminder that India’s internal security is deeply intertwined with its geopolitical environment. The involvement of foreign powers in the state’s unrest should serve as a wake-up call for India to rethink its strategy.
An immediate and robust military crackdown, coupled with a comprehensive approach that addresses both the internal and external dimensions of the crisis, is essential. Only then can India hope to secure peace and stability in Manipur and the broader northeastern region.