Manipur’s Prolonged Agony: Governance in Crisis or Political Calculus?

The ongoing crisis in Manipur, marked by persistent violence, community clashes, and a breakdown of governance, reveals deep-seated political and structural failures. The recent violence in Imphal East district, where armed Kuki militants attacked villagers, highlights the fragile security situation that has persisted for over 19 months. The injuries sustained by a journalist and a state police officer during these events underscore the inability of the security apparatus to protect civilians and maintain order. This raises troubling questions about the role of security forces, especially reports suggesting that central forces have obstructed state police operations rather than assisting them. Such actions create the impression of a disjointed security strategy, or worse, a deliberate attempt to prolong the crisis for political motives.
Manipur’s strife is rooted in its ethnic diversity, with longstanding tensions between the Meitei, Naga, and Kuki communities over resources, representation, and autonomy. Historically, these divisions have been exploited by political actors for electoral gains, deepening mistrust between communities. The current crisis appears to be an extension of this pattern, with neither the state nor the union government showing the will to address these grievances. The claim by a former Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court that some forces are deliberately keeping the state in turmoil for their benefit further fuels suspicions of political manipulation and neglect.
The role of the union government has been particularly controversial. Despite the deployment of substantial central forces, the violence continues unabated, and the lack of a coherent strategy has eroded public confidence. The perceived indifference of national leaders, coupled with an apparent bias in handling the crisis, has alienated large sections of the population. The absence of meaningful dialogue or initiatives to de-escalate tensions suggests a troubling disregard for the region. Critics argue that this apathy is deliberate, aimed at consolidating power by destabilizing the state and keeping its governance weak.
At the state level, the government’s failure to protect its citizens and enforce law and order underscores a governance crisis. Weak leadership, coupled with the politicization of administrative institutions, has left the state ill-equipped to handle the escalating violence. The lack of coordination with the central government and an over-reliance on external forces further highlight the limitations of the state apparatus. These failures not only exacerbate the crisis but also deepen mistrust among the affected communities.
Meanwhile, the media and civil society play a critical role in highlighting the plight of those affected by the violence. However, these efforts are often stifled by threats and censorship, as seen in the recent attack on a journalist covering the conflict. Civil society organizations, while active, remain divided along ethnic lines, limiting their ability to foster reconciliation or advocate for systemic change. Despite these challenges, their work is vital in keeping the spotlight on the human cost of the crisis and holding authorities accountable.
To address the prolonged crisis in Manipur, decisive action is urgently needed. First, an inclusive dialogue involving representatives from all communities must be initiated to address grievances and chart a path forward. Second, local governments and institutions should be empowered to address community-specific issues and rebuild trust. Third, the security apparatus must be reformed to ensure better coordination between state and central forces while eliminating political interference. Fourth, an independent judicial commission should investigate allegations of misconduct by security forces and other stakeholders to ensure accountability. Finally, press freedom must be safeguarded to enable unbiased reporting and ensure that the voices of affected communities are heard.
The situation in Manipur is a stark reminder of the dangers posed by the politicization of ethnic tensions and security strategies. The prolonged violence serves only those who benefit from chaos and division. It is imperative for both the state and union governments to rise above political considerations and work towards a peaceful resolution. The people of Manipur, caught in the crossfire of neglect and manipulation, deserve more than to be reduced to pawns in a cynical political game. A lasting resolution demands honesty, empathy, and a commitment to justice from all stakeholders.