When constitutional promises fail, should Manipur revisit the Merger Agreement?

Seventy-five years have passed since Manipur was merged into the Indian Union under the terms of the Merger Agreement of 1949. But today, amidst the smoldering ruins of displaced homes, ongoing ethnic strife, and the deafening silence of justice, an urgent question arises: Has India truly honoured its constitutional promises to Manipur? Or has the trust placed by the people of Manipur in the Indian state been grossly betrayed?
Across writings in local platforms such as Imphal Times, voices have persistently raised this uncomfortable truth — that the very Constitution which guarantees the right to life, liberty, and equality has become a distant dream for thousands of Manipuris. Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) continue to languish without adequate rehabilitation. Security remains elusive. Justice, even more so.
When bullets were fired into the heart of Imphal, when militants armed under the guise of Suspension of Operations (SoO) unleashed terror on innocent civilians, the Constitution promised protection — and yet, there was none. The reports of SoO violations have been consistent and credible. But where is the review of the agreement? How does a tripartite SoO remain valid when the Government of Manipur, one of the three parties, has already withdrawn from it? Is it not a mockery of legality and governance that heavily armed militants still enjoy protection while law-abiding citizens live in fear?
It is deeply troubling that acts of terrorism in Manipur — including the kidnapping and murder of women and minors in places like Jiribam — are treated with conspicuous indifference, whereas similar acts in Kashmir or other parts of mainland India rightfully draw national outrage. Is Manipur not India? Are Manipuri lives not equal under the law?
The Indian state must reflect: There can be no “good terrorist” and “bad terrorist.” Violence is violence. Terror is terror. Selective outrage only deepens alienation, fueling sentiments that challenge the very legitimacy of India’s governance in the Northeast.
In light of the present situation, many commentators have rightly begun to question whether the time has come to review the Merger Agreement itself. The agreement was based on the assurance that Manipur would be given full constitutional safeguards and equal treatment. If those assurances are no longer being upheld, then the moral, legal, and political foundation of the Merger deserves to be critically examined.
The Union of India cannot afford to treat Manipur as an expendable frontier. It is not enough to send in troops or deploy rhetoric about unity. The true unity of India depends on honoring constitutional promises — not just in Delhi, but equally in Imphal, Churachandpur, Moreh, Jiribam, and every corner of Manipur.
The silence of the government today is not just an insult to the people of Manipur — it is an erosion of the Indian Constitution itself.
If India is serious about being a just and united nation, it must urgently correct its course in Manipur. If not, the calls to revisit the Merger Agreement will only grow louder, not out of rebellion, but out of a profound sense of betrayal.