Why fighting at foothills have stopped? Is it due to Lok Sabha Election?

The cessation of hostilities in Manipur has sparked inquiries into its underlying causes and implications, particularly regarding the upcoming electoral process. The notion that the election might be the solution to the ongoing violence raises concerns. If the electoral process indeed possesses the capability to quell unrest, then the delay in addressing the violence until now suggests a significant failure on the part of governance and conflict resolution mechanisms, possibly for electoral gain. One could say holding the election in May last year could have potentially prevented numerous casualties, loss of livelihoods and heartbreaks.
The absence of Kuki attacks against the Meiteis raises suspicions regarding the motives behind this apparent ceasefire. Moreover, the decision of Kuki organizations to abstain from fielding their own candidate and instead choosing between the Congress and Naga People’s Front candidates for the parliamentary elections raises questions about the benefits they might accrue from refraining from violence. The refraining of Kuki forces from engaging in hostilities, seemingly until the conclusion of the election period, hints at a calculated strategy. It suggests that external forces may be manipulating the conflict dynamics, utilizing the Kukis as proxies to further their vested interests.
Previously, whenever fighting erupted at the foothills, it was often strategically timed to create turmoil in Imphal and exert pressure on the government. However, the cessation of violence during this critical juncture serves the interests of certain political entities, as any resurgence of conflict would undermine the stability and legitimacy of the ruling party. Thus, the tactical restraint exercised by the Kukis reveals the political underpinnings of the ongoing conflict in Manipur.
However, the absence of overt violence does not necessarily signify the restoration of law and order. The continued existence of barriers and boundaries, such as the restrictions preventing Meiteis from crossing Kanglatongbi and Kangvai, underscores the persistent challenges to establishing genuine peace and security in the region. These barriers serve as reminders of the underlying tensions and unresolved grievances that continue to simmer beneath the surface.
The apparent calm in Manipur presents a paradoxical situation. While the absence of overt violence may provide a semblance of normalcy and stability, the underlying dynamics suggest a precarious balance that could easily be disrupted. The calculated maneuvers of various stakeholders, including the Kuki militant factions and political actors, underscore the challenges inherent in achieving sustainable peace.
Addressing these challenges requires an approach that goes beyond merely addressing the symptoms of the conflict. It necessitates a deeper understanding of the root causes of the violence and a commitment to addressing them through dialogue, negotiation, and reconciliation. Moreover, it requires the involvement of all stakeholders, including local communities, civil society organizations, and international partners, in the peace process.
Furthermore, efforts to establish sustainable peace must be accompanied by measures to address the underlying social, economic, and political grievances that fuel the conflict. This includes addressing issues such as land rights, economic development, and political representation, which are often at the heart of conflicts in Manipur and other regions plagued by violence. Ultimately, achieving sustainable peace in Manipur will require a long-term commitment from all parties involved. It will require a willingness to engage in difficult conversations, make compromises, and work towards a shared vision of peace and prosperity for all communities in the region. Only through such collective efforts can the cycle of violence and instability be broken, and a lasting peace be achieved.