Why the crisis in Manipur still continues ?

The ongoing crisis in Manipur has devastated lives and exposed a troubling political inertia at both the state and central levels. For months, violence, displacement, and unrest have gripped the region, leaving citizens to wonder why a solution remains elusive. This perception, that both the Indian and Manipur governments are reluctant or incapable of resolving the crisis, has raised serious concerns. Exploring the reasons behind this inaction is crucial.
At the heart of Manipur’s crisis lies a complex web of ethnic, political, and security-related issues. The conflict, primarily between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities, stems from long-standing tensions over land, political representation, and ethnic identity. The Indian government has often struggled to manage such conflicts, particularly in the Northeast, due to the region’s complex demographic makeup. The BJP-led government in Manipur has been accused of exacerbating these tensions by failing to adopt a more inclusive political approach.
One key reason for the delay in resolving the crisis is the absence of a coherent strategy addressing its root causes. Instead of focusing on a clear and consistent policy, the central government seems more inclined to manage the symptoms—whether through security deployments or sporadic internet bans—rather than fostering dialogue or reconciliation. The state’s ethnic dynamics make it difficult for both governments to act decisively without risking alienating one group or another, leading to political indecision.
Political motivations have played a crucial role in shaping the response. Both the central and state governments appear more interested in maintaining their electoral standing than taking bold steps to resolve the issue. For the BJP, the Northeast has become an increasingly important region electorally. The party’s dominance in several Northeastern states, including Manipur, is significant, and it is wary of making decisions that could destabilize its standing.
As political tensions escalate, the governments carefully weigh their moves, fearing that a heavy-handed response might alienate one community, while inaction could erode trust in another. This balancing act has led to paralysis, where the fear of political fallout outweighs the urgency of resolving the humanitarian crisis.
Another critical element complicating the situation is the involvement of external actors. Manipur’s proximity to Myanmar has made it vulnerable to cross-border militancy and insurgency. Reports of Kuki militants from Myanmar being involved in the violence, using advanced weapon like drone bombs, raise concerns about foreign interference, particularly from China.
The central government has historically focused on securing India’s borders in the Northeast, but this militaristic approach has not brought peace. The involvement of foreign powers makes it difficult for the government to resolve the crisis without addressing broader security concerns. Yet, the emphasis on national security has overshadowed the need to address local political dynamics.
The centralization of decision-making has also contributed to the crisis. The Manipur government, led by Chief Minister N. Biren Singh, has been criticized for its failure to take proactive steps to address the violence. However, the problem also stems from an over-reliance on New Delhi for solutions. The state government appears unable or unwilling to make bold decisions without central approval, leading to a sense of helplessness.
Moreover, the reluctance to involve local leaders from both the Meitei and Kuki communities in the peace process has deepened mistrust. Local governance structures, crucial for reconciliation and conflict resolution, have been sidelined. This top-down approach has prevented local voices from being heard, exacerbating distrust between the people and their representatives.
The ongoing crisis in Manipur represents a failure of both state and central leadership. The ethno-political complexities, coupled with political calculations, external influences, and national security concerns, have created a perfect storm of inaction. Resolving the Manipur crisis requires more than just a military response or electoral considerations—it demands political dialogue, addressing local grievances, and rebuilding trust between communities. Both governments must take decisive steps toward peace before the situation spirals further out of control.