Ahead of its 15th Foundation Day, the proscribed Coordination Committee (CorCom), an umbrella organisation of several valley-based insurgent groups, has issued a detailed political statement reiterating its longstanding position on Manipur’s merger with India, the continued militarisation of the region, alleged human rights violations, and what it described as the systematic exploitation of the region’s natural resources.
In the statement issued by its Media Coordinator, M. Shak-Hen, CorCom extended what it termed revolutionary greetings to revolutionary organisations and people living in Manipur, which it referred to as Kangleipak, and the WESEA region. The outfit also paid tribute to those it described as martyrs of the armed movement and expressed gratitude to individuals who, according to the organisation, have continued to support its movement despite repression and hardships.
The statement presented CorCom’s interpretation of the historical evolution of the Indian nation-state, alleging that modern India emerged from British colonial territorial consolidation rather than as a historically unified nation. It claimed that the nationalist movement during the colonial period primarily served the interests of dominant upper-caste groups and failed to recognise the distinct historical identities of several erstwhile kingdoms.
Reiterating its long-held position on Manipur’s merger with India, CorCom alleged that the state’s integration into the Indian Union in 1949 amounted to an annexation. It further claimed that Manipur and the wider WESEA region have since been treated as a strategic frontier and buffer zone, leading to prolonged militarisation. The organisation alleged that the continued enforcement of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) has resulted in political suppression and widespread human rights violations, including enforced disappearances, alleged fake encounters and sexual violence.
It further claimed that these actions violate international humanitarian law, including provisions of the United Nations Charter and the Geneva Conventions.
The outfit also criticised what it described as the growing influence of Hindu nationalist ideology in India’s governance, alleging that it has been combined with capitalist economic policies to facilitate the extraction of the region’s natural resources and strategic minerals. It further claimed that India’s territorial policies remain rooted in colonial-era cartography and referred to the continuing dispute over the McMahon Line as evidence that India’s territorial boundaries remain contested.
Environmental issues occupied a significant portion of the statement. CorCom alleged that the expansion of oil palm cultivation under the National Mission on Edible Oils–Oil Palm (NMEO-OP) poses a serious threat to Manipur’s forests, biodiversity and water resources. It referred to Memorandums of Understanding reportedly signed with Patanjali Foods Limited and Godrej Agrovet Limited for oil palm cultivation and claimed that around 66,652 hectares of land across six districts of Manipur have been identified for the project.
According to the organisation, large-scale oil palm plantations could cause irreversible ecological damage similar to that witnessed in Indonesia and Malaysia. It further alleged that the authorities had neither adequately informed indigenous communities about the environmental consequences of the project nor obtained their Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), a principle recognised under international law.
The statement also expressed concern over the increasing prevalence of drug trafficking and poppy cultivation in the region. CorCom alleged that certain armed groups operating under the Suspension of Operations (SoO) agreement were being used as proxy forces and accused them of functioning in areas associated with poppy cultivation. It warned that drug addiction was increasingly affecting the younger generation and appealed to parents and guardians to remain vigilant.
Commenting on the prevailing ethnic tensions in Manipur, CorCom claimed that growing emphasis on ethnic divisions was weakening the state’s social fabric and diverting attention from broader political, economic and environmental challenges. The organisation cautioned against demands for exclusive ethnic homelands, arguing that such narratives would only deepen divisions among communities. It instead advocated coexistence, stating that lasting peace and progress could only be achieved through mutual understanding among all communities living in the state.
CorCom called upon all communities in Manipur to reject ethnic confrontation and work towards peaceful coexistence. While reaffirming its opposition to what it described as India’s political, security and economic policies in the region, the organisation urged the people to remain united in safeguarding the future of Manipur and the wider WESEA region.
