IT News
Imphal, Feb 24:
Armed rebel group, the Revolutionary People’s Front (RPF), is set to observe “Independence Demand Day” to mark the 45th Anniversary of the armed rebel group on February 25.
In connection with the day, acting President of the Proscribed group Revolutionary People’s Front (RPF), MM Ngouba, in his message, said that the Indian government’s response to the crisis in Manipur has come under scrutiny, with concerns raised about its handling of the situation. Despite possessing the necessary resources to intervene and prevent the escalation of the crisis, there is a perception that action is delayed until a specific community’s death toll rises, prompting questions about potential biases in the government’s approach.
He said that the particular concern is the apparent preferential treatment of Kuki armed militants by Indian forces, raising suspicions about motives behind shielding certain groups from harm. He added that the treatment of civilians in the valley suggests a troubling inclination towards population reduction strategies, leading to speculation about underlying motivations that remain concealed by authorities. The prolonged conflict has served as a wake-up call for the people of Manipur, who have increasingly come to recognize what they perceive as India’s true intentions. Clarity has emerged through a series of events linked to a concealed agenda, prompting parallels with scientific discovery – where understanding is achieved not by direct observation, but through the accumulation of evidence over time.
The RPF acting President said that despite calls for policy corrections and justice, there appears to be a persistent inability or reluctance on the part of authorities to implement necessary changes. Many attribute this to decisions or positions predetermined by India, which are allowed to persist as long as they align with the country’s interests, leaving the plight of innocent civilians unresolved.
The people of Manipur have reached a consensus that India’s policies and programs are intricately linked to the nation’s strategic interests. Recognizing the legitimacy of a country to pursue its own national interests, Manipur acknowledges the necessity of such pursuits. These interests drive the formulation of various policies, employing diverse strategies and tactics to achieve them.
He said that the National interests encompass a spectrum of objectives, some of which are openly declared while others remain undisclosed or confidential for security reasons. Certain interests are deemed too sensitive to be publicly disclosed, and probing into them is a formidable task.
Any attempt to uncover or reveal such classified information risks severe consequences, including accusations of treason, leading to prosecution for multiple offenses and potential harsh penalties such as lengthy imprisonment, capital punishment, or even enforced disappearance. Conflicts between nations often stem from the pursuit of their respective national interests, driven by the imperative to protect citizens, preserve socio-cultural values, and defend territorial integrity. The underlying basis and ideological underpinnings of these interests are critical considerations. If these principles are distorted or tainted by ultra-nationalistic ideologies, it can lead to a host of challenges and potential escalations of violence, both domestically and internationally. Such circumstances may even pave the way for broader conflicts in the future.
Ngouba said that India finds itself grappling with a pervasive strain of Hindu ultra-nationalism, which has permeated its national interests, exacerbating tensions. This ideological influence has significant repercussions, with foreseeable consequences that warrant collective scrutiny. Understanding these outcomes is crucial for assessing the present and future trajectory of Manipur’s fate.
Initially, the outward expressions of India’s ultranationalism may project a sense of unity and solidarity among its populace. However, over time, the Indian government could adopt increasingly draconian measures. Blurring the lines between state and ruling party, both entities may tighten their grip on news and media outlets, stifling dissenting voices. This could hollow out democratic institutions, concentrating power in the hands of a select few and fostering an environment where dissent is suppressed.
Such actions may lead to the forceful imposition of a dominant cultural narrative, targeting individuals of different races and non-Hindu ethnicities, potentially sparking internal strife and escalating violence. India’s foreign policy trajectory could also veer towards aggression, eliciting disdain from neighboring countries and escalating tensions. Diplomatic rifts with allied nations and heightened economic sanctions on unfriendly states could erode India’s international influence, potentially isolating it on the global stage.
India’s current course aligns with these trends. Among its national interests, the most perilous is its perceived need to counter China, which has contributed to the ongoing crisis in Manipur. Whether viewing Manipur as aligning with China or anticipating unfavorable outcomes if China intervenes, India feels compelled to dismantle revolutionary groups in Manipur and the WESEA region, reducing their strength and inciting opposition to China.
Another key national interest for India involves strategic intervention in Myanmar to counter Chinese influence. This necessitates a specific policy approach towards Myanmar, leveraging tactics such as utilizing Kukis under Suspension of Operation (SoO), promoting poppy cultivation, and introducing illegal immigrants into Manipur. India’s strategy also entails supporting rebels along the Myanmar-China border to disrupt Chinese interests, utilizing the Chin-Kuki population in border areas as leverage.
In this intricate geopolitical maneuvering, India seeks to exploit Myanmar as a conduit, employing hybrid warfare tactics tailored for both Myanmar and Manipur. While extending military and financial aid to the Myanmar Army, India simultaneously backs rebels along the Myanmar-China border to counterbalance Chinese influence. The Chin-Kuki population serves as a strategic tool for India in both combating revolutionary groups in Manipur and exerting pressure on Myanmar.
On the contrary, these actions underscore India’s assertive stance and its readiness to deploy a range of measures concerning Myanmar. However, the preservation of Manipur’s rich history, socio-cultural diversity, and the well-being of its communities and ethnicities do not appear to factor into India’s national interests. This stance goes beyond mere disrespect; it amounts to a dishonorable neglect of Manipur’s borders.
While India adamantly defends its own borders, any transgression is swiftly met with force. India has even intervened in border disputes with neighboring countries like Bhutan, citing threats to its national interests. Yet, despite a significant portion of Manipur’s border forming part of India’s international border, there seems to be little regard for its sanctity simply because it falls within Manipur’s territory.
It’s an undeniable reality that Manipur and its people have become victims of India’s national interests. Those affected by India’s policies in Manipur may not seek divine intervention for retribution. Instead, India’s current trajectory appears to be leading it towards self-inflicted destruction. Unless India alters its course, it risks a bleak future marred by internal conflicts and strained relations with its neighbors.
India’s unwavering focus on countering China, along with its consequential policies affecting the broader Northeast region, may exacerbate tensions. China’s growing national power poses a significant challenge to India, while the integration of militarism and expansionist ideologies within India’s ultra-nationalism could further escalate tensions and potentially lead to border conflicts.
This dysfunctionality is evident in India’s policy shifts, such as the transition from the “Look East Policy” to the more assertive “Act East Policy,” and potentially towards a “Fight East Policy.” These shifts reflect the evolving nature of India’s interests and objectives, which are increasingly aligned with global power dynamics.
The ongoing crisis in Manipur serves as a poignant reminder of historical conflicts, such as “the Seven Years’ Devastation” and “the First Anglo-Burmese War.” Reflecting on these events offers valuable insights into the present situation and underscores the importance of strategic positioning and alliance-building.
The indomitable spirit, unity, and courage displayed by Manipur’s forefathers in their struggle for liberation serve as inspiration for the present generation. Enduring oppression and waiting for external mercy will only lead to further degradation of society and nation. Now is the time for decisive action and unity to break free from the chains of oppression.
The Revolutionary People’s Front (RPF) calls upon every individual to join the struggle for the liberation of Manipur.
