By Annunthra Rangan
The ongoing conflict in Manipur has elicited varied interpretations from scholars and observers, worldwide. While some attribute the unrest to religious tensions, others point to the influx of migrants and refugees from Myanmar or blame the policies of the current government. However, a closer examination reveals that the roots of the conflict are deeply embedded in Manipur’s history, geography and socio-economic structure, with origins tracing back to the 19th century.
The northeastern region of India, including Manipur, is geographically unique, with a rich abundance of natural resources. However, arable land is scarce, and the demographic structure historically comprised tribal communities spread across the valley and hilly areas. In Manipur, the Meitei community primarily resides in the valley, constituting approximately 11 percent of the population, while the hilly areas, accounting for 89 percent of the state’s territory, are home to the Kuki-Zomi and Naga communities.
Historically, Meitei kings ruled over Manipur and sought to expand their influence into the hills, where semi-nomadic Naga tribes resided. This expansion led to early tensions, but was partially mitigated over time. A significant turning point occurred during the 19th century, when internal power struggles among the Meitei rulers escalated. The three brothers—Chourjit Singh, Marjit Singh and Gambir Singh—vied for supremacy. Marjit Singh, with Burmese support, overthrew Chourjit, leading to Burma’s occupation of Manipur (1819-1826). Gambir Singh, with British assistance, eventually recaptured Manipur, culminating in the Treaty of Yandabo in 1826.
The British, after consolidating their influence in the region, allegedly facilitated the migration of the Kuki-Zomi community from Burma to serve as a buffer between the Meiteis in the valley and the Nagas in the hills. This migration sowed the seeds for future discord.
In 1896, the British introduced an inner line separating the Kukis from the Meiteis, based on the colonial perception of the Kukis as “uncivilized”. This division became a precursor to modern debates over the Inner Line Permit (ILP), a system introduced in Manipur in 2020 to regulate the entry of non-Manipuris under constitutional provisions like Articles 244(A) and 275(1). While proponents of the ILP system argue it protects tribal interests, critics contend it fosters exclusion and restricts national integration.
In 2015, under the Congress government, the Manipur assembly introduced three bills, including the Protection of Manipur People Bill, aimed at addressing inter-community tensions by regulating land ownership and economic activity. However, the Kuki community opposed these measures, perceiving them as discriminatory. The ensuing protests delayed the bills’ implementation until 2018.
In 2017, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) assumed power in Manipur, launching initiatives like “Go to Hills” and “Go to Villages” to promote development in hilly regions. Despite these efforts, the government faced criticism for not adequately addressing tribal aspirations. In 2021, the Hill Areas Committee (HAC) recommended the Autonomous District Council (ADC) Amendment Bill, seeking greater financial and administrative autonomy for the hills. However, the state government introduced alternative amendments in 2022 without consulting the HAC, leading to protests and renewed tensions.
The socio-economic disparity between the valley and the hills is a critical factor in the conflict. Meitei landlords dominate agricultural ownership in the valley, while many hill-dwelling Kukis and Nagas lack formal land ownership rights. Article 371(C) of the Constitution prohibits non-tribals from purchasing land in tribal areas, reinforcing the perception that Kukis and Nagas control 89 percent of Manipur’s land. However, this view overlooks the limited economic benefits accrued by these communities due to systemic inequities.
The demand for a separate Kuki state, termed “Kukiland”, has been a recurring theme since the 1980s. Alternatively, tribal groups have sought inclusion under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution or greater autonomy through measures like the ADC Amendment Bill.
The security landscape in Manipur has further complicated the situation. A 2008 suspension of operations agreement between the government and 25 Kuki insurgent groups mandated the disarmament of these groups. However, the partial lifting of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in 2022, primarily in the valley, has created perceptions of unequal security measures.
Additionally, tribal groups argue that the government’s policies favour the valley, while Meiteis accuse the tribals of harbouring separatist ambitions. The formation of village defence forces on both sides has heightened tensions, with each side alleging that the other supports militant activities.
Religion has often been cited as a factor in the Manipur conflict, with the valley’s Meitei population predominantly practicing Hinduism, alongside smaller segments adhering to Sanamahism and Islam. In contrast, the hill tribes, including Kukis and Nagas, primarily follow Christianity, with some practicing Islam, Judaism, or animism. However, while religion shapes the identities of the communities involved, it is not the primary driver of the conflict.
Manipur has been grappling with prolonged unrest for over 18 months, resulting in deep divisions between ethnic communities in the Imphal Valley and the surrounding hills. The deployment of central security forces, tasked with maintaining peace, has faced significant challenges due to two critical issues:
The collaboration between the Manipur Police and central security forces has been strained by allegations of bias. Communities in the hills perceive the Manipur Police as favouring those in the Valley, undermining trust and complicating efforts to ensure impartial law enforcement. The central government’s 2008 peace agreement with certain hill-based militant groups has added another layer of difficulty. While this agreement has historically contributed to stability, adhering to it while addressing ongoing violence presents a challenging balancing act for security forces.
Additionally, the emergence of village defence volunteers on both sides has intensified the situation. While these groups claim to safeguard their communities, their actions have sometimes led to violent confrontations. This dynamic has further fuelled confusion, with law enforcement labelling some volunteers as “militants”, even as these groups argue they are acting in self-defence.
Since May 2023, ethnic violence between the Imphal Valley-based Meitei community and hill-based Kuki-Zo groups has led to over 250 fatalities and displaced thousands. The clashes have stemmed from long-standing socio-political and ethnic tensions in the region. Mobile internet restrictions were first imposed on November 16, following the discovery of six bodies—three women and three children—found in the Jiri and Barak rivers in Manipur and Assam. The victims, who belonged to the Meitei community, had been reported missing from a relief camp in Jiribam district after a clash between security forces and suspected Kuki-Zo militants on November 11. The skirmish resulted in the deaths of ten insurgents and triggered widespread protests and clashes as residents took to the streets, further intensifying unrest in the region.
In response, the Manipur government suspended mobile internet and data services across the state from 3pm on September 10 to 3 pm on September 15, citing concerns over the potential spread of disinformation and rumours via social media. The prolonged digital blackout has drawn criticism, particularly from the Kuki Students’ Organisation, which called for the restoration of internet services in the hill districts. They questioned why areas unaffected by the unrest, such as the hill districts, were subjected to the shutdown. “Since the issue is primarily confined to the Valley Districts, the hill districts should not have to endure the consequences,” they stated, according to The Wire.
The organization also expressed concern that the internet restrictions might be used to obscure certain actions, such as the removal of the Salei Taret flag at the deputy commissioner’s office in Thoubal. Both the Kuki and Meitei communities have voiced dissatisfaction with the internet blackout, alleging that it serves to suppress the full extent of the situation in Manipur from being seen by the rest of the country. The recent shutdown follows a history of extended digital restrictions in the state, including a prior blackout that lasted over 3,050 hours, reflecting the ongoing struggle to balance security concerns with the public’s access to information.
The government of Manipur had extended the suspension of mobile internet services in nine districts until December 3, citing concerns over law and order. The affected districts include Imphal West, Imphal East, Kakching, Bishnupur, Thoubal, Churachandpur, Kangpokpi, Pherzawl, and Jiribam. An official statement from the home department confirmed that the decision was taken after assessing the current security situation and its connection to the potential misuse of internet services. The suspension includes mobile internet, mobile data services, VSATs, and VPNs, and remained in effect until 5:15 pm on December 3 to maintain public order.
Recognizing the challenges posed by the internet shutdown, the state government had conditionally lifted the suspension on broadband services (ILL and FTTH) on November 19. This partial relaxation aimed to alleviate difficulties faced by residents, healthcare facilities, educational institutions, and businesses. The order specified, however, that subscribers could not share their connections or enable WiFi or hotspot services.
While religious narratives are often cited, the root cause of Manipur’s conflict lies in its socio-economic disparities, historical grievances, and political mismanagement, rather than a singular issue like religion or migration. Addressing these issues requires sustained and inclusive dialogue, equitable development policies, and respect for the distinct identities of all communities involved. Only then can lasting peace be achieved in the region.
—The writer is a Research Officer at Chennai Centre for China Studies. Her research interests constitute China-WANA (West Asia and North Africa) relations and human rights
The post appeared first on .
The ongoing conflict in Manipur has elicited varied interpretations from scholars and observers, worldwide. While some attribute the unrest to religious tensions, others point to the influx of migrants and refugees from Myanmar or blame the policies of the current government. However, a closer examination reveals that the roots of the conflict are deeply embedded in Manipur’s history, geography and socio-economic structure, with origins tracing back to the 19th century.
The northeastern region of India, including Manipur, is geographically unique, with a rich abundance of natural resources. However, arable land is scarce, and the demographic structure historically comprised tribal communities spread across the valley and hilly areas. In Manipur, the Meitei community primarily resides in the valley, constituting approximately 11 percent of the population, while the hilly areas, accounting for 89 percent of the state’s territory, are home to the Kuki-Zomi and Naga communities.
Historically, Meitei kings ruled over Manipur and sought to expand their influence into the hills, where semi-nomadic Naga tribes resided. This expansion led to early tensions, but was partially mitigated over time. A significant turning point occurred during the 19th century, when internal power struggles among the Meitei rulers escalated. The three brothers—Chourjit Singh, Marjit Singh and Gambir Singh—vied for supremacy. Marjit Singh, with Burmese support, overthrew Chourjit, leading to Burma’s occupation of Manipur (1819-1826). Gambir Singh, with British assistance, eventually recaptured Manipur, culminating in the Treaty of Yandabo in 1826.
The British, after consolidating their influence in the region, allegedly facilitated the migration of the Kuki-Zomi community from Burma to serve as a buffer between the Meiteis in the valley and the Nagas in the hills. This migration sowed the seeds for future discord.
In 1896, the British introduced an inner line separating the Kukis from the Meiteis, based on the colonial perception of the Kukis as “uncivilized”. This division became a precursor to modern debates over the Inner Line Permit (ILP), a system introduced in Manipur in 2020 to regulate the entry of non-Manipuris under constitutional provisions like Articles 244(A) and 275(1). While proponents of the ILP system argue it protects tribal interests, critics contend it fosters exclusion and restricts national integration.
In 2015, under the Congress government, the Manipur assembly introduced three bills, including the Protection of Manipur People Bill, aimed at addressing inter-community tensions by regulating land ownership and economic activity. However, the Kuki community opposed these measures, perceiving them as discriminatory. The ensuing protests delayed the bills’ implementation until 2018.
In 2017, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) assumed power in Manipur, launching initiatives like “Go to Hills” and “Go to Villages” to promote development in hilly regions. Despite these efforts, the government faced criticism for not adequately addressing tribal aspirations. In 2021, the Hill Areas Committee (HAC) recommended the Autonomous District Council (ADC) Amendment Bill, seeking greater financial and administrative autonomy for the hills. However, the state government introduced alternative amendments in 2022 without consulting the HAC, leading to protests and renewed tensions.
The socio-economic disparity between the valley and the hills is a critical factor in the conflict. Meitei landlords dominate agricultural ownership in the valley, while many hill-dwelling Kukis and Nagas lack formal land ownership rights. Article 371(C) of the Constitution prohibits non-tribals from purchasing land in tribal areas, reinforcing the perception that Kukis and Nagas control 89 percent of Manipur’s land. However, this view overlooks the limited economic benefits accrued by these communities due to systemic inequities.
The demand for a separate Kuki state, termed “Kukiland”, has been a recurring theme since the 1980s. Alternatively, tribal groups have sought inclusion under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution or greater autonomy through measures like the ADC Amendment Bill.
The security landscape in Manipur has further complicated the situation. A 2008 suspension of operations agreement between the government and 25 Kuki insurgent groups mandated the disarmament of these groups. However, the partial lifting of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in 2022, primarily in the valley, has created perceptions of unequal security measures.
Additionally, tribal groups argue that the government’s policies favour the valley, while Meiteis accuse the tribals of harbouring separatist ambitions. The formation of village defence forces on both sides has heightened tensions, with each side alleging that the other supports militant activities.
Religion has often been cited as a factor in the Manipur conflict, with the valley’s Meitei population predominantly practicing Hinduism, alongside smaller segments adhering to Sanamahism and Islam. In contrast, the hill tribes, including Kukis and Nagas, primarily follow Christianity, with some practicing Islam, Judaism, or animism. However, while religion shapes the identities of the communities involved, it is not the primary driver of the conflict.
Manipur has been grappling with prolonged unrest for over 18 months, resulting in deep divisions between ethnic communities in the Imphal Valley and the surrounding hills. The deployment of central security forces, tasked with maintaining peace, has faced significant challenges due to two critical issues:
The collaboration between the Manipur Police and central security forces has been strained by allegations of bias. Communities in the hills perceive the Manipur Police as favouring those in the Valley, undermining trust and complicating efforts to ensure impartial law enforcement. The central government’s 2008 peace agreement with certain hill-based militant groups has added another layer of difficulty. While this agreement has historically contributed to stability, adhering to it while addressing ongoing violence presents a challenging balancing act for security forces.
Additionally, the emergence of village defence volunteers on both sides has intensified the situation. While these groups claim to safeguard their communities, their actions have sometimes led to violent confrontations. This dynamic has further fuelled confusion, with law enforcement labelling some volunteers as “militants”, even as these groups argue they are acting in self-defence.
Since May 2023, ethnic violence between the Imphal Valley-based Meitei community and hill-based Kuki-Zo groups has led to over 250 fatalities and displaced thousands. The clashes have stemmed from long-standing socio-political and ethnic tensions in the region. Mobile internet restrictions were first imposed on November 16, following the discovery of six bodies—three women and three children—found in the Jiri and Barak rivers in Manipur and Assam. The victims, who belonged to the Meitei community, had been reported missing from a relief camp in Jiribam district after a clash between security forces and suspected Kuki-Zo militants on November 11. The skirmish resulted in the deaths of ten insurgents and triggered widespread protests and clashes as residents took to the streets, further intensifying unrest in the region.
In response, the Manipur government suspended mobile internet and data services across the state from 3pm on September 10 to 3 pm on September 15, citing concerns over the potential spread of disinformation and rumours via social media. The prolonged digital blackout has drawn criticism, particularly from the Kuki Students’ Organisation, which called for the restoration of internet services in the hill districts. They questioned why areas unaffected by the unrest, such as the hill districts, were subjected to the shutdown. “Since the issue is primarily confined to the Valley Districts, the hill districts should not have to endure the consequences,” they stated, according to The Wire.
The organization also expressed concern that the internet restrictions might be used to obscure certain actions, such as the removal of the Salei Taret flag at the deputy commissioner’s office in Thoubal. Both the Kuki and Meitei communities have voiced dissatisfaction with the internet blackout, alleging that it serves to suppress the full extent of the situation in Manipur from being seen by the rest of the country. The recent shutdown follows a history of extended digital restrictions in the state, including a prior blackout that lasted over 3,050 hours, reflecting the ongoing struggle to balance security concerns with the public’s access to information.
The government of Manipur had extended the suspension of mobile internet services in nine districts until December 3, citing concerns over law and order. The affected districts include Imphal West, Imphal East, Kakching, Bishnupur, Thoubal, Churachandpur, Kangpokpi, Pherzawl, and Jiribam. An official statement from the home department confirmed that the decision was taken after assessing the current security situation and its connection to the potential misuse of internet services. The suspension includes mobile internet, mobile data services, VSATs, and VPNs, and remained in effect until 5:15 pm on December 3 to maintain public order.
Recognizing the challenges posed by the internet shutdown, the state government had conditionally lifted the suspension on broadband services (ILL and FTTH) on November 19. This partial relaxation aimed to alleviate difficulties faced by residents, healthcare facilities, educational institutions, and businesses. The order specified, however, that subscribers could not share their connections or enable WiFi or hotspot services.
While religious narratives are often cited, the root cause of Manipur’s conflict lies in its socio-economic disparities, historical grievances, and political mismanagement, rather than a singular issue like religion or migration. Addressing these issues requires sustained and inclusive dialogue, equitable development policies, and respect for the distinct identities of all communities involved. Only then can lasting peace be achieved in the region.
—The writer is a Research Officer at Chennai Centre for China Studies. Her research interests constitute China-WANA (West Asia and North Africa) relations and human rights
The post appeared first on .