Reading Between the Lines: What do the Advisory Notices Issued by KIM and ITLF Signify?

The recent advisory from the Indigenous Tribal Leaders’ Forum (ITLF) and Kuki Inpi Manipur (KIM) advising the Kuki community against contesting the upcoming Lok Sabha elections has ignited debate and raised questions about the interplay between identity politics and electoral politics in the region.

However, one has to read between the lines of these advisories to understand the sentiments and grievances of the Kuki people.

The directives of the two Kuki top bodies comes in the midst of heightened ethnic tensions and political uncertainty in Manipur, where communities grapple with issues of representation, autonomy, and historical grievances. Against this backdrop, the advisory to abstain from electoral participation reflects deep- seated concerns about the potential for exacerbating existing fault lines and inflaming communal tensions.

The Kuki community, one of the prominent ethnic groups in Manipur, has a long history of struggle for recognition, rights, and representation within the state’s political framework. Like many other indigenous communities in the region, the Kuki people have faced marginalization, discrimination, and socio-economic disparities, fuelling aspirations for greater autonomy and political self-determination. They have been tagged as illegal migrants, foreigners, Burmese, and what not, to discredit their political aspirations.

In this context, the advisory can be seen as a cautionary measure aimed at preserving peace, harmony, and unity among different ethnic groups in Manipur. It is also a display of frustration shown against the lackadaisical attitude of the government in addressing the plight of the Kukis.

By urging the Kuki community to refrain from contesting the Lok Sabha elections, the two Kuki bodies seeks to avoid the potential to exacerbate existing tensions and deepen divisions along ethnic lines.

However, the advisory issued by KIM and ITLF has sparked controversy and drawn criticism from some quarters, with questions raised about its implications for democratic values, political rights, and the freedom of choice. Critics argue that electoral participation is a fundamental democratic right guaranteed to all citizens, and any attempt to curtail or influence this right undermines the principles of democracy and pluralism.

This critic’s argument fails to substantiate the stand point of the two Kuki bodies and the Kuki people in general as many fail to read between the lines and do not want to understand the reason behind this advisory notices.

The two organizations have been dissatisfied with the state government policies, and they feel that participating in elections legitimizes a flawed system or unfair practices.

The Kuki people in general, and the two organizations in particular, believed that contesting the lone Lok Sabha seat for the hill areas of Manipur do not adequately represent the interests of the community. Moreover, they feel marginalized or ignored by current dispensation.

The aims of the two organizations are not merely successes in electoral politics but to establish a self- governed administration within the framework of the Indian Constitution which they believe cannot be achieved through participating in elections alone. Refrain from the electoral process is a way to pressurise the authorities to address their demands.

The Kuki people viewed not contesting elections as a form of non-violent protest against perceived injustices or grievances. This effectively allows the Kuki community to express their discontent and mobilize support for their cause without resorting to violence.

Understanding well the motive behind the advisory of two Kuki bodies, it has been heeded by the Kuki community as no one filed nomination paper for the II-Outer Manipur Parliamentary Constituency, a seat reserved for the Scheduled Tribes. The Kuki community’s decision in paying heed to the advisory notice underscores the delicate balance between collective identity and individual rights. While collective action and solidarity are essential for advancing the interests of marginalized communities, individual autonomy and freedom of choice must also be respected and upheld in a democratic society. However, all this has been sidelined by the Kuki community for the larger interest of their community, at the moment.

The ITLF’s advisory also sheds light on the broader context of political mobilization and conflict resolution in Manipur. Ethnic tensions and rivalries, often exacerbated by historical grievances and socio- economic disparities, continue to shape the state’s political landscape, posing challenges to peace- building, reconciliation, and inclusive development.

In this context, the role of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) as a mediator and arbiter of ethnic tensions highlights the importance of dialogue, engagement, and conflict resolution mechanisms in addressing underlying grievances and fostering mutual understanding among different communities. By advocating for restraint and moderation in electoral politics, the ITLF seeks to promote dialogue and reconciliation as pathways to sustainable peace and coexistence.

As Manipur prepares for the Lok Sabha elections, the advisory serves as a timely reminder of the need for inclusive and participatory democracy, where the voices and aspirations of all communities are heard and respected. While electoral politics can be a powerful tool for expressing grievances and effecting change, it must be exercised with caution and responsibility, mindful of its potential to either bridge or widen the fault lines of identity and ethnicity.

In addition, the KIM and Indigenous ITLF advisory urging the Kuki community to refrain from contesting the Lok Sabha elections in Manipur reflects the complex interplay of identity politics, electoral democracy, and ethnic tensions in the region. As Manipur navigates through the challenges of political representation and communal harmony, it is imperative to uphold democratic principles, foster dialogue, and promote inclusive governance to build a more peaceful and prosperous future for all its citizens.

Overall, the Kuki community chose to abstain from contesting Lok Sabha elections as a strategic decision to protest against perceived injustices and to assert their political rights and demands.