Understanding the Manipur Conflict in India and the Kuki-Zo Perspective

The northeastern state of Manipur in India is renowned for its diverse cultural heritage, distinctive customs, and delicate past involving numerous ethnic groups. Pressure on its social cohesion has always existed in the state, which was formed by numerous ethnic groups, each with its own distinct character and customs. Each of them were given their own unique domain as a result of the redrawing of administrative lines and construction of artificial boundaries, paving the way for latter conflicts, such as historical land disputes, economic injustices, and political problems. Some actions that exacerbated preexisting tensions have led to the current bloodshed. The idea of a unified Manipuri identity and nationhood has been called into question, and the violence has revealed the state’s long-standing ethnic differences and frustrations. Pre-existing historical, social, and economic grudges have been brought to light by the conflict, which has led to a horrifying outburst of animosity that affects the area till today. Nonetheless, the origins of the disputes can be found in the colonial period, when the Burmese and subsequently the British had a significant influence on the political geography and demography of the region.

The Kuki-Zo people, an ethnic group, inhabit the bordering regions of Bangladesh, Myanmar, and the northeastern Indian states of Manipur, Nagaland, Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram. With a historical presence in the Manipur highlands, they have upheld customary rights to their resources and lands. However, they have grappled with challenges pertaining to property rights, political representation, and economic opportunities. Consequently, they have demanded greater recognition, self-governance, and protection of their ancestral lands, which are rich in biodiversity and natural resources. On the other hand, the Imphal valley has long been home to the Meitei ethnic community, constituting the majority in Manipur. The community’s regions have often received prioritisation concerning political representation and economic advancement. Due to their deeply rooted association with Manipur’s cultural and historical traditions, any perceived challenges to their rule have historically led to conflicts. Moreover, their prolonged political and economic dominance has sparked concerns among other communities, particularly the Kuki-Zo, regarding fair distribution of opportunities and resources. Consequently, they have called for the preservation of their political standing and cultural heritage within the state.

The land issue has emerged as a central point of conflict between the Kuki-Zo and the Meitei. Due to Manipur’s unusual terrain, there is competition over resource-rich areas, fuelling long-standing disputes over land ownership and fostering hostility between communities. Both groups engage in claims and counterclaims, fiercely defending their ancestral lands. The Meitei-Kuki/Zo relationship has become more complex within Manipur’s political landscape. Political power struggles exacerbate existing tensions as ethnic groups strive for representation and influence in the state’s governance. Historical events, such as the creation of autonomous regions, have added complexity to these ethnic disputes. Cultural differences between the Kuki-Zo and Meitei populations also contribute to conflicts, with language, customs, and social behaviours often becoming flash points. The struggle for recognition and acknowledgement involves crucial aspects such as preserving and promoting diverse cultural identities. Economic disparities further intensify these conflicts. Discussions regarding resource distribution, development projects, and employment opportunities can leave certain segments of the population feeling marginalised. The economic element adds turbulence to an already-complex situation, amplifying existing frustrations. Violent clashes, blockades, and strikes have manifested as expressions of this conflict, resulting in a significant loss of life and property. These actions have damaged inter-community relations, disrupted socioeconomic activities, and posed a grave threat to the state’s administration. Moreover, they have exacerbated distrust among diverse groups, underscoring structural flaws that urgently require attention.

All stakeholders in this conflict, including the government, communities, and international organizations, must cooperate to find a lasting resolution ensuring the prosperity and well-being of all Manipur residents as the state deals with its aftermath. The discord in Manipur is deeply entrenched and multifaceted, demanding earnest attention and focused efforts towards reconciliation. To move towards a future of peace and cooperation, the state administration must address historical grievances of both communities. Through fostering communication, understanding, and inclusivity, the state can progress toward a future that is equitable and harmonious. Human rights organizations are alarmed by the humanitarian crisis unfolding in the area, drawing global attention due to the violence. The unrest not only destabilizes the affected areas but also has broader implications for the stability of the entire region. Establishing a lasting foundation for peace in the state necessitates efforts to narrow economic disparities, ensure fair representation, and safeguard the rights of all communities. Leaders can potentially forge understanding and consensus through facilitated dialogues centred on historical coexistence and shared interests, with impartial state mediation ensuring comprehensive resolution of each community’s concerns. Both state and central authorities have undertaken various initiatives to address this issue, but resolving the conflict demands a multifaceted strategy addressing its root causes. Political dialogue serves as an essential initial step toward peace, addressing structural problems contributing to ethnic tensions, such as identity assertions, territorial disputes, and socioeconomic inequalities. Policies prioritizing equitable resource allocation and inclusive development can address the underlying socioeconomic disparities. The Indian government, in addition to announcing measures for rehabilitation and relief for affected individuals, has initiated negotiations with leaders from both communities. However, finding common ground remains challenging due to intricate political power dynamics, cultural differences, and historical grievances. It is vital to support initiatives fostering inclusivity, understanding, and discourse.

The situation in Manipur continues to be unstable and dangerous, lacking signs of a lasting peace or diplomatic resolution. Root causes of the conflict remain unaddressed, severely damaging mutual respect and cohesion between communities. The varied agendas and ethnic identities within these groups has fuelled the ongoing violence. Perceived marginalisation has bred bitterness, prompting a demand for an independent state separate from the majority society. The Kuki-Zo tribe has fervently sought autonomy and self-determination through various campaigns and organizations, advocating for a separate administration to safeguard their people due to ongoing violence and perceived state failure in protection. They have articulated their demand for a separate hill council or district for governance, or even the formation of a distinct state within the Indian Union named Kukiland or Zoland. In regions where they hold the majority, they have asserted self-rule, stating it as the only viable means to halt oppression, bloodshed, and secure their rights, lives, and dignity. They have urged the central government to intervene and resolve the situation.

The Kuki-Zo’s call for a distinct administration reflects both their aspirations for a better future and their despair and desperation. Further dialogue and consideration between the involved parties are imperative to assess the reasonableness and desirability of this demand, as well as its potential to address the fundamental issues at the heart of this disagreement.