Violence breaks fragile peace in Manipur

Violence breaks fragile peace in Manipur

The fresh violence that has broken out in Manipur shows that the promise of precarious peace that came with the imposition of President’s Rule has been deceptive. Last week, one person was killed and many others injured when protests erupted against the state administration’s attempt to facilitate inter-district movement of civilians and goods.

Kuki groups have insisted that they will allow key roads, including two national highways, to be reopened only after the administration accepts eight demands, including the setting up of a separate administration in the form of a Union Territory in the hill districts dominated by them. The administration had taken steps for unhindered movement of people and goods with government-arranged buses running between the hills and the valley, escorted by central forces. Such movements had stopped in the state as the Meitei and Kuki groups had, some months ago, disallowed each other from crossing into areas.

The administration had also announced a deadline for surrender of weapons taken away by warring groups from the state armouries. These weapons were in circulation in the community and were a major threat to peace. But only about a third of the over 3,000 weapons have been surrendered. It would be a challenging job for the security forces to recover all the weapons but as long as they are in the community, peace and normalcy will be difficult to achieve. In the last over two years when the state was in the grip of turmoil and violence, even war-grade weapons were used. Most of the weapons are with the militant groups. They are still active and there is no sign of any group being disbanded. The fresh round of violence shows that there is resistance even to the early steps to restore peace. Over 60,000 persons have been displaced and are living in relief camps. There cannot be any normalcy before they can return to their homes.

The resignation of Chief Minister N Biren Singh and the imposition of central rule were much-needed, if belated, steps. But the latest violence and the hard positions being articulated show that there is a need for stronger measures. The government must continue to engage with representatives of both communities and try to create trust, which is still lacking. Months of strife and confrontation have deepened divisions between the rival communities and it will take time for trust to be restored. Unfortunately, the Centre has kept itself away from the state from the beginning of the present period of strife. It should shun the apathy and take a more proactive role in bringing about peace in the state.