Meitei, Kuki-Zo insurgent groups warned against violating ground rules, continuing extortion

The recent joint review by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and state officials regarding Meitei and Kuki-Zo insurgent groups in Manipur is a critical development in addressing the protracted ethnic conflict plaguing the state. This move underscores the central government's intensified efforts to restore peace and enforce law and order in a region that has witnessed significant violence and instability since May 2023.

**Background Context and Historical Roots:**

Manipur, a strategically important state in India's Northeast, has a complex demographic mosaic comprising Meiteis (predominantly residing in the Imphal Valley), and various tribal communities including Kuki-Zo and Nagas (residing in the surrounding hills). The roots of insurgency in Manipur date back to the 1960s, driven by demands for self-determination, protection of indigenous identities, and grievances against perceived neglect or dominance. Over decades, numerous insurgent groups emerged from different ethnic communities, often leading to inter-community clashes and a challenging internal security situation. The 'Suspension of Operations' (SoO) agreements, initiated in 2008, have been a key policy tool for the government to engage with Kuki-Zo groups, aiming to bring them into the mainstream. Similar, albeit less formal, understandings exist with some Meitei groups. However, the fragile peace was shattered in May 2023, when widespread ethnic violence erupted between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities, triggered by a Manipur High Court order suggesting the inclusion of Meiteis in the Scheduled Tribes (ST) list. This stoked fears among Kuki-Zo communities about land, identity, and political representation, while Meiteis expressed concerns about illegal immigration and encroachment on their ancestral lands.

**The Current Development:**

In this latest review, the MHA and state officials directly engaged with representatives of both Meitei and Kuki-Zo insurgent groups. Key directives were issued: the United National Liberation Front – P (UNLF-P), a prominent Meitei insurgent group, was explicitly ordered to return weapons looted from police armouries during the initial phase of the conflict. This directive is crucial, as the proliferation of illegal arms has fueled the violence. Concurrently, Kuki-Zo insurgent groups, many of whom are signatories to the SoO agreements, were instructed to relocate seven of their camps and strictly adhere to the established ground rules. The overarching warning against violating ground rules and continuing extortion activities applies to all groups, signifying a strong message from the government that such actions will not be tolerated. This review indicates a shift towards stricter enforcement and accountability, rather than just dialogue.

**Key Stakeholders Involved:**

1. **Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Government of India:** As the nodal ministry for internal security, the MHA plays a pivotal role in maintaining law and order, formulating counter-insurgency strategies, and negotiating peace. Its direct involvement signifies the national importance of stabilizing Manipur.

2. **Manipur State Government:** The state administration is on the front lines, responsible for local law enforcement, managing relief and rehabilitation, and implementing central directives. The Chief Minister and state police machinery are crucial stakeholders.

3. **Meitei Insurgent Groups (e.g., UNLF-P):** These groups represent a segment of the Meitei community, often articulating demands related to land rights, protection of identity, and combating illegal immigration. Their compliance with directives, especially regarding weapon surrender, is vital for de-escalation.

4. **Kuki-Zo Insurgent Groups:** Many of these groups are under SoO agreements, which entail cantonment of cadres and adherence to specific rules. Their relocation of camps and cessation of extortion are key to restoring trust and stability in tribal areas.

5. **Local Communities and Civil Society Organizations:** The primary victims of the conflict, these groups are deeply affected by the violence and play a crucial role in advocating for peace, justice, and humanitarian aid. Their cooperation and trust are essential for any long-term solution.

**Significance for India:**

This development holds immense significance for India's internal security and socio-economic fabric. Manipur's instability directly impacts the nation's security architecture, especially given its sensitive border with Myanmar. The ethnic strife has led to significant loss of life, widespread displacement, and severe disruption of economic activities, hindering the state's development. Politically, it tests the federal structure, requiring robust coordination between the Centre and the State. Furthermore, continued unrest in Manipur undermines India's 'Act East Policy,' which aims to enhance connectivity and economic ties with Southeast Asian nations, as the state is a crucial gateway.

**Constitutional Provisions and Policy References:**

Several constitutional provisions and policies are relevant here. **Article 355** of the Indian Constitution mandates the Union to protect every State against external aggression and internal disturbance, justifying the MHA's proactive intervention. While President's Rule (**Article 356**) has not been imposed, the grave internal disturbance highlights the potential for such measures. The **Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), 1958**, though its application has been reduced in parts of Manipur, remains a legal framework historically used to tackle insurgency in disturbed areas. The 'Suspension of Operations' (SoO) agreements are a policy instrument for managing insurgent groups, and adherence to their ground rules is paramount. The underlying issues of land rights and identity also touch upon constitutional provisions related to Scheduled Tribes and the **Sixth Schedule**, which provides for autonomous administrative divisions in some tribal areas, though Manipur's tribal areas are governed differently. The demands for inclusion in the ST list also bring into focus the constitutional framework for affirmative action.

**Future Implications:**

The success of these directives will largely depend on the willingness of the insurgent groups to comply and the government's consistent enforcement. If weapons are returned and camps are relocated, it could pave the way for de-escalation, confidence-building measures, and a renewed focus on political dialogue to address the underlying grievances. Failure to comply, however, could lead to further security operations and prolonged instability. A sustainable solution requires not just security measures but also comprehensive rehabilitation packages for displaced persons, economic development initiatives, and a political framework that addresses the aspirations and fears of all communities involved. This review is a step towards re-establishing state authority and creating an environment conducive for lasting peace in Manipur.