Manipur Insurgency

 

Manipur Insurgency: Historical Roots, Ethnic Struggles, and the Fight for Autonomy

Manipur, a region of immense strategic and cultural significance, sits at the crossroads of India and Myanmar. It serves as a vital link between India and Southeast Asia. According to the Ministry of External Affairs, Manipur’s geographical location makes it crucial for India’s “Act East” policy, which aims to strengthen economic and political ties with Southeast Asia. Despite its rich natural resources and geographical importance, the state is marked by a complex mosaic of ethnic identities. The Meitei, Naga, and Kuki tribes, each with distinct cultural, religious, and political backgrounds, coexist in this diverse land. The 2011 Census shows that Manipur’s population is about 2.7 million, with the Meitei community, predominantly Hindu, making up roughly 60%, while the Naga and Kuki communities, mostly Christian, dominate the hill districts. However, historical tensions have often led to conflicts, particularly over demands for autonomy and self-determination. This mix of ethnicities contributes to the state's vibrant culture but has also become the basis of political unrest, as each community seeks recognition, empowerment, and greater control over its future.

                                                      In Picture-  Political Map of Manipur

The origins of the insurgency in Manipur trace back to the state's forced merger with India in 1949. Prior to the merger, Manipur was an independent kingdom, and the Indian government’s decision to annex the state led to widespread resentment. The 1950s saw the formation of the Manipur National Army (MNA), one of the first organized resistance movements, which symbolized the beginning of unrest. The Indian government’s decision to incorporate Manipur into India was followed by the introduction of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in 1958. According to the Indian Ministry of Home Affairs, this law grants the military sweeping powers, including the ability to arrest without warrants and use lethal force. Over the decades, insurgent groups like the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Manipur People’s Liberation Front (MPLF) emerged, calling for the separation of Manipur from India and the establishment of a sovereign state. As of 2020, over 40 active insurgent groups were operating in the state, further highlighting the persistence of the insurgency.

                                              In Picture-  Demographic Map of Manipur

The tragic killing of Thangjam Manorama in 2004, allegedly by Indian security forces, sparked mass protests and became a pivotal moment in the state's struggle. According to a report by Human Rights Watch, this incident led to widespread protests in which women organized a public demonstration, famously stripping as a form of protest against the AFSPA, demanding justice for Manorama's death. Despite ongoing peace talks and ceasefire efforts, the insurgency has persisted, fuelled by demands for autonomy and exacerbated by the heavy-handed military presence in the state. The human rights violations linked to AFSPA, such as arbitrary arrests, torture, and extrajudicial killings, continue to be significant points of contention, with local organizations and international groups like Amnesty International calling for the law’s repeal.

                                              In Picture -Manorama with her Family

The Indian government has responded to the insurgency with security operations. According to the Assam Rifles, more than 425 intelligence-based operations have been carried out in the past 15 years, resulting in the recovery of over 1,500 weapons from insurgent groups. In response to the ethnic violence that erupted in May 2023, the Ministry of Home Affairs deployed over 17,000 personnel from various Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) to restore order. However, despite these efforts, the use of AFSPA has led to significant distrust between security forces and civilians. According to a 2016 report by the United Nations, the application of AFSPA has fostered a culture of impunity, making it harder to restore peace.

The problem worsens with the involvement of external forces. Reports suggest that insurgent groups in Manipur receive support from foreign intelligence agencies, particularly from China. A 2019 report by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) revealed that Myanmar-based insurgent groups were using the ethnic unrest in Manipur to recruit locals and escalate attacks on Indian security forces. Additionally, the return of armed groups from Myanmar, well-trained in combat from the country’s civil war, has further heightened ethnic violence in the region. The NIA also uncovered evidence that these groups were supplied with sophisticated arms and training by foreign powers, exacerbating the conflict. This external influence makes the conflict even more complex, intertwining local struggles with larger geopolitical dynamics.

The consequences of the insurgency are far-reaching. Ethnic violence, particularly between the Meitei and Kuki communities, has led to widespread deaths and displacement. According to official reports, over 250 people have died and more than 60,000 have been displaced since May 2023 due to clashes between ethnic groups. The state’s economy, already fragile, has suffered immensely. The agricultural sector alone reported losses of ₹211.40 crore in 2023 due to disruptions caused by the insurgency, and the tourism industry, which once attracted more than 160,000 visitors annually, has seen a drastic drop in the number of tourists. The number fell to just 19,908 in the first quarter of 2023, as reported by the Manipur Tourism Department. As businesses and livelihoods crumble, the local population faces mounting economic hardships, further fuelling dissatisfaction and unrest.

                                              In Picture -  Tourist Place in Manipur

In early 2025, Manipur continued to grapple with severe ethnic conflict between the majority Meitei community and the minority Kuki-Zo tribes. The violence was partly ignited when a court ruling extended special economic benefits and quotas to the Meitei, previously reserved for the Kuki, intensifying existing tensions. Accusations arose that Chief Minister N Biren Singh, a Meitei and member of the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP), was biased towards his community, leading to his resignation in February 2025 amid mounting pressure. In response, the Indian government imposed direct rule over Manipur, appointing Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla to oversee the region. Complicating matters, fighters returning from Myanmar's civil war entered the fray, introducing sophisticated weaponry and further escalating the violence. Efforts to restore peace included a government-initiated roadmap focusing on weapon surrender, road reopening, and curbing armed group activities, with some success in weapon recoveries. However, challenges persisted, including the use of unlicensed satellite internet services like Starlink by militant groups to bypass government-imposed internet shutdowns. Despite these initiatives, the path to lasting peace remained fraught with difficulties, as ethnic tensions and distrust continued to hinder stabilization efforts.

 In Picture -Fresh violence erupts in Manipur: Kuki protesters clash with security forces,

In light of these challenges, the Indian government must adopt a comprehensive approach to address the insurgency and its root causes. First and foremost, political dialogue must be prioritized. A genuine conversation involving all stakeholders—including insurgent groups, ethnic communities, and local leaders—should focus on addressing the historical grievances of the people of Manipur. In 2015, the Government of India entered into a peace agreement with the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN-IM), an insurgent group from the neighbouring Nagaland state, signalling that dialogue remains a viable option for resolving insurgencies. Greater autonomy or special status for Manipur should be considered as a way to empower local communities and address their aspirations for self-governance. This would go a long way in alleviating the sense of alienation and offering the region a path toward reconciliation.

Equally important is the reform of security laws like AFSPA. While the law has helped control insurgency, its application has led to significant human rights abuses and growing mistrust between security forces and civilians. A 2017 Supreme Court ruling in India stated that AFSPA should only apply in areas that are “disturbed” and where there is an immediate threat. Gradually repealing AFSPA in areas where peace has been restored, alongside independent monitoring of security forces, will help rebuild trust. A more humane, community-oriented approach to security, such as community policing, will enhance the effectiveness of counterinsurgency operations while minimizing harm to innocent civilians.

In addition to political and security reforms, economic development plays a crucial role. The lack of infrastructure, limited job opportunities, and widespread poverty drive much of the unrest in Manipur. According to a report from the Planning Commission of India, Manipur’s poverty rate stands at around 36%, higher than the national average. The government must invest in local infrastructure projects, create jobs, and support industries like agriculture, manufacturing, and tourism to provide alternatives to violence. Furthermore, skills development programs for the youth will help divert them from insurgent groups, giving them a stake in the state's economic future.

Resolving the ethnic violence between the Meitei and Kuki communities requires a concerted effort to promote social reconciliation. A 2020 study by the National Foundation for Communal Harmony (NFCH) showed that inter-ethnic tensions between the Meitei and Kuki communities have resulted in recurring violence. Community-led peacebuilding initiatives and efforts to ensure equitable distribution of resources will be vital in reducing ethnic tensions and fostering mutual respect. The state must adopt inclusive governance policies that ensure no community feels marginalized or excluded from the benefits of development.

Lastly, the regional dimensions of the insurgency cannot be overlooked. The involvement of insurgent groups from Myanmar and external support from foreign powers make this conflict a broader geopolitical issue. India must work closely with its neighbours to strengthen border security, share intelligence, and prevent cross-border insurgency activities. A 2020 study by the South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP) found that cross-border insurgency activities in Northeast India, including Manipur, have grown due to the lack of coordinated regional security measures. Regional cooperation will play a crucial role in limiting the ability of insurgents to operate freely and weakening their capacity to sustain the conflict.

Conclusion

The insurgency in Manipur is a deeply complex issue with historical, ethnic, and geopolitical dimensions. To resolve the crisis, India must pursue a comprehensive and balanced strategy that addresses both the immediate security concerns and the long-term political, social, and economic needs of the region. Dialogue, security reforms, economic development, and ethnic reconciliation must be at the heart of this approach. The time for decisive action is now, as the stakes are incredibly high—not only for the people of Manipur but for the stability and future of India as a whole. By adopting an inclusive, multi-faceted approach, India can restore peace, stability, and prosperity to the state, securing a lasting resolution to the conflict.