Manipur conflict – an analysis of its origin and reasons thereof

 

Manipur conflict – an analysis of its origin and reasons thereof

Manipur in turmoil 

The Manipur incident had exploded as a national news way back after the 3^rd May, 2023 incident, when a Kuki protest congregation had turned violent and attacked Meitei villages and inflicted casualties, which appeared to be a pre-mediated event.  However, the violence after initially simmering vigorously for a few months, was slowly settling down, when the current spate of rocket and so called drone attacks, has again catapulted the State onto the national news headlines.  Although a senior Police functionary has turned down the drone attack theory, which was purportedly being circulated as a fake video of some other conflict zone, but the deep distrust amongst the two tribes has just started simmering again, just before the assembly elections are due for some north Indian States, slated to begin in a few months’ time and the Election Commission has already notified the same.  This made me do a bit of research and to publish this current blog, about my take on this issue.

The map of Manipur

A brief Geography, culture and History

[This part covers the tribes of Manipur and their origin etc. of Meitei’s]

The State of Manipur is a small State in the North-eastern region of India.  It is geographically situated being bordered by Nagaland in the North, Mizoram in the South, Cachar district of Assam in the West and bordering Myanmar in the East. The land surface of Manipur is 22,347 sq. kms. About 90% of the land mass of Manipur is mountainous.  In 1826, Manipur was brought into India by the treaty of Yandavo by Raja Jai Singh with the British at the end of the Indo-Burmese war. This followed a dispute in accession to the throne. With the intervention of the British, the dispute was settled. In 1891 Churachand was nominated the Raja and it came under British rule as a princely state. During World War-II, Imphal (capital of Manipur) was occupied by the Japanese. After Indian independence Manipur became a Union Territory and subsequently achieved statehood in January 21, 1972. 

The Meitei's of Manipur

            The people of Manipur comprise of Meitei, Bishnupriyas, Naga, Meitei Pangal (Muslim Meitei community) and other smaller communities which have lived together in complete harmony for centuries.  The inhabitants of Manipur have been identifying themselves as "Manipuris" since centuries. The land of Manipur was formerly divided into small territories occupied by different clans, namely - Khumals, Moirangs, Angoms, Luwangs, Ningthoujas etc. The territories occupied by them were identified as per the names of their respective clans. Some of the clans are of Aryan branches and some belong to Kuki-chin branch.  Therefore, different clans of the Aryan and Mongoloid people lived side by side in Manipur for centuries. In course of time the Meitei’s (the Ningtauja clan) occupied all the territories towards 15th century AD and established a sovereign kingdom known as ‘Meitei Leipak’ (the land of Meiteis).  Historians also equivocally agree that the Bishnupriyas were also living in the Valley of Manipur from centuries before the establishment of that "Meitei- Laipak" (Sometimes refers as to be Senalaipak, Kongleipak, Metrabak etc.). The Meiteis called the Bishnupriyas as ‘Mayangs’ and the history Manipur can be traced back the 7th century AD, it could have its origin earlier too, but the same is not well documented.

A Meitei Pangal (Muslim) family in Manipur

As regards the name Meitei and Bishnupriya, there is a story prevalent and found in local Meitei purana or puya called "Khumal Purana". This purana states that conversion of Meiteis into Hinduism by Shri Santidas Babaji in 19th century at the instance of the then King Shri Pamhaiba and it was aimed at linking up the with the Aryans, the mainstream of people of Manipur and their language too with Sanskrit. The Aryans, the followers of Lord Vishnu denied to accept the initiation by Shri Santadas Babaji , whereas the others accepted. Thus, the Manipuri people Aryan and Kuki-chin group have been classified and renamed as Bishnupriya and Meiteis.  Thus, the term ‘Manipur’ and ‘Manipuris’ have been in use by both the Meiteis and the Bishnupriyas commonly with equal right to them; and practically, people of both these clans used these two terms ‘Manipur’ and ‘Manipuris’ without any reservation to identify their land and themselves respectively.  Further, culturally, the Meiteis and Bishnupriyas cannot be distinguished from each other. Both these two clans developed a homogeneous culture and the concept of being one community was ingrained over centuries.

 [Origin etc. of Kuki’s]

            Much of the history that we know about the Kukis is through colonial records. The name “Kuki” was perhaps used for the first time in British documents in 1777 when the British Governor General Warren Hastings was asked for help against Kuki raids from the hills by the chief of Chittagong.  Incidentally, these tribes were also called Lushais by the British and Chins by the Burmese. Historians believe that the name “Kuki” itself is an exonym, meaning that it was a name given by outsiders of a community or group of communities and not one native to the state of Manipur.  The 1886 Gazetteer of Manipur which was based on this census data further recorded approximately 8,000 ‘old Kukis’ in Manipur, who traditionally lived in the state, and about 17,000 ‘new Kukis’ who migrated from Lushai Hills in the south during the early 19^th century.  These tribes, which later came to be identified and referred to as Kuki-Chin groups had similar linguistic and cultural affinities and their populations are found in all north eastern states of India today (apart from Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim).

Kuki's of Manipur

             In a critique of the largely colonial historiography of the Kukis, other historians and researchers, especially indigenous academics, have found this view of Kukis as painted by colonial writings as deeply erroneous and one-sided.  Anecdotes about the exogamous origins of the word “Kuki” which some colonial accounts dubbed as a “Bengali word” and the “perceived notion that they (Kukis) were immigrants from the south in the latter half of the 19^th Century remains the “most erroneous view” of a deeply subjective colonial historiography,” noted Haoginlen Chongloi in his paper “Wave Theory Kuki Perspective on Migration”.  Professor Gangumei Kabui also noted the same in his article ‘History of Manipur’.

Some foreign backed Kuki militants in Manipur

On the other hand, Kukis of present day Manipur can be traced back to as early as the historic times along with or after the Meitei advent in Manipur Valley, explains Ngamjahao Kipgen, Associate Professor of Sociology at the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences of the Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati.  Kuki academic Thongkholal Haokip adds that Buddhist literature written by Lama Taranathaduring the 15th century also has accounts of Kukis (Ko-ki) in their present habitat.  Incidentally, Pooyas, traditional records maintained by Meitei Kings mention how “two Kuki chiefs named Kuki Ahongba and Kuki Achouba were allies to Nongba Lairen Pakhangba, the first historically recorded king of the Meithis [Meiteis], in the latter’s mobilization for the throne in 33 AD,” Haokip wrote in a 2010 paper.  “The question of their citizenship undebatable”. Chongloi adds that Kukis followed a wave pattern of migration and these patterns can be traced with respect to the location of the purported “khul” or cave to which the Kukis mythologically trace their origin.  The question, then, should perhaps not be about when the Kukis came to Manipur but instead framed as “Who are the people who identify as Kuki and since when?” Such a probe seems to better describe the complexities of the historical narratives surrounding Kukis.

High Court orders leading to protests - a collage of reportings

            In Kuki mythology and cultural history, the Kuki-Chins emerged from a cave called ‘Sinlung’, or a rock called ‘Chhinlung’ or from the ‘khul’. While the location of this khul orits actual existence has remained unverified, the place is real in the collective memory of the Kuku-Chin people and an important aspect of their identity-building process.  “In their self-perception, the Kuki-Chin groups believe that all of them originated from the same place and that they have a common social origin and share descent”, Kipgen writes.  For instance, many Kuki groups believe the mythical folk hero Gaalngam to be their progenitor. His “history” is recorded in material artefacts like footprints, paw marks, engravings on rock slabs, etc. Present-day Churachandpur district of Manipur, a stronghold of Kukis, is said to house the footprints of the mythical Gaalngam and his herds of Mithun and there is even a memorial on the spot to mark the place by the Hmar Kuki tribe that refers to him as their “grandfather”.  While these myths cannot really be verified, as with myths of other religions, they play an important role in building the cultural identity of Kukis and find resonation in songs, art, poetry, cultural events and even bedtime stories of Kukis.

Some Kukis with placards in Mizoram - instance of foreign hand clearly seen

Among the Kukis, there has been a perception of a single homeland for all Kukis tribes-Zale’n-gam. While the physical demarcations of this homeland might not be found on any map, the place exists in the memories of the Kuki ancestors.  “Zale’n-gam is an ideological concept propounded by PS Haokip, the President of the KNO, which means ‘freedom of the people in their land’,” Kipgen explains.  Haokip propagated the ideology of Zale’n-gam as the means to unite the erstwhile ancestral domain of the Kukis prior to the British rule and restore the Kuki nation Zale’n-gam. It encapsulates and expounds the essence of Kuki history and nationalism and the restoration of the erstwhile Kuki territory in the pre-colonial period.  “There has been a desire to unify all the Kuki inhabited areas into a single administrative unit.  Currently, their demand is for a separate homeland/Kukiland within the framework of the Constitution.  However, Kipgen highlights that despite the Kukis’ search for Zale’n-gam beyond the Meitei kingdom of Kangleipak (Manipur), the two communities have coexisted peacefully for time immemorial and did not interfere in each other’s internal affairs, even offering help in the face of common enemies.  An example of this amity was noted in 1810 when the then Meitei King Chourajit sought help from Kukis to fight the Burmese army. Historians also state that Kuki chiefs supplied irregulars to guard the Meitei Maharajah and his Kingdom which was resisting the merger agreement on the eve of Manipur’s annexation to India in 1949 when the kingdom was merged with the Indian Union.

 Political scenario of Manipur after India’s Independence

Recent Meitei march in Imphal

Manipur had ceased to be an independent kingdom in 1891 when Britain took it over after its victory in the Anglo-Manipur War. The assassination of British officials led to the Battle of Khongjom, officially commemorated by the state on 23^rd of April every year.  Another tragedy related  to  the  conflict,  celebrated annually  as  Patriots’  Day,  is  the  public  hanging  in  Imphal  of  two prominent  combatants,  Thangal  General  and  Tikendrajit  Yuvaraj  on August 13, 1891.  The  loss  of  the  state  to  Britain  was  acknowledged  as  part  of British India’s expansion to defend its eastern borders, which inevitably resulted in the loss of Manipur’s independence. As Britain did not annex the Kingdom, but Manipur became another indigenous State  with  administrative  and  political  sovereignty  vested  in  the Maharaja, but  restricted to  the Valley, and  Britain overseeing  the outer Hill  districts  populated  by  tribal  people.  The  presence  of  a  British resident  in  Imphal  emphasized  the ‘independent’  kingdom’s  sub-ordinate position even more.  British deepened the divide between the hills and the valley, as per their doctrine of ‘divide and rule’, which is more or less a source of conflict in recent times. Manipur has had a chequered political history.

 In 1946, Irabot and Longjam Bimol established the Praja  Sangh  political party to achieve  an  independent Manipur.  Their  goal  entailed  the creation  of  a parliament,  constitution  and  a  cabinet replacing  the  monarchy in which  the  people’s  representatives  would  govern  the  state  based  on socialist principles.  These ideals faced  opposition from individuals  who went  on  to  form  the  Manipur  Congress,  a  political  party  that  had  no affiliation with  the Indian National  Congress. In 1947, a constitution- making committee, chaired by F.F.  Pearson, President of the Manipur State Durbar, drafted the Manipur Constitution.

           Following India’s independence from British rule in 1947, India’s first Home  Minister, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, initiated the  integration of  more  than  six  hundred  princely  kingdoms  into  the  newly  formed Indian Union.  The process of assimilating these incongruent states was lengthy. After India gained its independence, Akbar Hydari, the Governor of Assam at the time, visited Manipur to  evaluate the political situation and  examine  the  possibility  of  Manipur  becoming  a  part  of  India. Hydari’s visit provided the central government insights into the views of both the Maharaja and the people of Manipur, which helped the Indian government in its decision-making process.

       In September 1949, Maharaja Bodh Chandra Singh was invited by Akbar Hydari to Shillong for discussions on integration. On the first day of  the  conference,  Hydari  presented  the  Maharaja  with  a  pre-written ‘Merger  Agreement,’  which  stipulated the  integration  of  Manipur  into the Indian Union. The Maharaja insisted that the deal could not be signed without consulting the Council of Ministers.  Despite his offer of consultations, the Maharaja was placed under house arrest and barred from communicating with anyone outside.  Consequently, on September 21, 1949, the Maharaja was coerced into signing the ‘Merger Agreement’ with India. The newly formed Indian government in New Delhi dismissed the then  elected Manipur  government, and pressed Maharaja  Bodh Chandra  to  sign  a  merger  agreement  on  that  day.  The Assembly was dissolved, and Manipur was reduced to a ‘Part-C state,’ and designated as a Chief Commissioner’s Province on October 15, 1949.  At this time Manipur’s Kuki leaders, rejected the Manipur Merger Agreement, believing it compromised the geographical integrity of the Kukis.

         An  Advisory  Council  was  formed  in  1950  to  make recommendations  on  the  State’s  management  and  Manipur  was designated as a Union Territory on November 1, 1955. It was replaced by a Territorial Council of thirty elected and two nominated members in 1957.  Despite lacking functional  power, the  Government of  Union Territories Act  of  1963  created  a  Legislative  Assembly  of  thirty  elected  and  three nominated  members.  The  top  executive  was  appointed  at  the  rank  of Lieutenant Governor  on December 19,  1969.  Following lengthy protests in Manipur and elsewhere in India, Manipur was granted full statehood on January 21, 1972, and the same year witnessed the first state elections held under Indian sovereignty.

             This merger of the State with India in 1949 nevertheless led to a wider gulf between the hill dwellers and the plains men.  Under this new system, various hill areas under the British administration became a ‘Scheduled Area’ and the Acts forbid the plain peoples (Meiteis) to settle in tribal areas/the hilly region. This clearly alienates the Meiteis and the tribals (the Nagas and the Kukis), Kipgen adds.  Over the past decades the Kuki identity, however, has also undergone changes with several Kuki groups claiming tribalistic self-assertion. The Hmars, an old Kuki tribe, claim to identify neither as Naga nor Kuki while some other Kuki tribes like the Anal and the Monsang, are assimilating Naga identity.  These shifts, however, now bears the effect of the ongoing violence between Kukis and Meiteis in Manipur, which has put the Kuki identity at the center of controversy and further complicated Kuki identity as it fights a violent battle for legitimacy against the dominant majority of the land.

         There was a spate of insurgency related incidents, fueled specifically by the Kuki militant organizations, as  a  result  of  the  violence  in  Manipur,  successive  Indian governments  have  resorted  to  strong  measures  to  maintain  order, including declaring the  entire state a ‘Disturbed Area,’  and authorizing the  implementation  of  the  Armed  Forces  Special  Powers  Act  (AFSPA).  The  AFSPA is  designed to  grant special  powers  to the  Armed Forces  in counter insurgency  and  terrorist  operations  when  other  forces  fail  to control  the  situation.  The  law  allows  the  armed  forces  to  conduct proactive  operations  against  insurgents in  hostile  environments. While the  AFSPA  is  applicable  only  in  the  Disturbed  Areas,  the  authority  to declare an area as such rests with the central and state governments.  Recent actions by the Manipur government have heightened tensions and exacerbated the  Kuki  community’s  sense of  discrimination  and  insecurity,  such  as the temporary suspension of the Free Movement Regime (FMR) that had been activated by India and Myanmar in January 2018 to allow movement of  villagers living  along  their 1,643  km-long  border.  The suspension was  extended in  November 2022  because  it was  believed  that the  FMR may  lead to  further increase  in  the illegal  entry of  Myanmar  nationals into India  in view  of the political  turmoil in Myanmar.  The FMR allows tribes living along the border to travel 16 km across either side of the border without visa restrictions.  There are over 250 villages with more than 300,000 people living within 10 km. of the border who frequently cross the border through 150 small and large formal and informal border crossings.  Moreover, the Kukis feel discriminated against due to the decision of the Government to suspend this free passage eviction drives.  The  Kukis  perceive  these  actions  as  targeting  their community, particularly the  Chin-Kuki tribe,  although the government claims  that  the  measures had  affected  various  communities, including the  Meiteis.

How insurgency affected Manipur in the past

However, the story of Manipur insurgency and AFSPA would be incomplete without mention of the role of Irom Chanu Sharmila.  The Government at the center (i.e. Government of India) during the past were not very much concerned with the affairs of the States of north east India, as a result, wherever there was any armed insurgency related issues, the response was always a knee-jerk reaction, by responding with the magnitude of armed response that was commensurate with the gravity of the situation i.e. deployment of CRPF or Assam Rifles or Armed forces and promulgation of AFSPA etc., as the case maybe.  A simple search in respect of such incidents in all the north eastern states be it Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Tripura or Nagaland, will reflect unnecessary use of force by the central government on many occasions. 

Irom Chanu Sharmila - a lone crusader in Manipur

   Due to long standing insurgency, the AFSPA was in force in Manipur since.  There were two major armed insurgent groups of Kuki militants operating both from within and outside India in Manipur and the main militant groups were the NSCN-IM (that entered a ceasefire agreement with India in 1997), Kuki National Organization (KNO) and the United People’s Front (UPF) that had entered into an agreement for ‘Suspension of Operation’ (SoO) with the GoI way back on 22^nd August, 2008.  The oldest armed insurgent group of Manipur was the United National Liberation Front (UNLF) that has been operating in the State since 1964 and the other major militant groups affiliated with the Meitei’s and were largely Meitei backed were the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), People’s Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak (PREPAK), Kangleipak Communist Party (KCP) and Kanglei Yawol Kanna Lup (KYKL), but they had stayed clear of any negotiation with GoI till they signed a deal in November, 2023.  However, despite the various agreements between the militant groups and Government of India (GoI), AFSPA continued in Manipur and several incidents of uncalled for Civil Rights violation had been documented and demonstrations and protests lodged by people of Manipur against such atrocities from time to time.  Amongst them the role of Irom Chanu Sharmila, who launched a non-violent agitation against imposition of AFSPA is a chapter from Manipur history that cannot be overlooked.  On November 5, 2000, a frail young woman from Manipur quietly sat on a hunger strike at Malom, near the site where three days earlier 10 civilians were shot dead while waiting at a bus stand by Indian paramilitary forces. Irom Chanu Sharmila had resolved to fast until the draconian Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, (AFSPA), was repealed by the Central government.

            In that dignified, peaceful protest that lasted 16 years — considered the world’s longest hunger strike – a most unlikely icon of 21st century India was born. Not only did Irom Sharmila become a symbol of non-violent resistance against the brute force of the establishment and armed forces, she also assumed the stature of an incorruptible, uncompromising martyr for the people of not just Manipur, but all the States where AFSPA was imposed. From a normal, life-loving, gentle young woman, Irom Sharmila became the “Iron Lady of Manipur”; she was also “Mengoubi”, or the “Fair One”.  Despite her political foray turning out to be a disastrous one, yet her contribution for Manipur is singular and praise worthy.

Conclusion - What is my take on the Manipur scenario

Houses were set ablaze in Torbung area of Churachandpur in Manipur on May 4,  2023

            It is evident from the above narration that the militancy has been part and parcel of Manipur’s past.  Now the question is what has prompted this sudden flare-up in the State.  Whereas, there are several theories afloat namely –

a)      It is an ethnic cleansing activity and Hindu Meitei’s are trying to marginalize the Christian Kuki’s;

b)     Is it a conflict related to the grant of ST status to the Meitei?

c)      It is a conflict being fueled by foreign elements; and

d)     Is it a fight against foreign influx and drugs related issue?

There are a plethora of articles touting several such theories is floating the internet and some of it is definitely lopsided presentation.   Anti-India and Misinformation propaganda spreaders accounts from different countries mainly from Pakistan and Gulf are setting up their fake narrative against India as usual by giving it a religious clash angle amongst the Hindu Meitei and Kuki predominantly protestant Christians.

           At present the Government of India has exercised its powers under provisions of Article 371C that came into existence by the 27th amendment of the Constitution of India in 1971. This article deals with the Special Provision with Respect to the State of Manipur. This article authorizes the President to provide for the creation of a committee of Manipur Legislative Assembly consisting of members elected from hill areas of the state. The central government can give directions to the state government as to the administration of Hill Areas.  Accordingly, central forces including Assam Rifles have been deployed to maintain peace and order in the State, which is now being opposed by the Meitei groups stating that the policing by them have remained ineffective so far as it has failed to stop the violence and act as mere spectators.  However, there are counter claims that the local police would be playing a more partisan role i.e. Meitei’s police personnel helping their side and Kuki’s police personnel their side.  Whereas, the militant side of Kuki people is historically manifest, but the present allegations that are being levelled by the Meitei are that Kukis are inducting fresh armed insurgents from Myanmar using the 16 Km. corridor for establishing their superiority in hill tracts and to continue with the lucrative drugs trade across the Myanmar border.  The Kuki’s feel that by allowing Meitei’s to settle in the hills, it would lead to degradation of culture, trade and seize advantage in their land.  Whereas, the Meitei’s alleged that the Kuki’s are inducting foreign groups, who are fueling and provoking he conflict.  On the other hand the Kuki people allege that a shadow militant group known as the ‘Arambai Tenggol’, which in Meitei language translates to “Warrior’s Blood” and was named after a weapon used by Manipuri kings (Arambai) is spearheading this movement, but there is no definitive proof of such an organization in Manipur officially existing as on date.  Another group that Kuki’s point out is the ‘Meitei Leepun’ was established in 2015. ‘Meitei Leepun’ currently has 14,000 members, who include senior citizens, women and children, professionals, businessmen, writers, and activists. There are 1,000 trained cadres among the 14,000 in total and that this group although touts for peace is actually inclined to unsettle the Kuki establishment and overrun their land.

             In my opinion, this cauldron of Manipur State was already simmering with mutual mistrust and ambition of Kuki’s to have a separate administrative control of their region despite being much lower in numbers as per population census i.e. 53% are Meitei and about 30% are Kuki, juxtaposed to it Meitei are boxed in 10% geographical area of Manipur and the Kuki have a hold on remaining 90%.  It is evident that the British, as per their policy of ‘divide and rule’ had made this administrative exercise willfully, but the successive Governments in India, failed to assert their administrative skills and address this issue.  Whereas, most of the people of North-eastern States have been designated as Scheduled Tribe’, but despite fulfilling all the criteria for being acknowledged as a Scheduled Tribe, the Meitei have been left out from the list.  Thus, the Meitei have a legitimate grudge and despite being persons having their origin in Manipur (as per details provided above), they have been denied permission to buy land in the hill tracts, as they are reserved for the Scheduled Tribe i.e. Kuki, Naga etc.  With the population implosion taking place in India, Manipur too has faced it, but Meitei population having being boxed within confines of Imphal valley, land has become a priced commodity and they cannot buy land elsewhere despite being there in their own ancestral land and despite having a bigger population enjoy only 10% of the geographical land area.  It is evident that the Kuki people of Manipur want to continue with their hold on the hill tracts and growing opium is a source of easy income for these largely poor tribal people, hence with the High Court order in 2023 seeking response of GoI regarding granting to Scheduled Tribe status, sparked off the long simmering under current that suddenly burst out like a volcano, in form of tribal conflict amongst the Kuki’s and Meitei’s on 3^rd May, 2023. 

            Although, now this conflict has assumed a larger proportion, with foreign countries like China adding fuel to the fire through the Myanmar Junta by supplying arms and ammunition.  Role of elements like the Pakistan ISI also cannot be ruled out, especially in view of the recent Bangladesh incident, as also the involvement of American deep state, including likes of Mr. George Soros cannot be ruled out as in September, 2023 a Christian organization during 54^th session of the UN Human Rights Council held a panel discussion and berated India for Human Rights violation and terming the conflict as ethnic cleansing of Christians.  The interference of foreign elements is thus fudging the original reason of conflict, which in my opinion stems from the fact that it is basically a fight for land that has become a scarce commodity for the Meitei population because of faulty practices of the Government of India in the decades upto 2020s and this simmering conflict of interest between the Meitei population and Kuki population has come to a point eruption between the two communities, each one trying to protect its own interest and land holdings and there is no religious basis in this fight as is being touted.

© S. Roy Biswas

*Most of the photographs have been sourced from the internet to provide a representative image of the incidents/narrations;

**Articles have been sourced for study and to research for the article and detailed in the Bibliography below; and

***This is my independent opinion and not articulated to favor or disfavor any organization or person or persons or association of persons

 Bibliography –

1.      Manipur: Kuki History Struggles To Break Out Of Colonial Tropes And Majoritarianism - https://www.outlookindia.com/national/manipur-kuki-history-struggles-to-break-out-of-colonial-tropes-and-majoritarianism-news-313949

2.      History of Manipur - https://manipuri.org/index.php/history

3.      When did Kukis reach Manipur and how the past is shaping the state's present - https://www.indiatoday.in/history-of-it/story/manipur-violence-when-did-kukis-reach-manipur-and-how-past-is-shaping-states-present-2416215-2023-08-04

4.      2000: Irom Sharmila begins fast for repeal of AFSPA - https://frontline.thehindu.com/the-nation/india-at-75-epochal-moments-2000-irom-sharmila-begins-fast-for-repeal-of-afspa/article65720016.ece

5.      IROM CHANU SHARMILA-AN ICON OF NON-VIOLENT RESISTANCE - https://ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in/wsp15/chapter/irom-chanu-sharmila-an-icon-of-non-violent-resistance/

6.      Manipur’s oldest valley-based insurgent group, banned by MHA, signs peace deal with govt, gives up arms - https://theprint.in/india/manipurs-oldest-valley-based-insurgent-group-banned-by-mha-signs-peace-deal-with-govt-gives-up-arms/1864292/

7.      Opinion: Why Manipur Has Hit Rock Bottom Of Distrust - https://www.ndtv.com/opinion/why-manipur-has-hit-rock-bottom-of-distrust-4129776

8.      Origin of Meitei people - https://northeastindiawiki.wordpress.com/2020/07/04/origin-of-meitei-people/

9.      The Manipur Conflict: Internal Discontent, Policy Gaps, and Regional Implications - https://thediplomat.com/2024/07/the-manipur-conflict-internal-discontent-policy-gaps-and-regional-implications/

10.  What is really behind the violence in Manipur? - https://frontline.thehindu.com/news/what-is-really-behind-the-violence-in-manipur/article66820969.ece  

11.  Huge Row Over World Evangelical Alliance's Geneva Event On Manipur Violence - https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/huge-row-over-world-evangelical-alliances-geneva-event-on-manipur-violence-4408505

 

Two years of Ukraine war – a general analysis of the scenario

 

Two years of Ukraine war – a general analysis of the scenario

As the Russian tanks roll into Ukraine in Feb., 2022

            The war between Ukraine and Russia erupted on 24^th February, 2022 and after initial Russian breakthrough that was followed by a counter offensive by Ukraine in August, 2022 whereby they had been able to take a chunk of their land back from Russian occupation, it had almost reached a stalemate over the past two years.  Both the concerned were making claims and counter-claims of inflicting heavy damage to the other.  However, the recent news of the fall of region of Avdiivka to Russian forces (may check the news at – https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68322527) has again rekindled the debate about the future of the Ukraine war.  The reasons as to why Russians invaded Ukraine has been portrayed in a lopsided manner by the Western media since the war erupted and a balanced view of the origin of conflict has been missing and hence I have tried to put a narrative based on facts and figures, as an unbiased third party view of the conflict.

Map of erstwhile Soviet Union

Historical background

The Ukraine region has had a chequered history and was never under occupation of any specific group or category or class of persons, thus lacked an identity as an independent nation for a long time.  The Cossacks had played a major role in the region during medieval periods and subsequently Ukrainian lands fell under the rule of neighboring states – Lithuania and Poland. In the 16^th Century it merged into one of the largest and most powerful monarchies in Europe that was known as the Commonwealth. This state existed from the 16th to the end of the 18th century, gathering the territories of modern Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Latvia and western Russia.  However, historically the region has been divided into Russian dominated Eastern banks of Dnieper River and Poland and/or Lithuania dominated the Western banks over large periods of time.  The concept of Ukraine as an independent entity started only after the French Revolution and artists, play writers, poets etc. eulogizing Ukrainian identity and culture in 1840’s and slowly it gained momentum and was at center stage of Ukrainian identity and ideology from 1905 to 1917.

Countries formed after breakdown of Soviet Union in 1991

             The advent of the First World War created a state of flux in entire Europe and Ukraine was also drawn into this vortex.  Although Ukraine enjoyed some kind of autonomy as an independent entity from 1917 to 1922, but it was short lived.  Just after the culmination of World War-I, the Russian revolution had taken place and the Czar was replaced as head of Russia and a Communist regime was ushered in Russia under Vladimir Lenin in 1917.  Thereafter, it was led by Joseph Stalin (1922-1952) who consolidated the position and defeated the Polish forces and entered into peace treaty with Poland in 1921 and effectively took complete control over Ukraine.  Although there were some signs of discontent amongst the Ukrainians, but after declaration of Constitution of USSR on 30^th December, 1922 and the consolidation of the Russian hold upon Ukraine between 1922-1930, albeit by allowing small language and governance related relaxations.  Thereafter, the Second World War broke in 1939 and during the fight between Russian and German forces in 1941, the Ukrainian soldiers deserted their posts in support of invading German army and capitulated their posts, allowing free German army an almost free run through Ukrainian regions.  In response, as the German army halted in the Kyiv region for further consolidation, the Russian army launched the ‘scorched earth’ strategy, whereby it burnt down all industrial units, food stocks and infrastructure to slow down the German advance.  The German army lost the war in late 1943 and after their retreat, the Russians stung by the Ukrainian back stabbing, consolidated the political and economical hold over Ukraine by October, 1944 bringing it under total Soviet rule.  However, after the era of Stalin, the next leader to head Soviet Union i.e. Nikita Khrushchev relaxed the strangle hold on Ukraine to some extent and as a gesture of goodwill gave Crimea to Ukraine to strengthen the brotherhood between the two States.  Ukraine continued under Soviet occupation till its disintegration in 1990 and Ukraine declared itself as independent nation in 1991.  Therefore, from the historical perspective Ukraine has never been a sovereign nation historically speaking and was an administrative State of erstwhile Soviet Union with Russian spearking regions (widely called as Donbas region) being made part of Ukraine only for administrative purposes, but Ukaraine at best has been a cauldron of many races mingling together and under occupation of varied nations during its past.

 Modern day Ukraine

            Initially, after gaining independence in 1991, Ukraine having been ruled by Russia for a very long time, continued its alliance with Russia, as their economies and infrastructure etc. were intertwined.  After World War-II, the post war development of industries and farms etc. were as per Soviet era design and five year plans and hence this dependence continued.  Even politically, a major part of Ukraine comprised of Russian speaking people, with certain regions having almost 1/3rd of such Russian speaking population and hence the Russian influence was palpable.  There were several Russia backed leaders governing Ukraine since 1991, however, in 2001 one Viktor Yanukovych who was said to be backed by Russia, lost the elections to the supporters of pro-West group.  During the elections held in 2004, he was again re-elected, but there was widespread protests termed as the ‘Orange Revolution’ that forced him out of power or rather he was not allowed to take the oath.  As the newly elected party could not come up to the expectations of the Ukrainians, Viktor Yanukovych was again legitimately elected in 2010.  He continued in office till 2013, but in beginning of 2014, as he did not agree for a pro-European Union referendum agenda, there were widespread protests (some allege that the same was perpetuated by the West & US) and the people wanted to throw out Viktor Yanukovych from his office.  Apparently, some form of agreement was signed between the contending parties on 21^st February, 2014 as is stated in the news report (link is - https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/21/280622904/breakthrough-ukrainian-president-announces-concessions ), whereby it was decided to hold fresh elections within six months, but on 24th February, 2014 a riotous crowed stormed the Parliament building and Viktor Yanukovych was forced to flee the country.  Russia then invaded Crimea, through indirect means, without direct military intervention by sending armed groups and thereafter, held a referendum whereby the population purportedly voted to be annexed with Russia.  Russia holds that since Crimea had been part of Russia and was gifted to Ukraine, with change in geo-political scenario it had the right to take back its territory and protect interests of its own people, the West differs from Russian point of view and has made it an international rallying point against Russia.

Areas of Ukraine under Russian occupation on 4th May, 2022

Areas under occupation of Russia as on 15th Feb., 2024

             In 2019, Ukraine elected their new President Volodymyr Zelensky, who won a landslide victory.  He had no political background or experience whatsoever, but he suited the strategy of West & United States, as any person with a higher political acumen would have made him/her think twice before jumping into any kind of direct war with Russia.  The evaluation/assessment of capabilities of Zelensky as President by the Western media can be gauged from the headline of the BBC post that read as – ‘Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky: The comedian president who is rising to the moment’ -  link is as follows - (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59667938).  Evidently, Zelensky has been led into a trap by the West, rather than Putin falling into one as is being portrayed by many Western media analysts.  It was a Hobson’s choice of Putin, as Russia needs to keep its borders neutral as far as possible, so as not to bleed militarily in future with Western (read NATO) forces breathing down its neck and in stark contrast Zelensky because of his lack of political acumen and poor academic background, has pushed Ukraine back to the pre- industrialization days in physical sense.

 Analysis – what United States & West wanted to gain at the expense of Ukraine

            The geo-political scenario is a complex game, Russia albeit temporarily was able to stabilize its eastern borders (with China), as both United States and China were engaged in a race for world supremacy.  Russia is also aware that China cannot be relied upon in the long run and hence is following the policy of ‘make hay while the sun shines’.  From the historical perspective, it is easy to perceive that United States had been the biggest beneficiary financially after World War-I and World War-II by selling its arms and ammunitions.   It is in continuous habit of raking up geo-political issues all across the globe and also war mongering.  This allows the United States to sell its armaments and thereby swelling its coffers after every such incident.  The coming together of China and USSR, was the biggest challenge after the cold war and after the Covid-19 outbreak, United States is no longer in a very firm financial standing.  On the other hand Russia was slowly, but steadily reaffirming its economic powers and one of its strongest source of economy was by selling gas and petroleum products alongwith electricity to European nations.  In order to drive a sledge in this economic boom for Russia that had helped Russia by executing the Nord Stream-I project, the first target of United States was the Nord Stream-II project, which was being built as an even bigger gas and petroleum products related pipe line for Europe from Russia.  In order to create the wedge in relations, it preyed upon the minds of European countries regarding the political fallback of a strong Russia in Europe and used the invasion of Crimea as one such example.  The geo-political games are never an overnight event, but rather one drawn and orchestrated across years, if not decades.  After, displacing the pro-Russian powers in Ukraine in 2014, the Americans continued training and building up arms reserves etc. in Ukraine clandestinely and continued to threaten the European countries with a Crimea like attack by Russia and at the same time kept looking for a political novice to get Russia involved in direct war.  United States found the comedian actor, who wanted to act like a ‘Superman’ on world stage in Zelensky and encouraged him to seek NATO membership as an irritant for Russia.  Either way, it would have spelt doom for Russia, had Putin ignored, NATO forces would have been at his door step and in case he wanted to protect Russian interests he had to have a buffer zone militarily and was forced to create one.  Since, as detailed above, the Eastern side of Ukraine have been under influence of Russian regimes since centuries and through back door intervention by United States et al, Ukrainian governments since 2014 have been trying to change the demographic set up of the region that had evoked political back lash, which had turned into a militant one, the Russian had an opportunity to have a buffer zone and hence attacked.

Ukrainian soldiers withdrawing from Avdiivka

    However, there was two pronged failure on part of Russia while assessing the situation.  Russia’s Generals over assessment of their military might had not made them see the ground realities, like the extent to which United States and its allies had trained the military of Ukraine and also established strongholds all across Ukraine.  Secondly, Russia committed the same blunder as Germany had done, by stretching its line of offence to such an extent, where it became so thin that it was very difficult to defend it and was subsequently breached by the Ukrainian forces by August, 2022.  Russia and China have now come up with an alternative to keep United States engaged elsewhere in the world geo-political scenario and with help of Iran, it has orchestrated an attack on Israel, which has got the desired result for Russia, as that area is more important and strategic for United State.  Ukraine has thus, lost its military supply support and is left fighting Russia in its own backyard, which was never going to be easy, even for bigger military formations, what to say about a minnow like Ukraine, which was just but fighting a proxy battle on behest of the Western interests albeit to the detriment to its own interests.  Ukraine has now been pulverized beyond recognition and it will take decades, if not a century, to reach its former glory, if it ever does.  Why I am drawing this bleak scenario is because of the current geo-political scenario, as most of the world’s leading economies are in shambles after the Covid-19 pandemic and hence are not in a position to continue with sustain military aid etc. to Ukraine.  Therefore, the fall of region of Avdiivka to Russian forces may be the beginning of the end of Ukraine (may check the news at – https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68322527). My take is that although Russia will never annex Ukraine fully, but will keep a major portion, especially the Eastern region as a buffer region with the West.  Further, the post-war resurrection of Ukraine would be allowed at a deliberate slow pace by Russia and as Ukraine has been reduced from the status of a developed nation to almost to a status of a developing nation, it will find its way back to former glory, a long and arduous task.  All this has happened because of fool hardiness of a political novice and ill-informed politician, who also does not boast of a very high academic IQ, the comedian has actually performed a ‘Comedy of errors’, at the cost of his own population.  I say so because the extent of damage caused to the civilian and military establishment can be seen through this photo feature article that appeared in CNN publication – (https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2022/05/world/ukraine-war-photographers-cnnphotos/). 

© S Roy Biswas

 N.B – All the photographs, maps, video links have been sourced from the internet – as the article is for free academic use, specific permissions have not been solicited