The violence in Manipur is escalating at an alarming rate. However, no one incident can explain the complexity of the situation. We need to see the whole picture, both from the security angle and the humanitarian picture. 

The Geneva-based Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) report stated that the violence in Manipur accounted for 97% of displacements in South Asia in 2023. 

Three years on, however, the threat of further displacement is imminent. 

Within the security establishment, there are important conversations on whether to treat Manipur as a hybrid ethnic-insurgency-border crisis, while some retired intelligence-linked commentators push much more expansive “proxy war” claims. 

We can say that the Indian intelligence and security agencies appear to look at Manipur through four overlapping frames:

Ethnic civil conflict that has revived insurgent networks

Border-security crisis linked to Myanmar

Arms, narcotics, extortion, and militia mobilisation problem

Possible foreign exploitation, especially through Myanmar-based

The intelligence-security establishment does not see Manipur as a simple communal riot anymore. It sees it as a hybrid internal-security crisis: ethnic violence plus old insurgencies, looted armouries, cross-border sanctuaries, narcotics routes.

The conversations around the “foreign hand” are important in a context but they cannot explain the very real internal divisions within Manipur. Foreign powers can play a serious role only if the internal situation is not brought under control and the people can live in a secure and peaceful atmosphere.

Having said this, in the present scenario the role of foreign interests becomes a factor that needs to be noted, though not over stressed. Especially, since Indian policies, or the lack of it have failed to resolve the Manipur crisis.

Former Army chief General M.M. Naravane said on national television way back  in July 2023 that the involvement of foreign agencies in Manipur “cannot be ruled out”, and specifically referred to Chinese aid to insurgent groups in Northeast as something that had existed for years. He also suggested that some actors may benefit from continued instability and may not want normalcy to return.

Over emphasis on the role of China may also be helpful to the camp of those who want to push India closer to Americans. Whereas those who point out that China has leveraged the developments in Myanmar to its advantage may be pointing towards the need to have a more nuanced foreign policy towards China so as not to allow the Northeast to become a theatre for proxy wars. 

In this context, Sanjib Baruah, an expert on the Northeast and an author of several books, says caution is important. When he was asked in 2023 what his views were over aspersions that China may have aided the emergence of trouble in Manipur, he replied:

“Even if there was a foreign adversary wanting to create trouble for India in this border state, I doubt that it could create the kind of crisis we have in Manipur today. The crisis is entirely of our own making. But fishing in the waters of your adversary when they are troubled is a staple of international intrigues and power politics. If any foreign development has a bearing on these events.”  

However, he adds, that after the February 2021 coup in Myanmar, the Chin state in western Myanmar has become a significant battleground between the junta and the forces of opposition bordering the Indian states of Manipur and Mizoram.

In September 2024, Manipur Security Adviser Kuldip Singh said there were intelligence inputs that more than 900 trained Kuki militants had entered Manipur from Myanmar to attack Meiteis. His statement was given at a press conference and it caused alarm across the state.

The Indian Express later reported, “In an unusual move, Manipur Security Advisor Kuldip Singh and Director General of Police Rajiv Singh issued a joint statement… stating that a recent intelligence input issued by the Chief Minister’s Office on ‘over 900 Kuki militants’ entering the state from Myanmar could not be substantiated on the ground.”

It seems that the “foreign hand” has become an excuse for not seeing the internal causes for the ongoing violence in Manipur. A person was arrested in Manipur in a case which the NIA alleged was related “to a transnational conspiracy by Myanmar and Bangladesh-based leadership of terror outfits to wage war against the Government of India by exploiting the current ethnic unrest in Manipur.”

There is no way of verifying the charges made by the NIA, and the public at large gets distracted believing there is some foreign conspiracy which is responsible for the crisis in Manipur. These cases and media reports then allow the government to communalise an already volatile situation. 

In this case, the accused belonged to one community, but all armed groups and certain NGOs have links with foreign forces whether it be through insurgent groups across the border, the church or NGOs backed by Israel or the West.

Foreign interventions

In the debates over foreign interventions, it is often the Myanmar refugees who have genuinely escaped from persecution, who become victims of repression in India. As a result, real issues fall into the background, unresolved. 

The Rohingyas, refugees from Myanmar, have become the biggest pawns of such international politics, and in India, it has been used to weaponise the issue of illegal migrants with Muslim background.

There has been a report in Russian media, Sputnik, that the American Central Intelligence Agency, or CIA, is involved in the violence in Manipur. The report quoted Manipur Police’s Inspector General of Police (Operations) I.K. Muivah’s statement that “forensic experts suspected a foreign role in high-tech drone attacks used by Kuki militants”. Further, he said that foreign involvement was also being probed into the use of long-range rockets.

Sputnik also reported that: “There is a growing sentiment in India that the covert US backing for Myanmar ethnic armed organisations (EAO), specifically the Christian groups, is a crucial factor fuelling insurgent attacks by various Kuki militants against civilians and security forces in Manipur, a northeastern state where ethnic violence between majority Meitei and minority Kuki-Zo tribes have left over 200 dead and displaced over 60,000 people since last May.”

Such reports can be misused by communal elements to instigate anti-Christian sentiment and therefore, each report has to be put in context and to ensure the ordinary people are separated from these insidious agents.

Intelligence agencies have played an overwhelming role in the Northeast, including Manipur. Ajit Lal, a retired IPS officer, former special director in the Intelligence Bureau, and former chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee at the National Security Council Secretariat has taken over from A.K. Misra as the MHA’s Northeast adviser.

A.K. Mishra, Lal’s predecessor, is also a former Intelligence Bureau officer and served as MHA’s Northeast adviser, engaging Kuki-Zo, Meitei civil society, MLAs, and SoO-related processes.

The role of these officers is what may be called “as intelligence-led political management: talks with armed groups, ceasefire rules, inter-ethnic negotiations, and insurgency containment.”

There are the intelligence officers belonging to Northeast and among them is John S. Shilshi, a retired Manipur-cadre IPS officer who later served in the Intelligence Bureau and the National Security Council Secretariat. 

Shilshi is a retired IPS officer of the Manipur cadre who served in Manipur from 1990 to 2000, led the civil police commando unit, later served in the Intelligence Bureau from December 2000 to February 2016, and then in the National Security Council Secretariat from April 2016 to March 2018. 

His book Vale of Tears: Untold Stories of Violence in Manipur (Blue Rose, 2020) is a first-hand account of violent incidents he handled as a police officer in Manipur during the 1990s. He is much more balanced than other security officers as he criticises Central Reserve Police Force conduct during the 1995 RIMS massacre, recounts an Army-police confrontation over custody of an NSCN-IM suspect, and questions why intelligence inputs and public threats during the Naga-Kuki violence did not lead to preventive action. 

What do all these experts of the security establishment say about Manipur?

What is the solution? 

Almost all of these men – yes, there are almost no women – lean primarily toward coercive security measures, or dialogue and community-led peacebuilding. This security-centric analysis marginalises or instrumentalises people’s agency.

If the people of Manipur, and not just the token representatives, are not involved in a meaningful way in finding a political solution, each security-centric intervention will make the situation even worse – it has already gone from ethnic clashes to a low intensity civil war to now becoming a hybrid war.  

At present, it is giving way for an ideal scenario for various foreign agencies to play their nefarious roles.   

It is of utmost importance that the rest of the country take serious interest in the situation in Manipur and the sufferings of the people of all communities.

Nandita Haksar is the author of Shooting the Sun: Why Manipur was Engulfed in Violence and the Government Remained Silent (Speaking Tiger, 2023).

© The Wire