'The Manipur Conflict Is A Clash Of Multiple Nationalisms' | Samrat Choudhury Interview

I see it as a clash of multiple nationalisms. There is Manipuri, meaning Meitei, nationalism. This has, behind it, the idea and image of an ancient princely state whose origins date back to 33 A D. There is great pride attached to this legacy. The pride is tied to the territorial boundaries of the present state of Manipur. Therefore, any diminishing of the size or authority of the Manipur state over any part of this territory is anathema to the Manipuri nationalists.

Then there are the Kuki-Zo nationalisms, in the plural, with which the Meitei Manipuri nationalism has come into conflict. The different but related Kuki-Zo nationalisms have long had a dream of a separate administration of some sort for the areas in which they are dominant, which includes large parts of the hills of Manipur.

Third, there is Naga nationalism, which is part of the larger Naga separatist struggle for independence from India. This has been around since 1947 and it is still an unresolved issue—the peace talks between the Indian government and the NSCN(IM), which started in 1997, are still going on. The chief of the NSCN(IM) Thuingaleng Muivah himself is from Ukhrul in Manipur, and the Naga maps of their territories overlap with those of the Kuki-Zo groups. There is also Indian nationalism.

In Manipur, it is a three-way struggle between three contending nationalisms, each seeking something that they can only get at the expense of the other two, and each negotiating a space with Indian nationalism and with other nationalist forces of various kinds in Myanmar next door.

It is fundamental to what has been happening in Manipur since May 2023, since the issue is that Meitei groups and even the state government have been harbouring suspicions that a large number of Kuki-Zo people there are recent migrants from Myanmar. The Manipur assembly had already passed a resolution demanding a National Register of Citizens (NRC) exercise for the state in 2022. The question of migration from Myanmar has been hanging over the politics there like the issue of alleged migration from Bangladesh has been a constant presence in the politics of other parts of Northeast India.

They are extremely relevant. The fight between the Meitei and the Kuki-Zo groups reached a stalemate but if the Naga-armed outfits such as the NSCN(IM) enter the fray on one side, it could tip the balance. That is precisely what seems to be happening now in some areas along the Myanmar border.

Some people tried to give the Manipur situation a religious identity spin where Hindu Meiteis were contrasted with Christian Kukis, but the fact of the matter is that the Nagas and the Kukis both are tribals; both are Christians; but they have a long history of conflict.

The NSCN(IM) has been accused by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) of helping Meitei insurgent groups since the present conflict started, while the group itself has claimed to have clashed of late with the Kuki National Army. So they do seem to be entering the fight against their fellow tribals and fellow Christians because this is not a religious conflict.

I had submitted my final manuscript long before the trouble broke out. I wrote those words because I could see that none of the larger issues had been solved and all of them were bubbling beneath the surface. The Naga issue, which is very significant for Manipur, was unresolved. The territorial disputes between the Naga and the Kuki groups were already there. The demand for NRC was already there. As was the Meitei demand for Scheduled Tribe status. Basically, all the major factors that have since blown up into the present conflict were already present. One of these factors, the unresolved Naga issue, has not yet come fully into play, but if the situation continues to escalate, then that too will happen.

The greatest lesson of history from Northeast India is how the place has been plagued by ideas of nation and nationalism. The dictionary definition of nation is: “a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory”. This is extremely problematic in a part of the world where large bodies of people simply don’t inhabit neat blocks of territory where no other groups live. There are always other communities in everyone’s imagined homelands. The desire to have exclusive national homelands has caused endless strife in Northeast India. We must remember, from history, that a lot of these places were historically non-state spaces, part of what the scholar Willem van Schendel named “Zomia”. The advent of maps, censuses and borders as lines rather than zones has been very problematic here. Any search for a solution must start with the acceptance and realisation of the fact that those outdated ideas of nation will have to be jettisoned.

History also reminds us that India is the principal successor state to the British Indian Empire—and that Northeast India came into that empire following a war with Burma sparked off by a Burmese attack on Arakanese rebels in what is now Bangladesh. So, a solution that narrow-focuses on only one corner will miss the big picture.