The gorgeous state of Manipur in northeastern India is currently experiencing a protracted and upsetting conflict between the Kukis and the Meiteis due to ethnic violence. The amount of violence, deaths, and injuries caused by this battle is astonishing.
Mass displacement, too. A violent turn in what was supposed to be a tribal solidarity march set off a series of events that revealed deeper divisions inside the state. This article seeks to clarify the complicated issues at the heart of the violence in Manipur, which appear to have their origins in the traditional division between “state” and “non-state” groups.
The Conflict and Its Mortal Price
Devastating effects have resulted from the continuous conflict between the Kukis and Meiteis. According to conservative estimates, almost 80 lives have been lost, leaving behind devastated families. Additionally, over 40,000 individuals have been forcibly removed from their homes, and many of them are unable to return to the once-vibrant neighborhoods where they once lived. The troubling fact is that no Meiteis can be found in Churachandpur or other Kuki-dominated areas, while all Kukis have been forcibly driven out of Imphal, the country’s capital.
Increasing Disagreements and Mistrust
The dispute has shown a chasm of mistrust, rage, and even hatred between the two ethnic groups in addition to the immediate bloodshed. The Meiteis’ demand for Scheduled Tribe (ST) designation appears to be what started this conflict. In spite of making up around 60% of Manipur’s population, the Meiteis are currently restricted to just 10% of the state’s land area. The remaining areas, which include the hill districts, are home to several indigenous groups, primarily the Kukis and Nagas.
State vs. Non-State in the Conflict
A more thorough examination of the situation reveals that there are more at stake in the Manipur conflict than merely ethnic tensions. It is entwined with the historical distinction between “state” and “non-state,” which has effects on governance, society, and agriculture.
In his book “The Art of Not Being Governed,” anthropologist James C. Scott demonstrates how the idea of “surplus” is crucial to comprehending this split.
