Understanding political conflict & symptomatic
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: January 09 2016 -

One may call it skirmishes or random armed confrontation as witnessed between Grihang and Bungpa Khunou villages of Ukhrul district in the night of January 5.

No doubt militancy has receded considerably since the past four/five years in Manipur but the core issue remains unresolved and it is very much alive.

Since the late 1970’s Manipur has been embroiled in bitter armed conflicts between State forces and non-State forces, and thousands of people have been killed.

The armed conflict is a manifestation of a political conflict and this much has been accepted by both the parties.

Yet, many tend to read the insurgency issue of the entire North East region as an outcome of economic underdevelopment.

This is fraught with danger. To some extent, underdevelopment or socio-economic deprivation might have contributed to the unrest seen in different parts of the region since many decades back.

True, some conflicts have their roots in these socio-economic reasons. But attributing all conflicts seen in the region to socio-economic reasons would be too naive.

Conflicts as seen in the region can be divided into two broad categories; conflicts at the level of different communities or ethnic groups, and armed conflicts between rebel groups and the Indian State.

To be frank, the second category of conflict is highly political in spirit, character and their ultimate objectives. Secessionist is the term applied to them by the State.

Whether it is secessionism or not, these movements and the resultant conflicts are very much political to the core.

The first category of conflicts may be resolved by identifying and addressing the socio-economic factors fuelling the same conflicts.

But we are afraid that socio-economic upliftment measures would not be enough to resolve the second category of conflicts.

For instance, look at NSCN-IM which is under a dialogue process with the Government of India.

Its demands or rather objectives are all political, and all socio-economic aspirations are always kept subsidiary or secondary to the political goal.

Same is the case with many other rebel groups operating in different States of the region. Armed conflicts between State and rebel groups also breed many subsidiary conflicts which often slug out at the community level.

Until and unless the second category of conflicts is resolved, the first category would re-surface again and again even if the State can resolve them somehow.

In order to resolve the second category of conflicts, the State must first identify the core issues.

Rather than adopting a policy of appeasement through financial packages and/or economic upliftment measures, all the appropriate steps of conflict management, conflict transformation and conflict resolution should be followed in dealing with the second category of conflicts.

All these processes should be preceded by a sincere exercise to identify what constitutes the core of the insurgency movements in the North East region.

This is not to be confused with the everyday forms of issues, such as unavailability of water and electricity, lack of infrastructure, absence of healthcare facilities, unemployment, underdevelopment etc.

These are, nonetheless, important but without treating the core, the other multiple issues even if somehow resolved would resurface sooner rather than later.

The State should not commit the blunder of reading the conflict situation as entirely socio-economic issue.

At the same time, engagement at the political level with all agencies of conflicts, armed or unarmed, is crucial if the State is sincere enough to bring about lasting peace and usher in meaningful development in the region.