Indo-Meetei conflict: A civilizational perspective
- Part II -

Rajendra Kshetri *

The Shillong Accord 1949.
Warning: These images CANNOT be reproduced in any form or size without written permission from the RKCS Gallery

The hallmark of a great civilization was/is its ability to preserve cultural tradition without a complete break with the past (Basham, 2001:4). Manipur preserves, down to the present day, a culture, a Mongoloid culture which is fully conscious of its own antiquity. Basham, in his eulogization of the ancient Indian civilization, listed India and China as having the oldest continuous cultural traditions in the world (ibid.4).

To this may we add the more-than-2000 years old civilization of Manipur whose ethos still run through arts and culture, sports and academia. This was/is something inimical to the apologists of ancient Indian civilization, particularly the political elite of the young independent India. The Mongoloid civilization of Manipur had never been undermined so blatantly and brazenly by any other outside force as was/is done by independent India.

Not even by the British during its 56 years of suzerainty over Manipur. A few historical episodes involving India and Manipur will drive home the point. First, of course, was the (in) famous Manipur Merger Agreement of 1949. The manner in which the Manipur Maharaja was intimidated and made to sign the agreement was nothing short of a racist treatment.

Who can forget Sardar Patel, Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister, enquiring Sri Prakasa, Governor of Assam, whether Menon, Secretary to the Ministry of State, “had not a Brigadier in Shillong” (Kshetri 2006:35). To this must be added the telegram sent by Sri Prakasa to Sardar Patel on 18th September, 1949, three days before signing the agreement.

The telegram has shown in no uncertain terms the racist intention of the Indian State that it would use brutal force, if necessary, to make the king sign the agreement. No less an act of State racism was the unceremonious dissolution on 15 October, 1949 of the duly and democratically elected Manipur Legislative Assembly. It was immaterial to the Indian State that the Manipur State Constitution Act 1947 was still in force.

As if this was not enough, Manipur was placed (read relegated) as a Part-C State, then a Union Territory (under the States Reorganization Act 1956) and finally, ah finally, a full-fledged State in 1972 [(under the North-Eastern Areas, (Reorganization) Act (LXXXI) of 1971)]. For the Meeteis, this was not progression but regression.

Not upgradation but relegation. These certainly were terrible blows to the people who were the first to exercise adult franchise in the country (Kshetri 2006:83). Was/is there any similar episode(s) in the history of mankind where a distinct race of more than two thousand years of civilization has been treated in so shabby a manner, in so humiliating a fashion and rendered into a mere labyrinth ?

Having accomplished the National mission of political integration of all the princely States (Manipur and Tripura being the last), the Indian State, since the late sixties, have spoken about “emotional integration”. The words have no meaning as a sense of alienation has already taken deep roots in the North-East. And the sixties witnessed the resurgence of Mongoloid culture in the North-East, particularly in Manipur.

The response of the Indian State (to the cultural resurgence of the Mongoloid people), typical as it was/is, was the imposition of the now-infamous Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958 and the subsequent ‘militarization’ of the region.

Being conscious of its global image as the largest democracy and lest it sends a wrong (read racist) message to the outside world, the process of militarization was/is carried out under the garb of “security”, “integration”, “protecting civilian lives” and what not. So deftly and adroitly was the process executed that the Indian State was/is able to legitimize (for the benefit of the outside world) and conceal its real intent (read racist).

That it is sheer dehumanization of its own people is of no or little concern to the Indian State. That it negates the spirit of the Preamble to the Constitution is of little consideration and deserves no Constitutional debate(s). That the Indian State has, over the years, outgrown its Constitution is inconsequential.

Indeed, the great ancient civilization (read Aryan) and its child prodigy, the Indian State has become too powerful and strong to listen, let alone give in, to the massive human outcry/protest against militarization. After all, who cares for a few million Mongoloids in the land of one billion plus population of Aryans ? Not the Indian State by any tangible stretch of imagination.

The ‘couldn’t-care-less’ akin to ‘go to hell’ treatment of the Indian State towards the Meeteis (of Manipur) was more than evident in the ‘Bangkok Declaration’ of June 2001. Inked on 18th of the same month and same year, the Indo-Naga ceasefire agreement which contained the now-infamous three words “without territorial limit” was/is nothing short of sowing seeds for the disintegration of Manipur.

That the Government of India had to bite the dust and withdraw the controversial three words following the unprecedented mass uprising speaks volumes of the resolute determination of the Meeteis to protect the territorial integrity of Manipur. The ‘Great June 18 Uprising’ was/is a stern message, rather a chilling reminder to the GOI to NOT take the Meeteis for granted.

However, it soon became apparent that the Meetei message, though delivered, was/is not registered in the minds of ‘Delhi Chanakyas’, be it under the Congress and the BJP regimes. Three years after the ‘Bangkok Declaration’ and the subsequent June 18 uprising, the most barbaric and brutal act of raping/murdering Thangjam Monorama (by the Assam Rifles) happened on July 11, 2004.

This inhuman act of heinous crime led to the eruption of what could be termed as the most unprecedented hitherto unseen protest ever staged by womenfolk in the history of modern Manipur. It was on July 15, four days after the Monorama killing, of the same year that around forty women thronged at the main/western gate of Assam Rifles, threw down the gauntlet, taunted and challenged the Indian Army.

Twelve of them, shedding all their clothes, charged and staged the “Naked Protest” shouting “Indian Army, Take Our Flesh”, “Indian Army, Rape Us”. Once again, ‘Delhi Chanakyas’ (read India) had to bow down to the indomitable spirit of the Meetei Women who saw to it that Assam Rifles were withdrawn from Kangla Fort–the ancient sacred citadel of Meetei civilization. As later events would reveal, the Meeteis haven’t heard the last of the ‘Delhi Chanakyas’ though.

From July 2004 to May 2023. A pretty long time for public memory. But no, not for the ‘Delhi Chanakyas’ who had, all along those years, been scheming, plotting, devising to undermine/belittle the thousands years old Meetei civilization. Then came May Three Twenty Twenty Three. The Manipur Mayhem.

The Mayhem was not a bolt from the blue. It was/is a well-orchestrated, thought-out plan unleashed on the fateful day by forces inimical to the integrity/idea of Manipur. Time and time again, these forces have tried to undermine the historicity /historically-evolved State of Manipur and her existence as a geo-political entity/reality.

The fact that this ethnic based violence has continued, rather been allowed to continue, unabated for over fourteen months is enough of an evidence, if one is ever needed, to point fingers at the ‘Delhi Chanakyas’. Else, how on earth could one believe that an emerging global power like India is unable to contain or put an end to the violence. Delhi could but won’t for reasons best known to the Chanakyas.

No violence has ever lasted for so long a period anywhere else in the country, as it does in Manipur, in the history of post-independent India.

Why is Indian State not dealing the issue of cross-border narco-terrorism in Manipur with the same seriousness that it did/does with cross-border terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir ?

Why is ‘Bharat Sarkar’ allowing a handful of (illegal) Kuki militants to hold an integral part of India (read Manipur) and her people at ransom ?

Why are the Central security forces, the Assam Rifles in particular, deployed with the primary purpose of containing/stopping the violence, not behaving in an impartial manner ?

If the protracted violence is not another sly/veil attempt on the part of the ‘Delhi Chanakyas’ to deride/belittle the civilizational histories of the Meeteis, what is ? With each passing days and months, the hitherto invisible hands of ‘Delhi Chanakyas’ are now becoming less and less invisible.

What emerges from this year long violence is an unmistakable pattern that indicates that the violence-ridden conflict is more of a conflict between India and the Meeteis, than between the latter and the Kukis.

End Note

India is in deep crisis. The entire Manipur, to use a cliché, is a conflict (read war) zone. For the first time in seventy-four years of its existence as a Democratic Republic, the Indian State is facing its toughest challenge of grappling the conflict situation in Manipur. Unlike in the past, the present turmoil, the turbulence in India has not come from outside forces. It has come from within.

It has failed to respond positively to the cultural resurgence of the Mongoloid Meeteis. It has failed to take note of, let alone appreciate, the (cultural) “Renaissance” of Manipur valley in the fifties and sixties. Her borrowed idea of subjugation and assimilation (of another civilizational culture) have worked like borrowed ideas. Her archaic practices of dispatching troops (read armed forces) have worked like archaic actions.

Independent India is today bereft of any new idea. It has failed to rejuvenate the idea of all-India. Gandhi liberated India and Indians from the colonial york. But he left India without an ideology. Today, after 76 years of its independence, India is still searching (read groping) for an idea to de-alienate the feeling of alienation among the Mongoloid Meeteis.

The Indo-Meetei conflict has been described by many as “Socio-religious” and “Political” conflict. And rightly so. But I would like to contend that it is not merely political and socio-religious but more of a civilizational conflict. On the basis of what I have discussed in the foregoing pages I would like to term it as a conflict between two civilizations.

To put it in the often-quoted Huntingtonian phrase – “the clash of civilization”. Culture matters. More so civilizational culture. It is what defines one’s identity. When one’s identity is questioned, challenged and undermined, conflict/clash occurs.

When two civilizations clash/came into conflict, chaos and disorder follows. This is exactly what happened in Manipur in the seventeen and eighteen centuries. This is what happened and what is happening in Manipur vis-à-vis India since the late forties.

End of Conflict?

The Indo-Meetei conflict will not cease to exist as long as one civilization (read Aryan) questions, subjugates and undermines another civilization (read Mongoloid). The conflict will continue to exist till “this singular oasis of comparative civilization” is given/accommodated the recognition and appreciation it so richly deserves.

If the modern Indian State of 21st century is to come out of its self-created quagmire in Manipur, it needs to discard its age-old policy of putting/playing one ethnic group against another which in fact is nothing short of continuing the colonial policy of ‘divide and rule’. India talks of decolonizing colonialism but practices the same in Manipur (and the North-east).

India needs another freedom movement. Movement for freedom from parochialism and ethnocentrism. Only then will India have her “Indianness” without which the idea of India would be more akin to ‘the white tiger’.

India needs political leaders and statesmen, not political dealers, who could visualize and transcend beyond the narrow parochial paradigm of regionalism, fanaticism, casteism and ethnocentrism. Only then will it be possible/ meaningful for men of ideas to indulge in ‘imagining India’ to make ‘Bharat’ a ‘Vikshit Bharat’.

If Bharat, that is India, is to emerge as a ‘developed’ country by twenty forty-seven, as envisaged by the honourable Prime Minister Narendra Damodar Das Modi, Bharat has to establish a ‘New Order’ where there may flourish not one single civilization, but multiple civilizations. A New Order where every Indian, irrespective of race and region, is treated as citizen. Not as subject.