The agonizing reality of our country's veteran elites : The unattainable hypotheticals

Birendra Laishram *

Articulating solutions is far simpler than implementing them in practice. The turmoil that erupted in Manipur initially ignited within a particular community on May 3, 2023, has since emerged as a focal point for writers and journalists across the globe. While some possess a thorough understanding of the complexities of the situation, others are significantly uninformed, lacking even the most essential insights about the region.

The wide array of viewpoints they present offers scant guidance or reassurance to the innocent civilians who are grappling with a harsh new reality, one in which the sixty thousand homeless lives never envisioned being engulfed in a conflict devoid of essential resources like food, shelter, or the means to defend themselves.

Numerous so-called think tanks and intellectuals propose various options purportedly designed to restore normalcy to the State, but a careful analysis of their contributions reveals that their writings often reflect their frustrations rather than providing substantial solutions.

The Society to Harmonize Aspiration for Responsible Engagement (SHARE) published an analytical report on November 30, 2024, focusing on the ongoing ethnic conflict in Manipur. The report urged a temporary freeze on contentious issues like the National Register of Citizens (NRC), Scheduled Tribe (ST) status for Meiteis, and eviction drives in the hill districts to allow for a peaceful resolution.

SHARE noted that these issues have significantly fuelled the violence in Manipur, which has claimed over 250 lives, caused numerous injuries, and displaced around 60,000 people. The think tank, comprising retired senior civil and military administrators, suggested reversing the actions of the State and Central Government and rolling back community demands. However, these suggestions are deemed impractical and unfeasible axioms.

Their arguments hinge on the belief that without the presence of firearms, violence will cease, and that if community leaders can come together to agree on a cessation of hostilities, peace will necessarily follow.

They assert that if trust is rebuilt step by step, if there were changes in the Chief Minister’s Office, if the Prime Minister were to pay a visit, and if communities were to show one another respect, then serenity would ensue. However, these “ifs” are nothing more than idealistic conjectures, completely overlooking the lived experiences of those who are in constant turmoil.

Amid this cacophony of calls for reconciliation from those in elite circles, the sobering reality that plays out on the ground tells a very different story. The anguish reverberating throughout Manipur is not merely an analytical backdrop for scholarly debate; it signifies a community wrestling with a profound crisis.

While analysts engage in discussions surrounding policies, ordinary people are confronted daily with persistent feelings of fear, hunger, and hopelessness. The lofty proposals put forth by the elites remain distanced from the bitter realities faced by these individuals in their everyday lives.

Let us pause to reflect on the plight of the mothers who anxiously cling to their children, all the while dreading the next eruption of conflict, or the farmers whose crops stand unhar-vested, left to wither in the face of uncertainty.

The citizens of Manipur are compelled to shoulder the weight of these theoretical analyses while the analysts themselves often overlook the deep emotional currents and historical contexts that tie these communities together — bonds that cannot simply be severed by eloquent declarations or lofty promises.

It is essential to actively challenge the prevailing narrative that seeks to absolve the elites from any direct responsibility for the ongoing strife. Their analyses, which often appear to be detached from the pressing realities on the ground, lack the necessary empathy that is crucial for genuinely addressing the overwhelming devastation experienced by the people.

The grand ideas they propose frequently disregard the complex ethnic divides, historical grievances, and deeply ingrained resentments that cannot be easily ameliorated by simplistic rhetoric or mere changes in leadership.

If those in elite positions were to grasp even a fraction of the immense suffering that civilians face daily, they might begin to advocate for meaningful engagement that truly incorporates the voices of those who are in the thick of adversity, rather than imposing their own narratives from afar.

It is imperative for them to develop the humility required to listen earnestly and acknowledge that the path toward reconciliation demands not just dialogue, but also authentic acts of humanity that focus on healing rather than solely rehashing past grievances.

Indeed, it may be straightforward to articulate such sentiments—nevertheless, the elites must remember that achieving genuine change requires them to step beyond the sterile confines of their polished reports and truly grasp the lives of the individuals they claim to aim to assist.

Without this transformative shift in perspective, the relentless cycle of conflict is destined to endure, and the voices of the innocent will continue to be stifled by superficial analyses that lack depth.

The true challenge rests in transcending theoretical ideologies and immersing oneself fully in the lived experiences of those affected — only then can the possibility of a brighter, more unified future for Manipur emerge from the shadows of despair and turmoil that currently envelop the region.

A concerted effort to bridge the gap between theory and reality is not simply beneficial, but indeed vital for the restoration of harmony and hope for the resilient people of Manipur.

I find myself hesitating to recommend specific solutions for achieving lasting peace in a State that is deeply troubled and burdened by the presence of armed militants. These militants often operate with the tacit support of Central and State authorities and certain politicians, all of whom may prioritize profit over the welfare of the populace.

The financial resources necessary to maintain a militant lifestyle are not insignificant; they require substantial funding. In insurgent-affected regions, looting financial institutions and extorting ransoms from both politicians and businesses have unfortunately become routine practices.

To avoid these practices, it appears that, in a bid to protect the Government and its officials, there exists a silent yet pervasive policy of turning a blind eye to the various crimes committed by these insurgents. Such crimes include looting, engaging in illegal taxation, drug trafficking, and the trade of arms, most of which occur with minimal intervention from authorities.

Furthermore, the public statements and positions taken by Government officials seem heavily influenced, if not outright dictated, by these armed groups, reducing the credibility of the Government in the eyes of the citizens. It is noteworthy that even an ordinary civilian, who is directly affected by the conditions on the ground, can discern viable ways to establish peace within the State.

This understanding comes without the need for impractical suggestions from so-called think tanks, which often operate in an abstract realm detached from the real experiences of those living in conflict zones. The insights of everyday citizens, rooted in their lived experiences, may well hold the key to fostering a more stable and peaceful environment.