Border Dilemmas : Balancing security and community in the India-Myanmar divide

Dipak Kurmi *

The ongoing tensions surrounding the India-Myanmar border have intensified recently, particularly in light of the opposition to the Government’s decision to implement border fencing and abolish the Free Movement Regime (FMR).

Among the most vocal opponents of this initiative are the Naga Insurgent Groups, particularly the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN-IM), who are currently engaged in peace negotiations with the Indian Government.

The discontent extends beyond militant groups; numerous civil society organizations across the North Eastern States of Manipur, Nagaland, and Mizoram have formally expressed their grievances, urging the Central Government to reconsider its approach. Both the State Governments of Mizoram and Nagaland have articulated their opposition, signaling a significant regional discontent with the proposed measures.

The backdrop to these developments is the violent ethnic conflict in Manipur, which has resulted in over 200 fatalities and displaced more than 60,000 individuals. In response to the escalating violence between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities, the Indian Government has deemed the fencing of the Indo-Myanmar border as a necessary security measure.

The fencing is part of a broader strategy aimed at curbing illegal immigration and insurgent activities, particularly in light of the substantial influx of refugees following the coup in Myanmar in February 2021. Reports suggest that the States of Mizoram and Manipur have seen an influx of approximately 60,000 and 5,000 refugees, respectively, exacerbating the already tense situation.

The Fencing Initiative: Rationale and Opposition

The Indian Government has made significant financial commitments to border security, allocating Rs 31,000 crore for the fencing project, which aims to cover a total of 1,643 kilometers of the India-Myanmar border, traversing multiple North Eastern States.

Union Home Minister Amit Shah announced the completion of 30 kilometers of fencing as part of a broader security strategy that includes the deployment of over 60,000 security personnel in Manipur alone. However, the rationale behind these measures has faced intense scrutiny and backlash.

In October 2023, villagers in Kamjong, a district in Manipur, mobilized to prevent officials from conducting surveys for the border fencing, threatening dire consequences should the inspections proceed. This act of defiance highlights the growing resentment among local communities who feel their rights to cross-border movement and trade are being compromised.

The abolition of the FMR, which previously allowed for the free movement of individuals within a 16-kilometer radius on either side of the border, has particularly incensed these communities, whose livelihoods depend on cross-border trade and familial connections.

The Complexity of Border Management

The decision to scrap the FMR and erect a fence along the border has raised critical questions regarding the efficacy of such measures in addressing the underlying issues of illegal immigration and insurgency. Critics, including military experts like Rahul K Bhonsle, argue that border fencing is a feasible strategy in more straightforward terrains, such as those found on the India-Pakistan and India-Bangladesh borders.

However, the hilly and dense jungles of the Indo-Myanmar border present unique challenges that make comprehensive fencing impractical. Bhonsle suggests that it would be more effective and cost-efficient to manage established routes of human movement rather than undertaking the costly endeavor of extensive fencing.

Furthermore, the historical context of cross-border relations complicates the situation. Communities along the Indo-Myanmar border have deep-rooted cultural and familial ties, leading to a natural inclination towards fluid movement across borders for trade and social interactions.

Bhonsle emphasizes that the Government must recognize these relationships and engage local communities constructively, rather than viewing them as adversaries. The perception of separation from the mainstream Indian society is already a concern for many in the North East, and these recent policies may exacerbate feelings of alienation.

The Broader Context: Humanitarian and Security Concerns

The humanitarian aspect of the ongoing crisis cannot be overlooked. The closure of the “Indo-Myanmar Friendship Gate” in Manipur has left many refugees in limbo, unable to return home or access essential resources.

The continual closure of this gateway, particularly in light of the civil unrest in Myanmar and the ongoing tensions in Manipur, highlights the intersection of humanitarian needs and National security concerns. In Mizoram, similar patterns of border closure and reopening have been observed, dictated by the prevailing situation on the ground.

The scrapping of the FMR has also raised concerns about its impact on regional economies, as local communities heavily depend on cross-border trade. The cessation of free movement disrupts not only social ties but also economic activities that have been sustained for generations.

The economic repercussions of this decision could have lasting effects on the livelihoods of those living along the border, further entrenching grievances against the Central Government.

Navigating a Path Forward

As the situation continues to evolve, the need for a comprehensive policy on border management becomes increasingly urgent. Addressing the grievances of local communities, ensuring their inclusion in the decision-making process, and balancing security concerns with humanitarian needs will be crucial to fostering stability in the region.

The complexity of the Indo-Myanmar border, characterized by its challenging terrain and the intricate web of social and economic ties, demands a nuanced approach that transcends mere physical barriers.

In light of the ongoing crisis, it is imperative that the Indian Government reassesses its strategy, engaging local stakeholders and seeking collaborative solutions that prioritize both security and the well-being of the affected communities. Only through a balanced approach can the region hope to achieve lasting peace and stability, while also addressing the underlying issues of migration and conflict that have plagued the area for far too long.