Manipur's ethnic violence, a litmus test for officers

Priyanka Saurabh *

Violence and ethnic divisions have strained esprit de corps (unity and mutual respect among officers), weakening cooperation and trust among officers. The conflict has had a profound impact on interpersonal relationships among AIS officers, with social exchange and cooperation becoming rare.

Hate speech, propaganda, and the polarisation of public discourse, both online and offline, have further strained relationships, making it difficult for officers from different ethnic backgrounds to work together.

The ethnic violence in Manipur has exposed the weakness of India's administrative system in dealing with deep-rooted communal conflicts. While the situation presents serious challenges to the integrity of All India Services, it also provides a unique opportunity to rethink and reform the approach to governance in conflict-prone areas.

By focusing on capacity building, research, and innovative policy measures, the IAS and other services can turn the crisis into a learning experience that strengthens the resilience of the “steel frame” in future conflicts.

Ethnic violence between the Meitei and Kuki communities in Manipur erupted on May 3, 2023. The conflict resulted in over 200 deaths and displaced 60,000 people. The roots of the conflict between the Meitei and Kuki communities are deeply embedded in the ethnic and historical context of Manipur.

There are long-standing socio-political and land disputes between the Meitei, who live mainly in the valley areas, and the Kuki community, who live in the hill districts. Competition for political power, land, and government resources has increased tensions between these communities.

Policies related to reservation, land ownership, and autonomy are at the heart of this conflict. British-era policies of classifying tribal and non-tribal groups created divisions that still resonate today.

The law and order situation deteriorated sharply, communal tensions escalated and violent incidents broke out. Communal divisions have deeply affected the functioning of All India Services (AIS) officers, creating geographical and psychological barriers between them, with the hill and valley districts becoming inaccessible due to the conflict.

The current situation threatens the "steel frame" envisaged by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, with All India Services forming the backbone of India's administrative machinery. Esprit de corps (unity and mutual respect among officers) is under strain due to violence and ethnic divisions, weakening cooperation and trust among officers.

The conflict has had a profound impact on interpersonal relationships among IAS officers, with social exchanges and collaboration becoming rare. Hate speech, propaganda, and the polarisation of public discourse, both online and offline, have further strained relationships, making it difficult for officers from different ethnic backgrounds to work together.

Non-kinetic elements such as psychological warfare, disinformation, and economic disruption have played a significant role in escalating tensions in Manipur. These tactics, as part of hybrid warfare, have undermined public morale and confidence in governance, posing a significant challenge for the IAS and other services responsible for maintaining law and order.

Civil servants from various ethnic backgrounds face dilemmas in balancing their professional duties with their ethnic identities. The pressure of community expectations and loyalty versus the need to maintain administrative neutrality presents a significant ethical challenge.

Many officials face personal security threats due to their ethnicity. Reports of government officials being targeted by mobs and requiring protection underscore the grave threats they face. This has caused psychological stress and hindered their ability to carry out their duties.

The role of social media platforms in spreading disinformation, hate speech, and inflammatory content has exacerbated the conflict. Videos of violence and inflammatory speeches have further polarised communities, making it difficult for civil authorities to manage the narrative.

Despite the challenges, the Manipur conflict can be seen as an opportunity for research and documentation by institutions such as the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration (LBSNAA) and the Indian Institute of Public Administration (IIPA). Training modules and capacity-building workshops on conflict management, reconciliation, and administrative neutrality can be developed based on this case.

Such case studies will provide practical insights into dealing with ethnic-centric conflicts within a democratic framework, contributing to academic and practical understanding of governance in conflict zones.

The impersonal nature of bureaucracy as propounded by Barr can be leveraged to restore normalcy in a conflict-torn state. Professional team spirit among batchmates and the neutral role of AIS officers as agents of national integration provide a flexible framework for resolving conflicts.

Implementation of innovative personnel management policies to involve officers in peace-building efforts. Regular virtual meetings among officers from different ethnic communities can foster better relations and reduce psychological isolation caused by conflict. Such measures can help break down administrative silos that have emerged in Manipur, facilitate better cooperation within the civil services, and contribute to the peace process.

The conflict also underlines the importance of federal unity in India. Strengthening communication channels and fostering a sense of shared responsibility between the state and central governments can help mitigate future crises.

The ethnic violence in Manipur has exposed the weakness of India’s administrative system in dealing with deep-rooted communal conflicts. While this situation presents serious challenges to the integrity of All India Services, it also provides a unique opportunity to rethink and reform the approach to governance in conflict-prone regions.

By focusing on capacity building, research, and innovative policy measures, the IAS and other services can turn the crisis into a learning experience that strengthens the resilience of the “steel frame” in future conflicts.