Communal violence in Manipur erupted on May 3, 2022, following a tribal unity march in the hill districts to protest against the Meitei community’s push for Scheduled Tribe status (Photo: PTI)
Amidst the ongoing crisis in Manipur, Congress Member A Bimol Akoijam raises direct questions about the Centre’s “inaction”, suggesting that such a situation would not have been left unresolved if it had happened in states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
In an interview with PTI Videos, Akoijam criticized the centre’s handling of the situation in Manipur, asking why the Indian government is allowing the northeastern country to become like Afghanistan, which he described as a “banana republic”.
“With 60,000 troops deployed in Manipur, the central government should have prevented this crisis from going on for a long time,” Akoijam said.
“If this was happening in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, or Madhya Pradesh, would it have been allowed to stay longer? Many people would have said no,” he added.
Communal violence in Manipur erupted on May 3, 2022, following a tribal unity march in the hill districts protesting the Meitei community’s push for Scheduled Tribe status. Since then, the violence has claimed the lives of over 220 people, including members of the Kuki and Meitei communities, as well as security forces.
Amid the ongoing crisis, Akoijam appealed to the Center to resolve the problems in the state government, saying that the BJP MPs were speaking in two different voices on the issue of separate governance.
“Prime Minister Narendra Modi should have called MPs and ministers and said ‘this should not happen in India. Manipur is not part of any banana republic, I will not allow this to happen, speak up, what is the problem’, ” ” said Akoijam.
Representatives of some Kuki groups in Manipur last month demanded the construction of a Union Territory with a legislature near Puducherry, saying it was the only way out of the conflict.
Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh, however, rejected the request.
Akoijam, who represents the Inner Manipur region in the Lok Sabha, insisted that while he considered Singh a “small-time player” in the larger crisis, he would not be completely exempt.
“The Indian government is entirely responsible for this problem,” he said.
He expressed great concern over the state’s deteriorating state and gave the example of Afghanistan “where warlords roam and the authorities cannot assert themselves”.
Akoijam also urged the Center to commit “resolutely and wisely”.
Asked whether he thought Manipur was going the way of Afghanistan, the MP said, “The Government of India has been allowing it. So, the question is – instead of asking whether Manipur is going the way of Afghanistan, we should ask why the Government of India is allowing Manipur to be like that.” and banana republics, like Afghanistan.
Akoijam alleged that there was a deliberate attempt to discredit Manipur, saying “someone is writing this in collaboration with those who want to divide and disintegrate the state”.
He also pointed out that the violence seen in Manipur was unprecedented in post-colonial India, describing it as a civil war characterized by sophisticated weapons and military-like operations.
“India is not a banana republic. Even if the Indian Armed Forces were allowed to act as a peacekeeping force in another country, you would not allow these things to happen,” said Akoijam, associate professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University.
Responding to suggestions that he was giving a clean chit to Singh’s actions, Akoijam pointed out the parallels of historical violence, saying that no officer, regardless of rank, should escape accountability.
“In the case of Eichmann after the Holocaust, the officials involved could not plead ignorance or absolve themselves of responsibility,” he said.
He also criticized Singh’s statements which were inconsistent with the situation and said that they were contradictory and confusing rather than clarifying the situation on the ground.
Since the beginning, there have been many statements — sometimes claiming that narco-terrorism is involved, sometimes asserting that there is none, and sometimes suggesting that foreign elements are at play. This disagreement has muddied the waters about the reality of the problem, he said.
Touching on the issue of loss of trust in government institutions, Akoijam lamented the loss of trust in security including the police.
“If trust in government institutions decreases, that puts the legitimacy of the state into doubt,” he said.
Akoijam also rejected Home Minister Amit Shah’s statement that the overall situation in Manipur was calm except for the recent three days of violence.
“Government speeches cause confusion rather than clarity,” he said.
As for whether it is possible to restore peace and facilitate movement between communities in Manipur, Akoijam expressed doubts, noting that the situation was more complicated than other historical conflicts in the country.
Asked if he would fix the time frame for normalizing the situation in Manipur, the Member of Parliament said it “embarrasses me” as an Indian to ask when the communities affected by communal violence will be able to return to their homes.
“The status of Kashmiri Pandits is being discussed but at least some Pandits are left; in this case, there is a complete absence of certain communities,” he said.
Akoijam said that although there are complaints about security, there is a need to admit that some armed groups are fueling the violence, and the citizens were also armed.
This has never happened before and blaming one community or another makes things even more difficult, he added.
As the situation in riot-hit Manipur continues to worsen, calls for a strong response from the central government, with stakeholders expressing deep concern for the future of peace and stability in the region.
(Only the headline and image for this report may have been reused by Business Standard staff; other content is automatically generated from the trade feed.)