Suspension of Operation to what end, balkanization of Manipur ?

YENNING
What is the meaning of suspending operations between two entities which did not undertake any imaginable operations against each other ? How will one interpret when two entities which did not have any hostility agreed to cease imaginary hostility ? Who authorized the notorious Assam Rifles to enter into such an agreement bypassing the elected Government of Manipur ? The Suspension of Operation or SoO agreements signed between assortments of Kuki-Zo militant groups are now rightly in the centre of an all encompassing political controversy.
Suspension of non-existent operations and formal endorsement of bonhomie shared between the two entities viz; Kuki-Zo militant groups and Assam Rifles imply that the two have a common agenda or convergence of interests. A thorough study of these common agenda or shared interests can go a long way in unraveling the dubious roles played by the particular paramilitary force since the first day of the violent crisis besieging Manipur for the past one year and a half. SoO agreements are also dubious from the very beginning.
It was on August 1, 2005 that the Assam Rifles clandestinely entered into SoO agreement with two umbrella bodies of several Kuki-Zo militant groups namely; Kuki National Organisation (KNO) and the United People’s Front (UPF). Although the Government of Manipur is the largest stakeholder in any such agreement, the SoO agreements were signed without informing the Government of Manipur and this was stated by none other than former Chief Minister and Congress leader Okram Ibobi Singh.
All the Kuki-Zo militant groups, although many of their leaders are of foreign origin, are operating within the territory of Manipur and paramilitary forces including the Assam Rifles are stationed in the State to assist the State Government in maintaining law and order but the Government of Manipur was literally left a bystander to the SoO agreements as if it is a non-entity. This was strange, dubious as well as outrageous; The two signed the agreement without the knowledge of the Manipur Government. The police continued to arrest the insurgents, and in 2008 the formal SoO with the State Government’s participation was signed. The State Government discovered the existence of the 2005 ‘ceasefire’ agreement when, during police operations against Kuki-Zo insurgents, the State forces were often requested to stand down, former Chief Minister Okram Ibobi Singh stated on the floor of the Manipur Legislative Assembly on March 1, 2024.
It was only on August 22, 2008, the Government of Manipur was brought into the picture and formal tripartite agreements were signed by the United Peoples’ Front (UPF) and the Kuki National Organization (KNO), the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India and the Government of Manipur. From the very beginning, these Kuki-Zo militants have been challenging the territorial integrity of Manipur. The Kuki National Assembly (KNA) submitted a memorandum to Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru on March 24, 1960 seeking establishment of a Kuki State, thereby posing a direct threat to the integrity of Manipur. This threat got more pronounced with the formalizing of the SoO agreements. It only means the Kuki-Zo militants are insincere from the very beginning.
As per the preambles of the SoO agreements signed with KNO and UPF, the two umbrella bodies and their constituent groups will abide by the Constitution of India, the laws of the land and the territorial integrity of Manipur. The Kuki National Organization (KNO) comprises (1) Kuki National Front (Military Council) (KNF-MC)), (2) Kuki National Front (Zogam), KNF (Z), (3) United Socialist Revolutionary Army (USRA), (4) United Minority Liberation Army (Old Kuki), (5) United Komren Revolutionary Army, (6) Zomi Reunification Front, (7) Zou Defence Volunteer (KNO), (8) Hmar National Army, (9) Kuki Revolutionary Army (Unification), (10) Kuki Liberation Army (KNO) and (11) Kuki National Army.
The United Peoples’ Front (UPF) is constituted by (1) Kuki Revolutionary Army (KRA), (2) Kuki National Front (KNF), (3) United Kuki Liberation Front (UKLF), (4) Kuki Liberation Army (UPF), (5) Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA), (6) Kuki National Front (S), (7) Hmar Peoples Conference-Democratic (HPC-D) and (8) ZDV (UPF).
According to the preambles and ground rules of the SoO agreements, the cadres of all the Kuki-Zo militant groups which are party to the agreements must stay in their designated camps, the designated camps should not be located close to populated areas, National Highways and international border, movement of cadres from one designated camp to another shall be done only with the approval of the nominated security forces or State police, all weapons must be kept within the camp’s central armoury under a double-locking system, the cadres either individually or in group should not acquire any additional arms, ammunition or military equipment, the groups should not carry out fresh recruitment of cadres, the groups should not undertake offensive operations like ambush, raid, sniping and attack against security forces, other groups or the public and they must not indulge in blockade of roads and surface communication.
Even though the Kuki-Zo militant groups have been violating many or all of these ground rules over the years, the Government of India has never ever given any serious thought to reviewing the SoO agreements till date. This can be gleaned from the fact that the Government of India refused to endorse the Government of Manipur when the latter decided to withdraw from the SoO agreement with Kuki National Army (KNA) and Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA) on March 10, 2023 for their involvement in poppy cultivation and inciting people against forest officials. Kuldiep Singh, Security Adviser to the Government of Manipur appointed by New Delhi went on record at the height of the Kuki-Zo offensive that attendance at the designated camps of the SoO agreement signatories was not 100 per cent.
Whereas the Government of India and the Central paramilitary forces may turn a blind eye, the people cannot put up any pretense of not seeing the rampant and continuous violation of the ground rules by the Kuki-Zo militant groups. The vehement clamor of the people to abrogate the SoO agreements in the wake of extensive aggression, violence, carnage and arson unleashed by the Kuki-Zo militants must be given due consideration but it appears New Delhi is in no mood to antagonize the Kuki-Zo militants. The last term of the SoO agreements expired on February 29, 2024 but the Government of India has not yet come out with any official statement on the status of the agreements. A report in the Hindu said that the ‘status quo’ remains on the ground. If ‘status quo’ still remains, the SoO agreements are still operational, albeit unofficially. By analogy, it only means the Government of India, for reasons best known to its policy makers and security experts, does not care all the killings, massacres and acts of terror unleashed by the Kuki-Zo militants.
Since 2008, Kuki-Zo militant groups have been conveniently capitalizing on the SoO agreements to systematically build their strength and prepare for a war against the Meitei population as is glaringly evident now. All these years, crores of rupees have been spent on payment of stipends to cadres of SoO groups while the public continues to be harassed though extortion and intimidation, followed by a full scale war against the Meitei population. For the past 15/16 years since the SoO agreements were signed, the Kuki-Zo militant groups have been indulging in an intensive campaign of communal hatred and ethnic militarization.
It was the SoO agreement which enabled Kuki-Zo militants to march with automatic rifles in the midst of the so called Tribal Solidarity March at Churachandpur on the fateful day of May 3, 2023. Who would dare march with automatic rifles in full public view and right in front of security agencies without the protection of the infamous SoO ?
As pointed out by the Meitei Alliance in their booklet “Ghost of Peace, Why Not Abrogate Suspension Of Operation Agreements With Kuki Armed Groups to Prevent Destabilisation of India?”, SoO also legitimises proliferation of Kuki secessionist nexus into the “Temple of Indian democracy”. It said, “Kuki militant groups oppose free and fair representative democracy. They maintained a semi- feudal tradition where the elites enjoyed special customary privileges under the Haosa system. They oppose adult franchises and a free and fair representative election system. They use their gun power to ensure that their candidates win the election and capture legislative power.”
“There are Kuki MLAs who are allegedly linked with Kuki armed groups. For instance, Kimneo Haokip Hangshing’s (MLA, Saikul AC) husband is the Chairman of the Kuki Revolutionary Army. Nemcha Kipgen’s (MLA, Kangpokpi AC) husband is the President of the Kuki National Front”, the Meitei Alliance wrote.
The growth of Kuki-Zo militant groups militarily and economically, the emergence of this political class having nexus with the Kuki-Zo militant groups and vigorous articulation of the political demand for a separate Kuki-Zo State all have the blessing of the SoO agreements. Since the SoO agreements were signed, the Kuki- Zo militant groups have been enjoying impunity from all kinds of punitive actions from the Government of India just as the Indian army and paramilitary forces enjoy impunity through AFSPA.
At the end, SoO agreements instead of bringing peace brought war. The agreements instead of securing the country’s integrity have given birth to much bigger threats to the integrity of Manipur. The SoO agreements have clearly failed to serve its publicly stated purposes. As for the hidden or publicly unstated purposes, only the proponents can answer whether the SoO agreements have fulfilled those unstated purposes. Is the integrity of Manipur or Meitei people expendable in the larger game of India’s geopolitics or balkanization of Manipur a hidden agenda of the SoO agreements?