We did gave a word of caution to the people of the valley not to be carried away by the recent wave of Meitei resurgence which could be hijacked by political leaders with ulterior motives or by radical elements of all hues to create chaos and mayhem in the society. Ever since the breakout of ethnic violence between the Meiteis and Kukis, one could perceive a noticeable change in the political behaviour of the Meiteis vis-à-vis the idea of Manipur.
Keeping Manipur intact while taking along the various communities, big or small, was first and foremost in the minds of Meiteis. Notwithstanding the divide created by the colonial Britishers which had given birth to varied ethnic aspirations, the Meitei community as a whole had always been championing the cause of Manipur’s territorial integrity and the ethos of a collective people forged through a shared historical experience and interdependence.
For the Meiteis, it has always been Manipur first and Meitei second. And, it was indeed a formidable task for the mainstream civil society organisations in the valley in trying to bridge the artificial gap created by the colonialists. In terms of upkeep of the state’s territorial integrity, the political divide was mostly between the Meiteis and the Nagas while the Kukis more or less remained as observers.
Well, that has changed drastically as Meiteis and Kukis are aligned on opposite sides of the pole in view of their demand for a separate administration. Smaller tribes like the Kom, Anal, Moyon, Monsang or Aimol etc who were classified as Old Kukis by the Britishers in view of their culture and traditions have chosen to project themselves of not belonging to any of the major groupings in the hills, but always shown loyalty to the territorial integrity of Manipur in view of their close association with the valley population since time immemorial.
Politics apart, the Meiteis and the Nagas had in recent times managed to find common ground in terms of incessant influx of Myanmar illegals from across the border and establishing roots in the political demography of the state. We did warn about the inner rumblings within the Kuki-Chin brotherhood and now it has come out in the open with the recent demand for a separate administration for Kuki areas.
What is interesting in the present imbroglio is the resurgence of Meitei identity which had upstaged all other considerations. Never before, the community had felt so threatened by its existence and its historical imprint. Never had they considered the inroads, made by the unchecked influx of new Kukis and their systematic settlement pattern encircling the valley and the domination of Moreh after the Naga-Kuki clashes, would one day threaten to take over the whole state. This somehow ignited the resurgence among the Meitei community and gave rise to a Meitei-centric movement and form.
The glory of a once powerful nation state which held sway at the crossroads of South and Southeast Asia was once again invoked and it successfully guided the resurgence. A collective Meitei consciousness is indeed vital not only for survival for the community and keeping the historical legacy inherited from the forefathers burning bright, but also for keeping the integrity of Manipur, territorial or otherwise.
But as we said earlier, one has to be careful not to overstep in the new-found energy and resilience. Sadly, it is happening now. While the state dithers on resolute action with regard to its responsibilities of keeping the peace and maintaining law and order in the backdrop of a deafening silence and inaction on the part of the Centre, forces other than the legitimate ones had taken over and already dictating terms. It has now become crystal clear that, the state leadership is still weighing its options on political survival or dividends and responsibilities towards maintenance of peace and upkeep of the rule of law.
