The decision of National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN I-M) chairman Thuingaleng Muivah to visit his ancestral village of Somdal in Manipur’s Ukhrul district has triggered a fierce standoff at Mao Gate in the Nagaland-Manipur border. The Central Government has been caught unawares. The situation has deteriorated over the past few days with Muivah camping at Viswema in Nagaland close to Mao Gate. The situation was termed serious by Home Minister, P Chidambaram, and the Central Government seems at a loss, with Manipur Chief Minister, Okram Ibobi Singh, refusing to allow Muivah access to Ukhrul, and Nagaland Chief Minister, Neiphu Rio, lobbying in New Delhi to make Muivah’s visit possible.

However, this is not a new situation. Mao Gate has been a symbol of the geographical vulnerability of Manipur, as the major land route to Manipur lies through Nagaland. Frequent blockades and bandhs by various organizations in the past have affected traffic flows by the national highway. The highway has been the centre of protests and demonstrations by various Naga and Meitei organizations over the issue of Greater Nagalim demanded by NSCN-IM, which includes four hill districts of Manipur dominated by the Thangkhul Nagas, the tribe to which Muivah belongs. This is a sensitive issue, and a major demand of the NSCN I-M in its ongoing peace talks with New Delhi. Clashes occurred in the past, and led to the burning of the state Legislative Assembly in Imphal in 2001.

The situation was only resolved by Muivah deferring his visit at the request of New Delhi and some Naga civil society organizations, until adequate preparations were made for his safe passage to Ukhrul. Muivah has made it clear that he will visit his ancestral village, despite the political atmosphere in Manipur being charged with ethnic tensions. At least three people were killed in a stampede, and three students were killed in the firing by Manipur Rifles personnel near Mao Gate, where Nagas had gathered to welcome Muivah. The NSCN I-M has declared them as martyrs, which is likely to intensify the standoff. This situation has the potential to create more violence in Manipur.

The Central Government has not learnt from its mistakes in the past, and has sought to manage the situation through ad-hoc policies and measures in Nagaland and Manipur. New Delhi has had several rounds of peace talks with the NSCN I-M over the last thirteen years, with no solution in sight. The major flaw in New Delhi’s policy has been its total neglect of the other stakeholders in the issue; it should have initiated simultaneous dialogues with the Meitei, Assamese and Arunachali civil society organizations, to evolve a sustainable solution towards peace.

The Central Government and NSCN I-M negotiations are even shrouded in secrecy; hence the stakeholders in Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh are apprehensive about the course the peace process would take and the contents of the proposed ‘special federal arrangement’ being talked about. The respective state assemblies of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh have passed resolutions that no territory will be parted for setting up a Greater Nagalim. The Meitei insurgent organizations will spare no effort in taking advantage of the present situation. The Nagas living in Manipur also face an uncertain future as the hill-valley divide is increasing due to bitter ethnic differences. The ultimate casualty will be the people of Manipur, be it the Meiteis or the Nagas, and a civil uprising is on the cards. Worse still, the Central Government is left with few options, as it has been temporizing for a long time, spending its time talking to the NSCN I-M. The problem has surfaced in various parts of Assam-Nagaland and the Arunachal Pradesh-Nagaland border with intense contests over villages claimed under Greater Nagalim, often resulting in ethnic clashes. A fertile ground exists for insurgent groups like the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) to consolidate support in the affected people.

There were indications in the recent talks between NSCN I-M and the Central Government that the former was going to play hardball, as no breakthrough was forthcoming. There is pressure also on the NSCN I-M, which has donned the mantle of the sole representative of the Naga cause, to bring about a solution to the peace talks at the earliest, as much time has already elapsed. This is a classic example of the NSCN I-M testing New Delhi’s sincerity to implement what it promised in the negotiations. New Delhi will have to walk the tightrope in assuaging ethnic differences and the concerns of various stakeholders in the states involved in the Greater Nagalim demand. The situation requires urgent intervention with sensitivity.