Guest contributor
Shalini Perumal
An analysis of the recent protest in India’s Manipur State against Delhi’s decision to scrap the Free Movement Regime (FMR) between Myanmar and India, and its implications for wider protests and the policy on the border.
A demonstration was held in India’s northeastern Churachandpur district in Manipur State on Dec. 3 to protest the government’s decision to scrap the India-Myanmar Free Movement Regime (FMR).
Led by the United Zou Organisation (UZO), the demonstration began at the Wall of Remembrance in Churachandpur. Carrying posters and placards, demonstrators chanted slogans against the decision to abolish the FMR and fence the 1,021 mile (1,643 km) long India-Myanmar border.
Several prominent figures attended, including Saikot Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) Paolienlal Haokip, Henglep MLA Letzamang Haokip, and Singngat MLA Chinlunthang, alongside leaders from various Kuki-Zo tribes.
A moment of silence was observed to honor the lives lost in the ongoing ethnic violence in Manipur State, where over 250 people have been killed since May 2023.
Leaders from organisations such as the Kuki Zo Council, Zomi Council, Kuki Inpi Manipur, and Hmar Inpui addressed the gathering. At the end, a memorandum addressed to Home Minister Amit Shah was submitted to Deputy Commissioner Dharun Kumar by UZO leaders.
The FMR, implemented in 2018 as part of India’s “Act East” policy, allowed residents within 16 km of the border to travel into each other’s territory without requiring any documentation.
However, the announcement to scrap the FMR was made in February after Home Minister Amit Shah declared India’s intention to fence the entire India-Myanmar border, which traverses Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh.
Fencing along the border has been a long-standing demand of the Meitei community residing in the Imphal Valley, who are the dominant ethnic group.
These groups have consistently alleged that militants frequently infiltrate India through the porous border. Additionally, they claim that narcotics are smuggled into the country, exploiting the absence of border fencing.
The recent protest in Manipur against the Indian government’s decision to scrap the FMR between India and Myanmar reflects the complex interplay of security concerns, humanitarian needs, and deeply rooted ethnic tensions along the volatile border.
The FMR had initially been aimed to create greater regional integration by allowing residents within the 16 km of the border to travel into each other’s territory without requiring any formal documentation.
This facilitated trade, cultural exchange, business connections, and familial ties between border communities, many of whom share close ethnic, religious, and cultural bonds.
The scrapping of the FMR has had significant repercussions. The restriction on movement has severely impacted cross-border trade, particularly for small-scale businesses and farmers who rely on informal trade across the border.
This has disrupted traditional livelihoods and exacerbated economic hardship for many border communities. For example, in the Tengnoupal district of Manipur, many residents relied on cross-border trade with Myanmar for essential goods like timber, agricultural products, and livestock.
The abolition of the FMR has significantly curtailed these economic activities, leading to job losses and income insecurity.
In addition, the FMR had facilitated cultural exchange and strengthened social bonds between communities. Its abolition threatens to weaken these ties, isolating border communities and hindering the transmission of cultural traditions and knowledge across generations.
Many border communities also have deep historical and cultural ties, with shared languages, religious beliefs, and kinship networks. This is now at risk of being severed, as voiced by demonstrators at the recent protest in Manipur.
Furthermore, the increased restrictions on movement could exacerbate the challenges faced by refugees fleeing the ongoing conflict in Myanmar. The FMR, while limited in scope, provided some flexibility for movement and access to essential services for those seeking refuge in India.
The government’s decision to prioritise border fencing, driven largely by security concerns, has further inflamed tensions between different communities within Manipur, particularly between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities.
The Kuki-Zo, who are more reliant on cross-border interactions, perceive the border fencing as a direct threat to their livelihoods and cultural identity.
Since the 2021 military coup in Myanmar, an estimated 30,000 to 50,000 refugees, primarily from the Chin ethnic group, have fled to neighboring India, seeking refuge from the junta’s brutal crackdown.
Mizoram and Manipur states, with its shared ethnic and cultural ties with the Chin people, has borne the brunt of this influx.
However, the initial outpouring of support from local communities and aid organisations has dwindled significantly.
Key challenges faced by these refugees include a lack of basic facilities as refugees in rural areas, particularly those living in remote villages, struggle to access adequate food, shelter, healthcare, and education.
In many cases, refugees are living in makeshift shelters with limited access to clean water and sanitation. Malnutrition and outbreaks of disease are significant concerns.
Furthermore, India lacks a comprehensive national refugee law, leaving refugees vulnerable to arrest and deportation as “illegal migrants.” This lack of legal protection creates a constant sense of insecurity and limits their access to essential services.
Many refugees live in constant fear of being apprehended by authorities and forcibly returned to Myanmar, where they face the risk of persecution and arrest.
The lack of legal status and limited economic opportunities often forces refugees into exploitative labour conditions. They are often employed in low-paying and precarious jobs, with little recourse if their rights are violated.
Despite the efforts of local non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and civil society organisations, weak coordination among aid providers has hindered the effective delivery of humanitarian assistance. This has resulted in gaps in service provision and an inefficient use of limited resources.
All of this takes place in the backdrop of the crisis in Manipur. The crisis is deeply rooted in complex socio-political dynamics. Deep-seated ethnic tensions between the Meitei community, who primarily inhabit the Imphal Valley, and the Kuki-Zo communities, who reside predominantly in the hills, have been exacerbated by the ongoing conflict.
The Meitei community, which constitutes a majority of the state’s population, has long felt marginalised by the political dominance of the hill communities. Concerns about the influx of refugees and the perceived threat to their cultural identity have further fueled these tensions.
The political landscape in Manipur is deeply polarised, with political parties often exploiting ethnic and regional divisions for electoral gains. This has further exacerbated tensions and hindered efforts to find a peaceful resolution to the ongoing conflict.
The Indian military has played a significant role in maintaining order in Manipur, but its presence has also been a source of contention.There have been allegations of human rights abuses by the military, further eroding trust between the military and certain communities.
Addressing the challenges faced by Myanmar refugees and mitigating the negative impacts of the FMR abolition requires significant shifts in national and state-level policies.
First of all, India should formally recognise Myanmar nationals seeking refuge as refugees, granting them access to basic rights and protections under international law.
This would provide them with a legal basis for their stay in India and access to essential services such as healthcare, education, and employment.
The development of a comprehensive national refugee law and policy is crucial to ensure consistent and equitable treatment of refugees across the country.
This framework should outline the rights and responsibilities of refugees, establish procedures for asylum claims, and provide a clear pathway for integration or resettlement.
Increased support for local aid organisations, including financial assistance and capacity building, is essential to ensure the continued provision of humanitarian aid to refugees.
This includes providing support for the development of community-based programs that address the specific needs of refugees, such as education, livelihood training, and psychosocial support.
Strengthening coordination among government agencies, international organizations, and local aid providers is vital for an effective and efficient humanitarian response.
This includes establishing clear lines of communication, sharing information, and developing joint action plans. Empowering local communities to play a more active role in supporting refugees through community-based initiatives can enhance the effectiveness of humanitarian assistance.
This could include homestay programs, language classes, and cultural exchange programs, which can impact understanding and build bridges between host communities and refugees.
Addressing the root causes of the conflict in Myanmar, including the junta’s human rights abuses, is crucial for a long-term solution to the refugee crisis.
This includes supporting the efforts of the international community to pressure the junta to restore democracy and respect human rights. Efforts must also be made to promote dialogue and reconciliation between different communities within Manipur.
This includes inter-community dialogue, addressing historical grievances, and promoting a culture of peace and understanding.
The abolition of the FMR and the escalating humanitarian crisis in Manipur indicates the urgent need for a comprehensive and nuanced approach to border management and refugee protection, that takes into consideration security concerns while ensuring the humanitarian needs of border communities and refugees are met on the ground.
Shalini Perumal is a creative international development professional who has worked previously in Mae Sot, Thailand at Mae Tao Clinic. She is currently a freelance journalist as well as Consultant at Finnish Refugee Council Myanmar. The views expressed in the article are her own and do not necessarily reflect those of the organization.
DVB publishes a diversity of opinions that does not reflect DVB editorial policy. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our stories: [email protected]
