The Politics of Forgetting and Remembering in the New Normal Manipur

The political tide in Manipur since the beginning of this year has increasingly pointed towards a much-awaited return to “normalcy” after three years of conflict. The replacement of N. Biren Singh by Yumnam Khemchand Singh as Chief Minister, Khemchand’s visits to Kuki-Zo-dominated areas such as Kangpokpi, Churachandpur and Leimakhong, the participation of two Kuki-Zo MLAs in the 12th Manipur Legislative Assemblyin person, and reports of Kuki-Zo individuals travelling through Imphal airport have been seen as a breaking down of physical (buffer zone), social, political and even psychological barriers. 

Yet, for the Kuki-Zo, this emerging “normalcy” demands caution. We need to ask the uncomfortable question of whose normalcy is being restored and on what terms? Given the fact that the conflict has fundamentally altered Manipur’s political and social landscape, with no credible institution of justice or meaningful effort to acknowledge and redress the wrongs committed, what is now being constructed is contrived and potentially dangerous political normalcy. 

Normalcy Through Forgetting

Nevertheless, the desire for the pursuit of normalcy is understandable. For the government, it means restoring order and getting back to business of governing; but for the Kuki-Zo, it is a desperate desire to escape the suffering and hardships caused by the conflict.

Though both sides desire the restoration of normalcy, the intent behind it is not. And this difference though subtle has a significant bearing on how normalcy is defined, what it and will mean, how it is pursued and ultimately restored. Accordingly, the government and the majority pursue normalcy through selective amnesia: forgetting, minimizing or simply ignoring what happened to the Kuki-Zo.

Remembering as the New Political Framework

In such a scenario, remembering becomes more than merely a human natural psychological process, but a political act.

We should not forget that in the last few years, anti-Kukiismhas been transformed from social attitude to a dominant political discourse if not a political ideology. With this, there has been a concerted effort in some quarters to render us effectively stateless, to deny the full protection and recognition of the state.It made it appear that the belonging of Kuki-Zo to the state is conditional, granted by majority and revocable by the majority. It has produced among us a peculiar and psychological complex form of existence. The experience of being simultaneously insider and outsider, accepted and provisional, belonging yet perpetually suspect.

Today, after the change in leadership, hostility against the Kuki-Zo may no longer be as explicit and pronounced as before, but it can manifest in subtler and more insidious ways. Despite the extensive evidence of killings and destruction, there has been little visible accountability or meaningful pursuit of justice. Those accused of being responsible for starting or instigating the violence have yet to face trial or justice. They remain free, with no convictions and little visible effort to hold them accountable. This is the very system that is now pursuing “normalcy” and we risk becoming willing participants in its construction. It is still a potentially dangerous political order, one in which injustice remains unresolved and the condition for another crisis remains largely unaddressed.

Way Forward

After all this, one thing is clear: our political destiny ultimately lies in our own hands. It appears that everyone has either forgotten or chosen to ignore what happened. At this juncture,therefore, we need to rethink how we do politics.

First, our new political framework must be grounded in the ‘politics of remembering’-what happened and this should inform us how we think, what we demand, and how we navigate the politics that lie ahead.

Second, informed by the memory of injustice the pursuit of justice and safe political structure must be at the heart of our politicking. Our politics cannot simply return to business as usual, centered only on development as it was before the conflict.

Third, our political actors, thinkers, activists, media, civil society and the people in general should strive to keep the memory alive and ensure that our suffering does not disappear from public memory and hold our leader accountable to this larger political responsibility.

Fourth, with the state assembly election around the corner, every candidate from the Kuki-Zo should be expected to clearly articulate in their manifesto how they intend to remember, address, and seek justice. This should also become a key criterion for the voters. We should choose not merely those who promise development, but those committed to securing our political future. 

Political Lesson from Nepal Flood

Imagine Nepal forgetting its floods—rebuilding homes without remembering the root causes of the disaster, what made communities vulnerable, and what safeguards were missing. In such a disaster-prone landscape, this would only invite the next catastrophe. 

Likewise, Manipur as we all know is a political disaster-prone environment, as the previous and current conflict so starkly demonstrates. It has swept away, in one stroke, our lives, homes, livelihoods and properties, causing enormous destruction. We must therefore remember what happened to us, address the vulnerabilities, and put political safeguards in place before rushing towards “normalcy.” Lest we forget.

(Views expressed are personal)