By Michael Meiphami Shaiza
This is the question Nagas in Manipur have been afraid to ask for 30 months. We say the words “state-sponsored terrorism” on social media, in memorandums, in church prayers. But we have never dissected the word STATE.
If we admit it, we must have the courage to define it. And if we define it, we must have the courage to indict ourselves.
What is a state?
A state is not a mere geographical map drawn by the Survey of India. A state is not hills and valleys. A state is an institution. A political system governed by laws made by the state legislature. A moral contract.
The philosopher and the Bible agree on this.
Politically, a state exists only when it fulfills three duties: To protect life, to guarantee liberty, to ensure justice. When it fails, the Constitution of India itself provides a verdict: Article 355 says it is the duty of the Union to protect every state against external aggression and internal disturbance and to ensure that the government of every state is carried on in accordance with the Constitution. Article 356 says if that government cannot be carried on, there is a Constitutional breakdown.
Biblically, a state is ordained by God for one purpose: “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil… for he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain.” Romans 13:3-4.
When the ruler becomes a terror to good works and a protector of evil works, he ceases to be a minister of God and becomes an instrument of terror.
Therefore, when we say what is happening in Manipur is state-sponsored terrorism, we are not talking about a piece of land. We are talking about a system:
A system where the law makers have terribly failed to protect their electorates. A system where arms are distributed, where one community is armed and another is left to die, where internet is shut to hide blood, where buffer zones are created not to protect but to divide, where the police watch, where the Assembly does not meet, where the Chief Minister does not resign.
That is not a geographical map. That is a collapsed institution. That is state-sponsored terrorism.
State-sponsored terrorism is not when a foreign country sends a terrorist. State-sponsored terrorism is when a state uses its own power, its own police, its own patronage, its own silence, to let one section of its people terrorize another section, while the state watches and profits.
The unasked question
Here we must include the point we have deliberately avoided, but which is the heart of the matter.
Isn’t this equivalent to Indian military formations cooperating with outside forces to forcibly occupy Naga’s Territory?
Look at the ground reality without fear. In Manipur, the Indian military and Central forces are the ultimate arbiters of who moves, where buffer zones are drawn, whose bunkers are protected, whose villages are secured, and whose villages are left as no-man’s land.
When a buffer zone is drawn across Naga ancestral territory, when a Kuki armed group is allowed to dominate a highway that cuts through Naga territory, when Kuki settlements expand into Naga ancestral land under the protection or the passive watch of Central forces, what is the legal and moral name for it?
It is not law and order management. It is proxy occupation.
And that Naga’s Territory being outside the purview of Indian Union’s Law?
This is the Naga political truth that India has acknowledged in writing. In the Framework Agreement of 3rd August 2015, the Government of India recognized the unique history and position of the Nagas. The Nagas have never been a party to the Instrument of Accession of Manipur state. Naga territory was never ceded to Manipur by conquest or consent. Naga territory in Manipur was annexed administratively by the British and then transferred to Manipur state without Naga consent.
Therefore, legally and historically, Naga territory in Manipur is outside the purview of Manipur state law and is held in trust, awaiting a final political settlement between Nagas and the Government of India.
If that is true, then what is happening today is gravely serious: Indian military formations, by cooperating with, or turning a blind eye to, outside forces who are forcibly occupying Naga’s Territory, are violating their own commitment to protect Naga territory as a disputed territory under negotiation.
You cannot negotiate with Nagas in Delhi about Naga sovereignty and unique history, and simultaneously allow that same Naga territory in Manipur to be forcibly occupied, settled, and militarized by another armed group under your watch. That is not ceasefire. That is collusion.
Biblically, this is the sin of Ahab again. King Ahab wanted Naboth’s vineyard and used false witnesses and the state machinery to kill Naboth and take it. 1 Kings 21:19 – “Hast thou killed, and also taken possession?” When a state uses its military formations to cooperate with outside forces to forcibly occupy a people’s ancestral territory that is outside the purview of its ordinary law, it has both killed and taken possession.
Legally, this violates Article 371C of the Constitution of India itself, which provides special protection for the Hill Areas of Manipur. Naga territory cannot be treated as ordinary Manipur state land to be gifted as a mercenary’s reward. It is protected hill territory.
The mirror we refuse to see
This is the most painful part. Who elects the state’s legislative assembly?
We do. The Naga electorates in Manipur state.
The Meitei electorate elects its representatives. The Kuki electorate elects its representatives. And the Naga electorate in Manipur state elects its own 10 MLAs and 1 MP from Outer Manipur.
The state is not an alien body that fell from Delhi. The state is made by us. The Legislative Assembly of Manipur is made by our vote.
There is already Constitutional breakdown long ago. Manipur has not had a functioning government since May 3, 2023. The Assembly has not debated peace. The Cabinet has not protected life. President’s Rule was not imposed when it should have been. This is the textbook definition of Article 356 breakdown.
But why does the Assembly still exist on paper? Because its members refuse to dissolve it.
And here is the uncomfortable truth that the outside world sees and whispers: The Naga electorates in Manipur state are equally responsible for this senseless, violent, horrible situation and the unthinkable humanitarian crisis.
Why? Because representation without moral action is complicity.
When Naga villages were burned, when Naga houses were bulldozed for buffer zones, when innocent Nagas were killed on the highways, when Naga people could not go to Imphal, could not go to hospitals, could not appear for exams, where were our representatives?
They were sitting inside the same Assembly that has failed. They were part of the same Cabinet system that failed. They continued to draw salary, security, and honour from a state that had already constitutionally collapsed.
The people outside Indian states see us clearly. They say: Nagas in Manipur talk of sovereignty, of separate identity, of Nagalim, but their 10 MLAs and 1 MP are part of the Manipur state that is committing state-sponsored terrorism. They have not stepped down. They have not resigned en masse. They have not declared that this legislature has lost its moral right to rule.
If the state is sponsoring terrorism, and you are a lawmaker of that state, and you continue to be a lawmaker of that state without revolt, what are you?
That is what people outside see us as. And they are not wrong to ask.
And now the question becomes even sharper: If Indian military formations are cooperating with outside forces to forcibly occupy Naga’s Territory that is outside the purview of Indian Union’s ordinary law, and Naga MLAs and MP continue to legitimize that state by sitting in its Assembly, then are they not legitimizing the occupation of their own ancestral territory?
Refusal to step down
Why are the electorates still tolerant to their representatives’ deliberate refusal to step down till date? This is the question of questions. Why?
1. Political Tribalism has replaced Biblical Stewardship: We no longer elect leaders to protect our future. We elect them to protect our tribe’s share of the loot. We fear that if our MLA steps down, another community will take the chair. So we tolerate a collapsed chair rather than risk losing the chair. This is the sin of Esau, who sold his birthright for a bowl of soup.
2. The Culture of Benefits: A Naga MLA in Manipur state is a source of contracts, jobs, funds, and compensation money. The electorate, impoverished by decades of conflict, has become dependent on that small patronage. To ask him to step down is to ask to cut our own small benefit, even though he has failed in his big duty of protecting life and protecting territory.
3. Fear of Delhi: Our electorates and our leaders fear that if Naga MLAs resign en masse, Delhi will be angry, and the Naga peace talks will be affected. But this is foolish wisdom. What peace talks can succeed when your own territory, which is admitted to be outside the purview of ordinary Indian law and under negotiation, is being allowed to be forcibly occupied under the watch of Indian military formations? Silence is not neutrality. Silence is consent to occupation.
4. No Accountability Mechanism from the Church and Civil Society: We have powerful church bodies and civil organizations who can broker peace between factions, but we have no mechanism to hold our own elected MLAs accountable. We excommunicate a petty thief, but we garland an MLA who sits in an Assembly that watches his people’s land being occupied. We have confused respect for position with worship of position.
The Bible warns: “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them.” Exodus 18:21. And, “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.” Proverbs 29:2.
Today, the Naga people in Manipur mourn. Therefore, we must ask: what manner of men have we placed over us?
The way out
If we admit it is state-sponsored terrorism, then we cannot continue as if it is normal. And if we admit it is equivalent to Indian military formations cooperating with outside forces to forcibly occupy Naga’s Territory that is outside the purview of Indian Union’s Law, then we must act as a people under occupation.
Eloquent speeches will not save us. Only bold action will.
1. Moral Dissociation and Declaration of Occupation: The Naga electorates must demand, in writing, in public, in church, that their representatives step down from a legislature that has undergone constitutional breakdown. They must declare that Naga territory in Manipur is not available for proxy occupation and that any attempt to settle armed groups from outside upon Naga territory under the protection of Central forces is null and void.
2. Reclaim the Definition of State: We must declare that our loyalty is not to the Manipur state as a failed institution, but to the Naga people as a nation and to Christ as our lawgiver. Let the map remain, but let the failed institution be delegitimized by mass resignation. Let us declare clearly: Our territory is outside the purview of Manipur state law for the purpose of permanent settlement of others. It is under negotiation with the Government of India, not at the disposal of Manipur state.
3. Accountability of the Electorate: We, the electorates, must repent. For 20 years we voted for money, for tribe, for contract, not for truth. We chose Political Thieves to rob us, and now we complain that we are robbed. If we want God to give us true leaders, we must first repent of how we chose false ones who would sit silent while our territory is occupied.
4. Appeal to Higher Constitutional Authority and International Law: Instead of sitting inside a collapsed Assembly, our leaders should have collectively invoked Article 355, 356, and 371C, and Article 26 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and sat outside as a people’s council, demanding that Indian military formations cease cooperating with forces occupying Naga territory, demanding President’s Rule and a neutral administration. That would have been statesmanship. That would have shown the world that Nagas are not part of state-sponsored terrorism.
The crossroads
Manipur state today is no longer a state. It is two states armed against each other, sponsored by a third power that watches.
If Naga MLAs and MP continue to sit in that Assembly till date, while Indian military formations cooperate with outside forces to forcibly occupy Naga’s Territory that is legally outside the purview of ordinary Indian law, history will record them not as representatives of the Naga people, but as silent partners of a system that sponsored terror and territorial occupation against their own people.
If the electorate continues to tolerate their deliberate refusal to step down, history will record us not as victims, but as willing accomplices who loved the chair more than the child, and who loved the salary more than the soil.
The image of the chief sitting on the stone must be remembered. He did not sit in the Meitei king’s court to protect his people. He did not sit in the British garrison to protect his people. He sat on his own stone, in his own hills, which no empire could lawfully give away.
Let the Naga people in Manipur return to their stone. Let them call their representatives down from the collapsed palace and back to the stone that is their territory.
For a state that cannot protect its electorate, and an army that cooperates with outside forces to occupy its own indigenous people’s territory, has lost its right to be called a protector. It is only a map stained with blood, and a law broken by its own makers.
***
Michael Meiphami Shaiza is the President of Ukhrul-based NGO Ecological Rehabilitators’ Association (ERA).
(Views expressed are writers’ own and do not, in whatsoever manner, reflect that of Ukhrul Now)
