The article is an attempt to study the history of the Tedim Road, a 265 km transborder road connecting Imphal (the capital of Manipur in India) with Tedim in the Chin Hills (Chin State) in western Burma (Myanmar). It was constructed by the British solely for the purpose of facilitating military movements along the India–Burma frontier during the Second World War.
India has been grappling with the problem of devising an efficient border management strategy that would prevent the entry of dangerous elements while at the same time allowing the legitimate flow of goods, services and people. Given that it has always been vulnerable to cross-border threats and challenges such as illegal migration, drug and human trafficking, gunrunning, smuggling of commodities and cross-border terrorism, India has taken a largely unilateral approach towards border management whereby security of the borders is accorded primacy over the free movement of people and goods.
Most nation-states in Asia and Africa that gained independence from colonial rulers during the middle of the 20th century are diverse in their ethnic composition. The national governments make efforts to politically integrate their constituent units in the face of the continuing resistance of several ethnic groups. India adopted various means to integrate the more than 600 princely states and other loosely administered areas.
The granting of scheduled tribe status to the Kuki-Chin people eroded their allegiance to clan and linguistic/dialectal identities. While they do not have any problem with a pan-ethnic identity, their primary loyalty is to their own clans and communities. Invocation of kinship ties by different groups does not necessarily translate into a common political agenda. There are at least 15 armed groups among them that have combined into two larger groups—the United People's Front (UPF) and the Kuki National Organisation (KNO)—and signed a peace agreement with the state and central governments.
In one of the most well-written and extensively researched books on the subject, Anuradha Chenoy and Kamal Mitra Chenoy attempt to holistically examine the state of armed conflicts in India. In their own words, the book has the modest aim of understanding the roots, the nature and the impact of the armed conflicts in India. However, the title gives the reader the erroneous impression that the Maoist conflict will be the central theme while other conflicts will be peripheral.
This article looks at the status quo of Indian counterterrorism policy—which largely favours ‘physical’ or ‘hard’ measures—and proposes that the government adopt a more holistic strategy. Termed ‘Countering Violent Extremism’, this would involve measures geared towards long-term prevention, with greater attention paid to the reasons for which people commit terrorism and to the impact of counterterrorism on communities.
Naxals of the Communist Party of India (CPI) (Maoist), better known as Maoists, characterised more than once by the Indian prime minister as the gravest threat to our internal security, have been continuously fine-tuning their strategies and tactics in order to maintain their relevance. On the other hand, the state too has been making concerted efforts by taking ‘security and development’ measures to diminish, if not altogether defeat, the challenge posed by the rebels to the Indian state.
The spate of rioting which plagued Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) from June 2010 is testimony to the mismanagement of developments by both the state and central governments. This is all the more unfortunate as near normalcy had been established in Jammu and Kashmir following the November 2008 elections and the downtrend in insurgency through 2009 and early 2010.
The demand for autonomy in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) followed by heated discourses on the subject has been appearing and fading intermittently. The demand as well as discourses, articulated by particular parties in the state, receives equal responses from political parties and analysts at the national level. In fact, the subject has acquired sharp political overtones over a period of time.
Insurgencies as well as popular unrests are generally rooted in political, social and economic deprivations, which in turn lead to the alienation and estrangement of a community. A popular sentiment seeking the empowerment of Muslim Kashmiris has been in existence for the past five centuries. History is replete with instances of the political deprivation and poverty of Kashmiri people during periods of their subjugation by the Mughals, the Pathans, the Sikhs and later the Dogras. Kashmiri alienation took firm roots during the Dogra rule (1846–1947).