Manipur is entering a quiet phase of its long‑standing crisis. Violence has subsided, travel between Imphal and Guwahati has resumed, and several Kuki‑Zo legislators have returned to the Assembly. The Y. Khemchand Singh administration is now working to restore political normalcy and reinstate routine governance.
Yet unrest continues to take new forms. The focus has shifted from why the conflict has persisted to whether the political uncertainty that followed the previous dispensation has become a condition that sustains it. Former chief minister N. Biren Singh, who was in office when the May 2023 violence erupted, remains a central figure in this debate. While he is not personally charged with criminal liability, democratic accountability demands that a head of government be answerable for a major breakdown of law and order under his administration.
Biren Singh’s future within the BJP is unclear. Although he is no longer chief minister, his supporters still view him as a viable political actor, and the possibility of a comeback, rehabilitation or marginalisation remains unresolved. This uncertainty can create incentives for continued mobilisation, as any sustained public dissatisfaction may be seen as a way to preserve political relevance. While there is no evidence that he directs protests or violent incidents, his political interventions—especially those that question the current government—become part of the environment in which mobilisations occur.
The conflict has also evolved beyond the Meitei‑Kuki axis, incorporating tensions between Kuki‑Tangkhul, Kuki‑Liangmei and other communities. A proliferation of civil‑society organisations, many linked to ideological groups such as the RSS, has made it difficult for ordinary citizens to differentiate between community protection and partisan politics. The renewed emphasis on the National Register of Citizens highlights how political vocabularies can shift quickly, turning legitimate concerns about immigration into new mobilising narratives. To avoid a cycle of perpetual instability, the present government must demonstrate that governance has moved beyond personality‑driven politics toward institutions, dialogue and evidence‑based accountability. Accountability should be universal and evidence‑based, extending to political leaders, armed groups and civil‑society actors wherever warranted. The uncertainty surrounding Biren Singh’s political future should not become another source of instability; Manipur’s future must be decided through democratic processes, not through continued unrest.
