The Breakdown in North-East India

This article tries to unravel the drivers of the protracted ethnic and secessionist conflicts, and the resultant disorder that have marred the north-eastern region of India. These conflicts have mostly been explained using the grievance narrative. But such explanations fail to account for the large variance in violence levels within the region. A rather more fruitful line of inquiry is provided by a state-society reading of the political history of the north-east that highlights the fact that conflicts there are accompanied by a contested and weak authority of governmental agencies and the fragmentation of society. Unpacking this causal connection demands that one delve into the region's history to study the process of state-making—how state leaders in colonial and post-colonial times established bureaucratic apparatuses, and constructed and mobilised collective identities in an effort at legitimacy. By focusing on the cases of Mizoram and Manipur, and their very divergent success with mitigating conflicts, and using qualitative sources of data, the paper demonstrates that in Mizoram the process of state-making was such that it consolidated the public legitimacy and authority of reigning institutions among all sections of society, resulting in the strengthened capability of government agencies to provide services, manage group contestations and avoid breakdown. In Manipur it was localised and traditional centres of power—tribal and ethnic associations—that gained in authority, in effect compromising the legitimacy of the government and the institutional capability of its agencies.