Building Trust

While civil society organisations and student bodies from Northeast India often put up a united front against discrimination and injustice faced by people from the region—particularly those living in other parts of the country for education, employment and other purposes—the long-standing interstate border disputes threaten to fracture this camaraderie and shared sense of solidarity. On the one hand, people across the Northeast share deep emotional and social connections rooted in geographical proximity and a common plight, including developmental deficits, inadequate infrastructure and a long history of insurgency. On the other hand, the ties, friendship and mutual respect among the states can quickly turn fragile when territorial claims come to the fore.

Assam alone has long-standing border disputes with four neighbouring states—Nagaland, Mizoram, Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh. These disputes are rooted largely in boundary demarcations made when new states were created, as well as historical claims. Unfortunately, the issues remain unresolved to this day, allowing tensions to flare up periodically. Two fresh clashes involving Assam were reported this month—one with Arunachal Pradesh and another with Nagaland over border-related issues. Mizoram and Meghalaya, too, have long-pending boundary disputes with Assam. It is disheartening that successive governments have failed to resolve these disputes despite decades of negotiations and the loss of lives and property in previous confrontations. This reflects a lackadaisical approach and a lack of political will to settle them. A fresh and determined effort is needed to break the deadlock and pave the way for lasting peace and development in the region.

In the past, state authorities have failed to prevent people from taking the law into their own hands on several occasions, resulting in violent confrontations and casualties on both sides. Such incidents must not be allowed to recur. Interstate border disputes should be resolved through dialogue, understanding and compromise based on mutual respect, rather than confrontation. Civil society groups and other organisations should not be allowed to obstruct the free movement of people and commodities in border areas. Such unlawful acts must be dealt with promptly to prevent them from escalating into a wider conflict. Being a landlocked region, the Northeast is vulnerable to the ripple effects of unrest or disruption in any one state. Any restriction on the movement of people, goods or services in one state can have a cascading impact on its neighbours. The ongoing ethnic crisis in Manipur, for instance, has affected neighbouring states in various ways—economically, socially and politically. The converse is equally true: positive developments in one state can benefit the entire region. Meghalaya Chief Minister Conrad K. Sangma recently suggested collective branding and greater regional cooperation by promoting the Northeast as a single tourism destination. The proposition deserves serious consideration. Such collaborative strategies should extend beyond tourism to other sectors as well. Greater cooperation among the northeastern states, including the sharing of intelligence, information and data, is also essential to tackle problems that transcend state boundaries, such as drug trafficking, human trafficking, environmental challenges and developmental disparities. Above all, the northeastern states must prioritise removing the thorn in the flesh of regional cooperation—the long-standing interstate border disputes.