Meiteis, Nagas hold rally in Imphal for SoO truce pact abrogation

The rally was a major public demonstration in Imphal by Meiteis and Nagas during Manipur’s continuing ethnic conflict. COCOMI organised it to demand lasting peace, justice for victims, safe resettlement of internally displaced people and abrogation of the Suspension of Operations agreement with Kuki militant groups. The United Naga Council endorsed the action.

The march began at Tiddim Ground in Kwakeithel and ended at Thau Ground in Thangmeiband, Imphal West. Thousands joined, shouting slogans including “Remove SoO,” “End proxy war” and “Manipur needs justice.” COCOMI described the turnout as historic and as proof of unity among indigenous communities.

The rally also showed how deeply the conflict affects public life. Businesses and educational institutions closed, and public transport stopped. Heavy security, road barricades, frisking and traffic diversions were imposed. Naga groups also held rallies in hill districts, especially Senapati and Chandel.

The Suspension of Operations, or SoO, is an agreement that pauses or limits security operations against participating armed groups. In this article, it refers to an arrangement involving Kuki militant groups. Such agreements generally aim to reduce fighting, establish rules for camps and weapons, and create room for political negotiations. The article does not give the agreement’s detailed provisions.

Protesters want the SoO abrogated, meaning formally ended. COCOMI alleges that the Centre and state government have used Kuki militant groups in a “proxy war” against indigenous communities. Naga representatives repeated demands to cancel the agreement and accused authorities of allowing arms and ammunition to reach Kuki groups.

The disagreement is central to Manipur’s political crisis. Protesters see the SoO as enabling insecurity and unequal accountability. The Kuki-Zo Council, however, says Kuki civilians remain vulnerable and questions security forces’ recent takeover of an SoO camp. Ending the agreement could therefore intensify political confrontation unless accompanied by protection and negotiations.

The mobilisation was described as massive and historic, with thousands of people from different walks of life joining the Imphal rally. The article does not provide an exact attendance figure. Meiteis and Nagas participated, and the United Naga Council supported the event. Parallel protests were held in several hill districts, showing that the mobilisation extended beyond the capital.

The disruption was broad. In response to COCOMI’s call, business establishments and educational institutions remained closed. Public transport services were suspended. These measures turned the protest into a citywide shutdown rather than a demonstration limited to the march route.

Authorities treated the gathering as a significant security risk. Roads toward the Chief Minister’s bungalow and Raj Bhavan were barricaded. Personnel conducted frisking and diverted traffic at Keishampat Junction, Konung Mamang, Palace Gate and Kangla Western Gate. The scale and disruption highlighted the conflict’s continuing impact on daily life.

The article gives only a limited historical account. It places the conflict’s outbreak in 2023 and describes recurring tensions among Meiteis, Nagas and Kuki-Zos. The political struggle now centres on security, justice, land, displacement, armed groups and the state’s response. Different communities accuse authorities or rival groups of failing to protect them.

Naga leaders stress ancestral land rights and say they are its owners and guardians. Meitei and Naga protesters accuse Kuki militant groups of participating in a “proxy war” and demand that the SoO agreement end. The Kuki-Zo Council gives the opposite account, saying Kuki civilians receive less protection and face violence without comparable government action.

These competing narratives deepen mistrust. Each community links safety to political arrangements, security forces and accountability. The article does not detail earlier historical disputes or specific legal triggers. It shows, however, that unresolved violence, displacement and rival political demands continue to drive mobilisation and threaten further confrontation.

The rally affected ordinary life across Imphal. Business establishments closed, educational institutions did not open, and public transport services were suspended in response to COCOMI’s protest call. This meant residents faced fewer services and limited mobility while the demonstration took place.

Security arrangements were especially visible around important government locations. Authorities barricaded roads leading to the Chief Minister’s bungalow and Raj Bhavan. Security personnel conducted frisking and redirected traffic at several locations, including Keishampat Junction, Konung Mamang, Palace Gate and Kangla Western Gate.

These steps were precautionary, but they also showed the authorities’ concern about possible unrest. The rally therefore had two immediate effects: it created widespread public disruption and triggered tighter movement controls. The article does not report arrests or clashes during the event. It does show that the protest unfolded under heavy security amid renewed tensions between communities.

COCOMI and the United Naga Council frame the crisis around collective security, justice and protection of indigenous land. They demand lasting peace, justice for victims, safe resettlement of displaced people and abrogation of the SoO agreement. Naga representatives also called for withdrawing the Assam Rifles and alleged that Kuki groups received arms.

The Kuki-Zo Council presents a contrasting grievance. It says the government has not protected Kuki civilians from violence by Meiteis and Nagas. It argues that deaths of Kuki-Zo civilians receive less official response than killings of Meitei or Naga civilians. It also objected to security forces taking over an SoO camp.

Politically, KZC wants a Union Territory and warned of stronger measures if protection, justice and a meaningful solution do not emerge. It could urge elected MLAs to leave the Manipur government and ask SoO groups to reconsider cooperation. The sides therefore seek sharply different security and political outcomes.

A ceasefire or suspension-of-operations agreement is a temporary framework for managing an insurgency without ending the underlying dispute. It usually pauses attacks or security operations, defines which groups are covered and creates channels for talks. The goal is to reduce deaths and build enough trust for a political settlement.

The mechanism depends on practical rules. Armed groups may remain in designated camps, limit movement and surrender or register weapons. Security forces may stop offensive operations but retain responsibilities for public safety. Monitoring bodies, review meetings and procedures for alleged violations can help prevent small incidents from restarting wider violence. The article identifies the SoO but does not describe its specific rules.

Such agreements can also produce accusations of unequal treatment. In this case, protesters say the SoO enables Kuki militant violence, while KZC says security forces targeted an SoO camp and failed to protect Kuki civilians. Durable progress requires credible monitoring, accountability and negotiations accepted by affected communities.