Multi-dimensional View of a Conflict
Understanding Northeast India’s Border Conflicts Through a Multi-Dimensional Lens
Decoding Border Conflicts in Northeast India: A Multi-Dimensional Perspective
By Pratyush Pran Sarma | CNSS Insights
Border conflicts in Northeast India (NER) are not just territorial disputes—they are deeply rooted in colonial history, ethnic tensions, and resource competition. This article explores how a multi-disciplinary approach is essential to understanding and resolving these complex conflicts, particularly those involving Assam-Meghalaya and Assam-Mizoram.
The Colonial Legacy and Its Lingering Impact
The seeds of today’s disputes were sown during British colonial rule, when arbitrary borders were drawn to serve imperial interests. These demarcations:
- Ignored ethnic boundaries
- Prioritized resource control
- Created minority enclaves vulnerable to identity crises
The Assam-Meghalaya conflict, for instance, stems from unresolved claims dating back to the Assam Reorganization Act of 1969 and the 1951 border committee.
The Mukroh Incident: A Flashpoint
On November 22, 2022, a violent clash in Mukroh village—a disputed area—resulted in six deaths. Though officially unrelated to the border dispute, the incident exposed the fragility of peace agreements and the deep mistrust among local communities.
Why Linear Negotiations Fail
Peace talks often focus on territorial claims, overlooking:
- Resource access (e.g., timber, coal)
- Ethnic grievances
- Underdevelopment
Without addressing these root causes, agreements remain fragile. The March 29, 2022 agreement between Assam and Meghalaya resolved six of twelve disputed areas, but unrest persists in the unresolved regions.
The Need for an Interdisciplinary Approach
To resolve these conflicts sustainably, we must:
- Analyze historical, economic, and cultural dimensions
- Include local voices and diverse data sources
- Understand emotional motivations behind stakeholder actions
- Apply theories like Growth Pole Theory to address development gaps
This approach mirrors Karl Bruckmeier’s conflict analysis model, which emphasizes contextual understanding and inclusive dialogue.
Development as a Peace Strategy
Development is not just a byproduct of peace—it’s a precondition. The lack of infrastructure, employment, and public services in border areas fuels resentment and violence. A bottom-up development model, tailored to local needs, can:
- Reduce ethnic tensions
- Legitimize state authority
- Foster long-term stability