One year later, Manipuris in India remain unable to return after escaping violence. : Analysis

Reading Time (200 word/minute): 3 minutes

Lingneifel Vaiphei was devastated when she found her infant son, Steven, lifeless on a stretcher in a mortuary in Chennai. Steven, only six months old, was wrapped in a traditional Kuki-Zo shawl. Lingneifel and her husband Kennedy, who had moved to Chennai to escape violence back home in Manipur, buried their only child after he succumbed to a fever before reaching the hospital. Lingneifel, who works in a local restaurant, returned to work soon after the tragedy, while Kennedy struggles to find employment. The Kuki-Zo community, displaced by ongoing ethnic clashes, is slowly building a support network to help members find work and accommodation. Haoneithang Kipgen, a member of the network, resettled in Chennai after losing his business and now helps fellow displaced tribe members. Despite the turmoil, he emphasizes that not all Meitei people are enemies, pointing blame at the government for the unrest. Lingneifel and Kennedy refuse to return to Manipur due to escalating violence and government inaction. The violence in Manipur, underscored by death and migration, has drawn criticism towards the BJP government’s handling of the crisis. Calls for peace and dialogue between the communities are urged as the situation worsens in the state.

The article provides a poignant depiction of Lingneifel Vaiphei’s heartbreaking loss and the challenges faced by the Kuki-Zo community in Chennai. The narrative highlights the impact of violence, displacement, and government inaction on individuals like Lingneifel, Kennedy, and Haoneithang Kipgen.

The sources in the article appear to be the personal experiences of the individuals mentioned, shedding light on the struggles and resilience of the Kuki-Zo community. However, the article lacks direct attribution to official statements or data to support the claims made about the situation in Manipur. This may raise concerns about the article’s credibility and reliability.

The piece also portrays a nuanced perspective on the inter-community dynamics in Manipur, with Haoneithang Kipgen’s statement emphasizing that not all Meitei people are enemies, shifting the blame towards the government for the unrest. This highlights potential biases or perspectives within the article that may influence readers’ understanding of the conflict.

In the context of the political landscape and the prevalence of fake news, articles like these could play a crucial role in shaping public perception by humanizing the impact of conflicts and government actions on individuals. However, readers should critically assess the sources, potential biases, and the lack of official data to avoid misinformation or oversimplification of complex issues. The political lens through which the BJP government’s handling of the crisis is criticized in the article may also influence readers’ views on governance and accountability in conflict situations.

Source: Aljazeera news: ‘No choice’: India’s Manipuris cannot go back a year after fleeing violence

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *