Manipur violence renews questions over government view on village volunteers
As ethnic clashes continue in Manipur, residents are asking how the government plans to treat village volunteer groups, especially amid claims about weapon use,
Manipur continues to face repeated outbreaks of violence between Naga and Kuki communities. During earlier clashes, many weapons were reported to have been looted from police armouries, and while several items have been recovered, some weapons are still said to be unaccounted for and believed to be with armed groups.
Why village volunteers are now at the centre of debate
After a new state government took office in February 2026, hopes of improved peace were raised. However, violence has resurfaced. Attention has also returned to how weapons are handled under the Suspension of Operations (SoO) framework, which was renewed in September 2025 under Revised Ground Rules (RGR). Critics and residents are asking how SoO cadres can be linked to armed incidents involving sophisticated firearms if weapons are meant to remain under security custody.
In the middle of these questions, a separate issue is being raised by villagers across affected areas: the role and treatment of village volunteer groups. The feed notes that, in many places, village volunteers are generally understood to carry only licensed 12-bore guns rather than automatic weapons. That difference, residents say, makes it important to clarify whether disarmament plans target all village volunteers or only certain categories.
Disarmament moves and concerns about unequal treatment
Recent operations by CRPF’s COBRA units in Noney district have intensified concerns. Reports described that Naga Village Guards were disarmed, which led many residents to see the move as selective. Villagers also point out that Naga communities are still recovering from an earlier incident that resulted in the killing of six people and triggered allegations of cannibalism. Against this background, some question why immediate focus shifted to disarming village defence groups when allegations of serious crimes remained disputed and widely discussed.
Another issue raised is transparency. The feed says there is limited public information about what the Joint Monitoring Group (JMG) has done regarding alleged violations of the Ground Rules or RGR. When action appears to be taken against one category of volunteers while alleged violations tied to SoO cadres are not addressed with similar firmness, residents fear unequal treatment perceptions will deepen and public trust in security institutions will weaken.
The article argues that the Ministry of Home Affairs should clearly define its policy on armed village volunteer groups. It also calls for consistent enforcement of weapon custody provisions for SoO cadres, along with uniform and transparent application across communities, to reduce suspicion and improve confidence in the neutrality of security efforts.
