The United National Liberation Front's (UNLF) 2 February proposal for ending the decade long conflict has been welcomed by several houses. Governor S S Sidhu on 24 February described the move positive and a good development. Chief Minister Ibobi Singh is reported to have said that "the Centre should now view the militancy movement in Manipur with the seriousness it deserves." However, amidst all such hype of a possible peace process, the fact remains that the insistence of the militant outfit on the sovereignty for the State would make the process a non-starter.

The UNLF, in response to the Republic Day speech of the Governor for putting a stop to the hostilities and initiation of a peace process, mooted a four-point proposal to bring the Indo-Manipur conflict to an end. The proposal included:

1. A plebiscite under United Nations (UN) supervision to elicit the opinion of the people of the state on the core issue of restoration of Manipur's independence.

2. Deployment of a UN peace keeping force in Manipur to ensure the process is free and fair.

3. Surrender of arms by the UNLF to the UN force, matched with the withdrawal of Indian troops.

4. Handing over of political power by the UN in accordance with the results of the plebiscite.

Subsequently, the outfit in another statement said, "The UNLF will talk to the Indian government only after the latter announces its acceptance of the proposal. We will take the step towards holding talks on the modalities of the proposed plebiscite and only on the agenda of restoring Manipur's sovereignty."

Even though the government and people in Manipur are keeping their fingers crossed, it is too early a development to predict on. But any positive move towards this would provide Manipur a much-needed breathing space. At the same time, any move that sends signals indicating a weakening and appeasing mood by the government will lead to a situation in which outfits would use the instruments of violence to strike bargaining deals with the government.

What seems to have initiated the UNLF proposal is a "dissatisfied brethren" terminology used by the Governor to describe the militants. He further explained that the militants are "also true sons and daughters of Manipur and they are our dissatisfied brethren." This description, which runs parallel to the similar "our misguided youths" expressions used by various authorities including Union Home Minister to describe the terrorists, is in a way an admission of the "genuine" grievances of the militants.

The demand for sovereignty appeared to have been bypassed by the State government in its longing for peace. Chief Minister Ibobi Singh was reported to have said, "The United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) has not shifted its stance from the demand of the sovereignty but that has not deterred the Centre from going ahead with the talks."

The Governor appears to be convinced that the government moves to increase developmental funds to the State will go a long way in dealing with insurgency. However, it has been a much tried and failed formula, which all these years has ensured that a substantial portion of the developmental funds goes into the coffers of the militant outfits. Similarly, ideas such as the look east policy have limited value as far as dealing with insurgency is concerned. Such approaches tend to lose sight of the character of militancy in States such as Manipur. The dynamics of porous borders, systemic state failure to govern and endemic corruption has created situations where multiple insurgencies just don't originate, but also grow and flourish.

As expected the proposal has led to a chain reaction of sorts by another recalcitrant outfit, the PLA. In a statement on 24 February, the RPF, political wing of the PLA, said that it would watch and wait New Delhi's reaction to the UNLF proposal. The RPF president Irengbam Chaoren said, "We will be watching how New Delhi reacts to the UNLF central committee's proposal as well as the latter's next move."

It appears that New Delhi's decision would be of paramount importance. However, in the form of the plebiscite for sovereignty clause by the UNLF, the talks face a difficult hurdle as the government would be reluctant to give in to such a demand. Talks with the ULFA have not begun as the outfit continues to harp on the sovereignty issue. Talks with the National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM) highlight the integration of the Naga-inhabited areas issue and tactically underplays the sovereignty demand. Thus, talks with the UNLF would have little possibility of getting underway unless the outfit makes tactical amends on its plebiscite demand.