Who’s to Blame if President's Rule Extends in Manipur

Manipur stands at a crossroads, its political future hanging in the balance as the monsoon session of Parliament, set to begin on July 18, 2025, looms large. 

The state has been under President’s Rule since February 13, 2025, following the abrupt resignation of Chief Minister Nongthombam Biren Singh, plunging the state into a governance void. Whispers of extending central rule until January 2026 are growing louder, sparking a heated debate: who bears the weight of this prolonged suspension of democracy? The answer is a tangled web of actors—each playing an important role in this unfolding drama. From the Centre’s calculated maneuvers and the BJP’s internal chaos to the Kuki-Zo MLAs’ boycott, Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla’s steady governance, Kuki militants’ shadowy influence, and the Congress party’s political gambits, the culprits are numerous. 

The seeds of Manipur’s current predicament were sown in May 2023, when the Centre invoked Article 355, seizing control of the state’s law and order while keeping N. Biren Singh’s BJP-led government in place as a mere figurehead. Central forces flooded the state, and a security advisor, Kuldiep Singh, was appointed to oversee operations. Yet, ethnic violence between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities raged on, unchecked. For 20 months, the Centre allowed Biren’s government to bear the brunt of public outrage, deflecting criticism for its failure to restore peace. 

Also Read: Biren's Stand: No Power Chase, Just a Vision for Manipur’s Revival

This approach starkly contrasts with other states like Jammu & Kashmir and Punjab, where security crises prompted swift imposition of President’s Rule, or Uttar Pradesh and Puducherry, where political motives drove decisive central intervention. In Manipur, the Centre’s delay in imposing President’s Rule—despite stripping the state government of security powers—suggests a deliberate strategy to shield its image while letting the state BJP absorb the blame. The invocation of Article 355 allowed the Centre to manage law and order without dismissing the state government, creating an illusion of state autonomy. If President’s Rule is extended into 2026, the Centre’s reluctance to restore a popular government—despite the BJP’s commanding 37 MLAs in the 60-member Assembly (one seat vacant)—will be a primary driver of the stalemate. The Centre’s cautious balancing act, wary of alienating either the Meitei or Kuki-Zo communities, prioritizes stability over democratic governance, setting the stage for this prolonged crisis.
  
The immediate trigger for President’s Rule was N. Biren Singh’s sudden resignation on February 9, 2025, a move that caught even his BJP colleagues off guard. Criticized for his handling of the Manipur violence, which claimed countless lives and displaced thousands, Biren became the Centre’s convenient scapegoat. His exit, without prior consultation within the party, left the BJP scrambling to find a new Chief Ministerial candidate. The state Assembly, with a tenure until 2027, was placed in “suspended animation” under Article 356, allowing the Centre to assume direct control through Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla. 

The swift imposition of President’s Rule distanced the Centre from the crisis, letting Biren and the state BJP absorb the public’s wrath. This contrasts sharply with other states, where President’s Rule was imposed with clear triggers—security crises in Jammu & Kashmir and Punjab, or political instability in Uttar Pradesh and Puducherry. In Manipur, Biren’s resignation and the Centre’s strategic use of him as a shield for its own failures mark a pivotal moment. If the extension is approved, this episode will remain a cornerstone of the crisis, highlighting the Centre’s calculated distancing from accountability.

The BJP’s Manipur unit is a house divided, its internal chaos a glaring obstacle to restoring democratic governance. With 44 legislators, including seven from NDA allies like the National People’s Party (NPP), Naga People’s Front (NPF), and Janata Dal (United), the party has the numerical strength to form a government. Yet, deep factionalism and a lack of consensus on a new leader have paralyzed progress. State party president A. Sharda Devi, along with leaders like Thokchom Satyabrata Singh, Yumnam Khemchand, and Thokchom Radheshyam, have made frequent pilgrimages to Delhi, ostensibly summoned by Union Home Minister Amit Shah and BJP President JP Nadda. These trips, framed as efforts to resolve the crisis, have produced no tangible results. 

Similarly, the BJP Northeast in-charge Sambit Patra’s visits to Imphal, where he held one-on-one meetings with MLAs, exposed the depth of the party’s divisions. A. Sharda Devi’s public assurances of restored governance have rung hollow, eroded by the party’s inability to unite. The state unit’s failure to bridge internal rifts and propose a viable Chief Ministerial candidate is a primary reason for the ongoing deadlock. If President’s Rule is extended, the BJP’s Manipur unit will bear significant blame for squandering its numerical advantage and failing to deliver for the state’s people.

The 10 Kuki-Zo MLAs, including seven from the BJP, hold disproportionate influence over Manipur’s political fate. Their boycott of government formation, driven by directives from Kuki Inpi Manipur (KIM), aligns with the Centre’s cautious approach, stalling any move toward a popular government. KIM’s influence extends beyond politics, reportedly coordinating with militant groups like the Kuki National Organisation (KNO) and United People’s Front (UPF). 

A discreet Silent Acceptance Agreement (SAA) between the Centre and Kuki militants hints at negotiations, with the militants agreeing to reduce designated camps in exchange for undisclosed concessions. Is the extension of President’s Rule their ultimate goal? The Kuki-Zo MLAs’ refusal to engage in government formation, backed by KIM’s directives and militant influence, has created a significant roadblock. Their absence from the political process ensures that no consensus can be reached, making them key players in the ongoing stalemate. If President’s Rule is prolonged, the Kuki-Zo MLAs’ strategic boycott will share substantial responsibility. 

Since assuming control under President’s Rule in February 2025, Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla has made central rule an attractive option for Delhi. His administration has prioritized three critical areas: rehabilitation of internally displaced persons (IDPs), security, and development. With a target of closing relief camps and resettling maximum numbers of IDPs by December 2025, Bhalla’s team has made significant strides in addressing the humanitarian crisis. Joint operations involving state forces, the Army, and the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) have intensified, leading to increased weapon recovery and arrests of lawbreakers. 

Additionally, Bhalla has secured substantial funds from the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (DoNER) for infrastructure projects, including roads, bridges, and markets, fostering economic recovery. His proven track record in Jammu & Kashmir, where he implemented result-oriented strategies, lends credibility to his governance. Bhalla’s advisory council has outshone the BJP’s stalled efforts, making President’s Rule a compelling alternative to a fractious state government. If the extension is approved, Bhalla’s effective administration will be a key justification, highlighting the allure of centralized control in a state plagued by division.
 
The Manipur Pradesh Congress Committee, led by president Keisham Meghachandra, played a catalytic role in the crisis. In early February 2025, their planned no-confidence motion against N. Biren Singh’s government pressured the BJP to avoid an Assembly session, paving the way for President’s Rule. While this move triggered the initial imposition, Congress’s role in a potential extension is less direct but no less significant. 

By failing to propose constructive solutions or collaborate with other parties to break the deadlock, Congress has contributed to the ongoing stalemate. With only five MLAs, their influence is limited, but their initial gambit fanned the flames of the crisis. If Congress were to prioritize Manipur’s welfare over political point-scoring, it could help steer the state away from prolonged central rule. As it stands, their role in precipitating the crisis and sustaining the impasse will share the blame if President’s Rule is extended.

If President’s Rule stretches into 2026, the responsibility will be a shared burden, with each actor contributing to the erosion of Manipur’s democratic voice. The BJP’s central leadership, wary of alienating either the Meitei or Kuki-Zo communities—both critical to its electoral base—may prioritize neutral governance over democracy, sidelining their own state unit despite its numerical strength. The state BJP’s disunity and ineffective lobbying, constrained by loyalty to Delhi, will be a primary driver of the deadlock. 

The Kuki-Zo MLAs’ boycott, backed by KIM and militant groups, blocks the formation of a popular government, while Governor Bhalla’s effective governance makes central rule an appealing default. Congress, though less directly involved in the extension, fueled the initial crisis and has failed to offer a path forward. 

Without bold, unified action from all stakeholders, Manipur risks remaining under Delhi’s grip, its people silenced by a tangled web of political maneuvering, factionalism, and strategic indecision. The monsoon session of Parliament will be a critical juncture—will it bring clarity, or will it deepen the shadows over Manipur’s future!