Indo-Myanmar border management : A relook ?

Lt Gen (Dr) K Himalay Singh, Retd *

Indo-Myanmar border near Moreh (border pillar #79 and #81) in July 2013 :: Pix - Somerendro Sorokhaibam

Background

The 1648 Km long Indo-Myanmar border is one of the most ecologically fragile, interspersed with water bodies, low mountains, thick jungles and devoid of modern infrastructure even today. Thinly populated by various small and margi-nalised ethnicities on both sides of the border, the population densities in most areas are less than 30 per sq Km.

The demography consists of hundreds of small and large ethnic groups whose languages and dialects are mostly Indo- Tibetan and Tibeto-Burmese groups of languages. Notable languages on the Indian side are Assamese, Nagamese (A mixture of Assamese and a few dialects of Naga ethnic groups), Manipuri, Lushai besides a number of other dialects. On the Myanmar side of the border, Shan, Chin, Burmese are the major languages besides many other smaller dialects.

Geography of the area has influenced the socio-cultural dimensions of the peoples in the area. The multiple ethnic groupings, multiple number of dialects and culture are a direct manifestation of geographical realities.

These border-lands were populated by mostly ‘wild and savage” people who were organised at village or clan levels for survival and administration devoid of any semblance of a ‘State’ or a kingdom till the entry of the British colonisers during late 18th century and early 19th century except the kingdoms of Manipur (Mekley) and the Ahom kingdoms on the Indian side and the Ava Kingdom on the Burmese side.

There were principalities such as Jaintia in present day Meghalaya and Shan kingdom on the Myanmar side too. The Ahom kingdom subdued many ethnic groups astride and neighbouring areas in the Patkai and Naga hill ranges and the Brahmaputra valley. The Manipur Kingdom similarly subdued many smaller groups to establish the kingdom during 13/14th centuries.

Border Between the Kingdom of Manipur and Ava Prior to Arrival of the British

A series of conflicts and frequent wars between the major kingdoms of Manipur and the Burmese Ava Kingdom were fought over dominance and control of territories in the region during 17-18th centuries of which the Manipuri campaigns deep into Burma at times well beyond the traditional boundary of Chindwin (Ningthee) river between the two during 1647, 1692, 1717, 1724, and 1749 were notable.

The Ava (Burmese Kingdom) often claimed the kingdom of Manipur as one of the tributary States at various times of history. Burmese campaigns into Manipur and adjoining areas of Assam to subdue continued in a reciprocal manner and the last of Burmese invasion being during 1819-26 after which the Treaty of Yandaboo was signed between East India Company and the Ava kingdom. (The kings of Manipur and Assam had asked for help from East India Company to drive away the Burmese forces).

Col Johnstone, the erstwhile political agent in the Kingdom of Manipur wrote “The territories of Manipur varied according to the mettle of the rulers. At times their territory extended to far east of Chindwin river and sometimes only upto the river only”.

This establishes the fact that the Eastern boundary of Manipuri kingdom were along the river Chindwin for considerable period of time. In the pre-British era, no border pillars were established, nor clearly defined borders as was the case in many parts of the world.

Captain Pembarton, another British surveyor who surveyed this boundary opined “Territories of Muneepore (Manipur) have frequently extended three to four days journey east of Ningthee River (Chind-win).” Pembarton Report forms the basis of the emergence of Indo-Myanmar border, post arrival of the British in the region.

Pembarton Report and the Boundary Post Partition of Burma from India Consequent to the Treaty of Yandaboo, The Burmese relinquished their claim on Assam, Manipur and the Arakan and the broad boundary was recognised along the Arakan mountain ranges.

Whereas Pembarton report 1834 established the boundary between Burma (Myanmar) and British India/Manipur Kingdom determined the Kabaw valley of Manipur (Areas West of Ningthee River and the Patkai Hills) to Burma for some strange reasons. The Patkai Hills were to be considered as the boundary as per his report thereby including the Hill areas of Assam (present day Naga-land, Parts of Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram) and Manipur on Indian side of the border.

These borders were further refined at various times in 1881, 1894. In 1894 Col Maxwell, the British political agent ensured that 38 pillars were erected for the first time along the border. He also demarcated the boundary between Manipur and Chin hills of Burma during 1894. In 1935, Burma was carved out of the British Indian territory as a separate entity under Govt of Burma Act 1935 which was passed by the British Parliament.

During this partition, the boundary was once again not demarcated except mentioning that the Burma will comprise of all “British territories lying to the east of Bengal, Manipur, Assam and tribal areas of Assam” (Tribal areas of Assam included present day Nagaland, Parts of Arunachal and Mizoram). No specific boundary details were earmarked.

It is alleged that many ethnic groups such as many Naga, Chin-Kuki, Chakma, Meiteis (Kathe Shans), and a few other tribes have been left on both the sides of the international boundary there by separating these groups on both sides of the IB.

Similarly, at least over one million Indians from other parts of the country apart from the tribals in the borderlands continued to remain in the new country. The borders thus remained porous without any semblance of border management even after India’s independence in 1947.

Free Movement Regime ? And Free for All since India’s Independance

The birth of “Free Movement Regime thus took place when both India and Burma amended their passport Rules to allow” free movements of bonafide citizens of both the countries and who are tribes ordinarily resident within 40 kms were exempted from passport or visa requirements to move into the other country upto 40 kms vide MHA 4/15/50 Rule 1950.

There were no bilateral agreements but only a tacit understanding through the amendment of the rules. No specific implementation mechanism were put in place either. It was only in 1967 that a serious effort to delineate the boundary was considered essential due to the instability and National security threats emerging due to the porous border where insurgent groups from the Naga, Mizo and Meitei groups raised war against India.

The insurgent groups crossed the boundary for training and supply of arms and other illegal materials from China and other inimical countries since independence. CIA report also suggests that Govt of Burma under Gen Ne Win was very keen to demarcate the boundary in a formal manner due to an increasing Chinese intrusion into northern part of the country during the period.

Thus, a Border Agreement was signed between the two countries with specific geographical features and ‘traditional” as boundary and delimit the entire boundary and formalise the same. A system of ‘ Permit System” was introduced for ‘Bonafide purposes” in the next year ie 1968.

Permit system was mostly on paper only, since there were no mechanism for checking at the borders. Nor was there any effort of the GoI or the concerned States to enforce the so-called “Permit System’ in the FMR regime in vogue.

Thousands were crossing over particularly to India without any permit and continued to settle down in the borderlands inside India, Manipur in particular since Naga Hills and Lushai Hills had a very strong land management mechanism at the village levels thus able to prevent the settlers from across to permanently settle down in their land.

Similarly, anti India and proxy insurgent groups were operating on both sides of the boundary with impunity. A massive smuggling and narcotics trade including poppy plantation thrived in the Indo- Myanmar borderlands amounting hundreds and thousands of crores a year were flourishing in the region. Gun running from Myanmar and China to North East region became rampant in the late 1960s.

As per a reply given by MoS Home in Parliament of India during 2019, Indo-Myanmar border remains unresolved in some areas of Manipur even today. Post Kargil war, the Group Of Ministers recommended and “One Border and One Force” came into force in 2002 and Border management was entrusted to Assam Rifles (AR).

The AR had major concerns of infrastructure, Manpower and other resources to manage the entire 1648 Kms long border while dealing with the insurgency problems in many parts of North East India, particularly in Manipur and Nagaland. The border crossing mechanism underwent changes in 2004 and 2018 again.

In 2004, only people residing within 16 Kms were permitted through designated entry points at Pangsau in Arunachal, Moreh in Manipur and Zokhtawar in Mizoram were to be crossing points. Again in 2018, it was reemphasised that border passes be accepted only for people within 16 Kms of the IB and stay was restricted to 14 days. However, as per available records, these have only been partially implemented.

Present situation and relevance of FMR

Consequent to military take over of the Government in Myanmar in February 2021, there have been large scale migration from Myanmar to Indian State of Mizoram and Mani-pur. Approximately one lac are reported to have taken shelter in these States in recent times. While Mizoram Govt have welcomed the immigrants being from similar larger ethnic groups, Manipur has seen strict opposition to the migrants in recent times.

A number of militant groups whether or not they are in peace talks/ Suspension of Operations have their bases in Myan-mar and frequently operate on both sides of the border with impunity. These groups include Naga, Meitei, Kuki groups numbering over 25 odd groups. It is believed that the narcotic trade volume in these borderlands annually are above Rs 60,000 Cr.

Rampant cross border illegal smuggling and narcotics are directly fuelling the unrests in the region. Over 1800 weapons of all hues were reportedly intercepted by the security forces during 2015-2020 in the area, some of them reaching the Maoist belt also.

Involvement of Chinese and other inimical elements are suspected to be driving the illegal activities there. A few militant groups are believed to be operating alongside the military junta in Myanmar while a few Kuki-Chin-Zo groups are fighting against the junta army. The ripples of such a situation across the border are felt in the State of Manipur.

These issues directly and negatively impact the National security of India and are a serious threat in the making. Geo-politics of Indo-Pacific by great powers appear to be played in some ways in these borderlands. Hence, India has no choice but to manage and re-strategise its border management mechanism in Indo-Myanmar border.

Some reports suggest that the MHA is mulling over removal or recasting of the role of Assam Rifles. The ITBP or BSF are being considered. Be that as it may, It is imperative that border management here be taken seriously by the authorities in the light of serious National security threat.

Border Fencing and Envisaged Deployment

Post the decision of the GoI to fence the borders and tweaking of the FMR regime, there have been opposition from certain quarters in Mizoram, Nagaland and some groups from Manipur due to the fear that cultural and ethnic affinity of respective tribes on both sides will be hit.

It’s an unfounded fear since the new FMR allows cross movements as hither-to-fore. The permit system in vogue since 1967 were not known to these tribes since these rules were never implemented in the first instance, hence the fear of implementing it now.

The fencing has been opposed solely on the grounds that “imagined ethnic, homelands’ on both sides will be disturbed. NSCN and a few Naga groups call it ‘NagaLim’ or NagaLim for Christ “ and Lushai-Kuki-Zo-Chin groups call it “Zogam” “Zoland” “Zalengam” or whatever.

These groups have called for integration of Naga or Zo ethnic groups across the border with a religious bent of ideology. Common people are made to believe that movement of goods and people will be suspended. Existing mechanism caters for cross border movement of legal goods and population continue as hither to fore with a partially regulated mechanism of checking the identities of the people, their return and the legality of cross border trades.

There is no doubt that “Free for All” mentality for cross border movement of people and goods need to be regulated. It never was a ‘FREE” movement since its inception in 1949-50 and even in the 1967 agreement between the two countries. The need for a “permit system “was there all along even though passports and visas were exempted. The policy was never implemented.

Nor was there a border guarding mechanism in existence. Token presence of BSF prior to 2001, along a few locations were clearly at the mercy of insurgent groups. That the authorities then had no inclination nor the resources to guard the border is an understatement and a matter of grave National security concern.

Way ahead and suggested mechanism

The only way ahead is to implement the recently promulgated MHA notification for ‘Border Pass’ which is yet to be notified by the MEA. Processes for entry into India as per the MHA notification of 2023:- “Visitors must : Report to designated border points, Fill a form and undergo document checks, security screening and health inspections. Information will be uploaded to the Indo-Myanmar Border Portal. A border pass with a photograph and QR code will be issued and must be returned at the same point upon departure”.

With 43 crossing points notified, and 22 already functional, there should be no hindrance to cross border movements. However, there will be a necessity of ensuring that the following border management architecture for it to be effective;-

1. Infrastructure to include approach roads or tracks as applicable.
2. Minimum housing for the operating personnel. AR infrastructure where possible for short term needs.
3. Reasonably trained personnel who have basic idea of rules. Customs/immigration/local police/ int/local security
4. Communication to include radio/internet connectivity for data management with State and Central agencies. Communication with the counterpart in Myanmar where possible. And exchange of data.
5. Scanners/sniffer dogs. Physical checking to begin with
6. Biometric identifications and foolproof ‘border pass” issue mechanism

The above are achievable with minimum infrastructure and honest implementation of the Indo-Myanmar agreement on border management.

Present Status of border Guarding Force and Recommendations.

1. Fencing/ Smart Fencing:- While the fencing construction is in progress presently in Manipur-Myanmar border, there have been opposition to the fencing efforts from some civil societies supported by militant groups in Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram. The GoI has rightly decided to fence the vulnerable stretches of the borders to begin with.

There is a need to ensure that the integrity of the IB is ensured with a suitable mechanism. Deployment of drones and other electronic means of surveillance are essential in more vulnerable areas where anti-National elements are bound to take advantage of. However, given the terrain, and the ground realities, boots on ground will have to be positioned in some way.

2. Infrastructure : It has been learnt that a border road is being planned along the entire 1643 Km long IMB to facilitate border management and deployment of forces and elements engaged in its management. This is likely to take upto five years.

Hence, the existing arrangements of using the AR posts from where the entry/exit controls are to be exercised will need greater attention. Coordination and connectivity with the state and other central agencies like the state police will need to be ensured. A degree of transparency will be need of the hour to establish greater integration with other agencies.

3. Border Force : Assam Rifles mandated to manage the border is woefully short of units. Against a requirement of about 40 Units, the present deployment is 20 units, that too without minimal infrastructure and many sub-units well away from the IB. The number of units will have to be enhanced to 40 BG units as planned.

If need be Armed police units of North Eastern States could be pulled in to augment the AR by deploying these with AR units as an interim measure. Deployment will have to ensure that EAOs of Myanmar and IIGs are deterred from any mischiefs.

A few local communities in and around the entry points could be roped in where required. In any case, AR has a significant number of personnel who belong to the border region. But caution should be exercised so that these personnel do not fall prey to local ethnic conundrum.

4. Entry Points : Of the 43 identified entry points, there are many which are 3-5 Kms away from the IMB. Many are also functioning under makeshift tents, even without internet connectivity of the NIC. These issues will need to be addressed earliest possible.

5. Training of Personnel:- The personnel will have to be more trained, like ability to read Burmese scripts, identifying fake passes, impersonations and border management techniques. Adequate knowledge of the challenges at the border such as drugs and narcotics smuggling will have to be imparted to the personal.

6. Integration of the agencies : AR will have to be made the lead agency to coordinate the function of the crossing points where multiple agencies are required to be deployed. Data sharing with the state authorities and other central agencies will have to be made on Priority. All Villagers within 10 Kms of the IMB will need to be issued with QR code enabled/ Bio-metric enabled identity passes.

Similarly , Myanmar authorities to ensure that a reasonably reliable mechanism of border passes is in place and not misused by EAOs and illegal migrants of Myanmar. State police personnel should be in the proximity of the BG location and co-located where essential.

7. Routine Modus Operandi of the BG force : The deployment of BG unit in IMB will be different from other borders due to the terrain and ground situation in the area. Within the IMB also, threat from terrorist groups operating in the area on both sides of the border have to be taken into account.

Cheaper variety short range drones should be operated by these Platoon level posts along with other surveillance equipments to deter the terrorists groups. Patrolling along the fence should be a combination of foot and vehicle mounted patrols with adequately armed personal. These must be supplemented by longer range surveillance drones.

8. Administrative and Political will : As brought earlier, the so-called “Free Movement Regime” was never “FREE’ in the first place. But, the local population was accustomed to a “Free” movement since the regime was never implemented by the enforcing agencies like the BSF from the beginning, nor were they provided nor demanded the resources to do so. The State Govts need to play their part in the border management too by supporting the GoI initiative rather than oppose it.

Conclusion

It is of great National security importance that the IMB will need to be guarded more genuinely in view of the increasing inimical activities in the region. The borders here have been neglected for long and the negligence have cost the country and the States equally in terms of cross border activities by the anti-India forces.

AR should be the lead agency with other elements and assume their role even as the manpower and other related infrastructures are due to come up in a few years from now and get more effective. The border States should not be allowed to dilute this vital issue of IMB border management.