Why in the News?

In February 2024, Union Home Minister Amit Shah announced plans to end the Free Movement Regime (FMR) along the Myanmar border. However, so far, there has been no official notification from the Ministry of External Affairs or any formal agreement with Myanmar on this matter.

What are the historical and socio-cultural reasons behind the implementation of the Free Movement Regime (FMR) along the India-Myanmar border?

• Ethnic and Familial Ties Across the Border: The India-Myanmar border cuts across communities with shared ancestry, language, and traditions. Ethnic groups such as the Chin, Mizo, Kuki, and Naga tribes live on both sides and consider themselves part of the same cultural identity.
  • Example: The Mizo people in Mizoram and the Chin people in Myanmar share deep kinship ties and often intermarry, making border restrictions impractical for their social and economic interactions.
• Pre-Colonial Trade and Historical Linkages: Before colonial rule, there were no rigid boundaries, and people freely moved for trade, festivals, and religious practices. The FMR formalized this long-standing tradition.
  • Example: The Naga tribes have historically maintained trade and social connections between Nagaland and the Sagaing Region of Myanmar, exchanging goods such as textiles, salt, and agricultural produce.
• Post-Independence Border Division Without Local Consent: The Indo-Myanmar border was drawn by the British without consulting local communities, splitting ethnic groups across two nations. The FMR was introduced in 1968 to ease movement and mitigate the negative impact of artificial boundaries.
  • Example: The Kuki and Zomi tribes in Manipur and Myanmar continue to see themselves as a single community despite the international border, and FMR allows them to maintain their cultural and familial ties.

Why do Mizoram and Nagaland oppose scrapping the FMR, while Manipur supports it?

• Reasons for Opposition (Mizoram & Nagaland)

• • Ethnic & Cultural Ties: The Mizo and Naga communities share deep historical and familial ties with tribes across the Myanmar border. Example: Many Mizos have Chin relatives in Myanmar, and restricting movement disrupts social and economic relations.
  • Humanitarian Concerns: Mizoram and Nagaland emphasize providing refuge to Myanmar nationals fleeing conflict and persecution. Example: Mizoram has sheltered thousands of Chin refugees since the military coup in Myanmar (2021).
  • Economic & Livelihood Impact: Many border communities depend on cross-border trade and traditional exchanges. Example: Mizoram’s barter trade with Myanmar sustains rural economies.

• Reasons for Support (Manipur)

• • Security Concerns: Manipur sees unrestricted movement as a risk to security, citing arms smuggling and insurgency threats. Example: The state government has linked rising violence to unchecked cross-border infiltration.
  • Demographic & Political Factors: Manipur fears an influx of migrants could alter its demographic balance and strain resources. Example: Tensions have risen between local communities and Kuki-Zo refugees from Myanmar.

What challenges does the Indian government face in implementing border fencing along the 1,653-km-long India-Myanmar border?

• Ethnic and Tribal Opposition: Several ethnic groups, such as the Nagas, Kukis, Mizos, and Chins, have strong familial and cultural ties across the border. Fencing would disrupt their traditional movement and economic activities.  
• Difficult Terrain and Dense Forests: The India-Myanmar border passes through hilly terrain, dense forests, and riverine areas, making it logistically challenging to construct and maintain a continuous fence. Example: The rugged terrain of Manipur’s Moreh-Tamu sector complicates infrastructure development and patrolling efforts.
• Security and Insurgency Issues: The region is home to various insurgent groups, including NSCN-K (Naga), PLA (Manipur), and Chin National Army (Myanmar), who use the porous border for movement and arms smuggling. Fencing alone may not curb insurgency without enhanced intelligence and cooperation with Myanmar.
  • Example: The Manipur-based People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has reportedly used Myanmar as a base for launching attacks in India.
• Impact on Free Movement Regime (FMR): The Free Movement Regime (FMR) allows people from border villages to travel up to 16 km inside each other’s territory without a visa. Fencing would disrupt this agreement, leading to resistance from local communities and potential diplomatic strain with Myanmar.
  • Example: The border trade hub of Moreh (Manipur) and Tamu (Myanmar) benefits from FMR, and restrictions could harm livelihoods.
• High Financial and Maintenance Costs: Constructing a fence across 1,653 km of difficult terrain requires massive financial investment and continuous maintenance due to landslides, heavy rainfall, and natural degradation.
  • Example: The fencing project in Manipur was delayed multiple times due to cost escalations and environmental challenges, making large-scale fencing impractical.

What alternatives balance national security and border community interests instead of scrapping the FMR? (Way forward)

• Strengthening Smart Surveillance and Border Management: Deploying technology-driven surveillance (such as drones, infrared sensors, and biometric tracking) can help secure the border without disrupting traditional movement.
  • Example: India has successfully used the Comprehensive Integrated Border Management System (CIBMS) along the India-Bangladesh border, which could be adapted for the India-Myanmar border.
• Regulated Border Trade and Movement Checkpoints: Instead of a blanket ban, regulated border entry points with biometric verification can ensure security while allowing legal movement under the FMR. More trade facilitation centers can also boost local economies.
  • Example: The Moreh-Tamu border trade point in Manipur enables legitimate economic exchanges while maintaining oversight over cross-border movement.
• Enhanced Cooperation with Myanmar for Joint Patrolling: Strengthening bilateral cooperation for joint border patrolling and intelligence sharing can help curb insurgency and illegal activities while maintaining local mobility.

Mains PYQ:

Question: Analyze internal security threats and transborder crimes along Myanmar, Bangladesh and Pakistan borders including Line of Control (LoC). Also discuss the role played by various security forces in this regard. (UPSC 2020)

Linkage: This question linked India Myanmar border issues. It requires an analysis of these issues specifically concerning the Indo-Myanmar border and the role of security forces in managing them.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now