This is the first of a two-part series on how disturbances in countries that India shares a border with contribute to internal violence. The first part reflects on how upheavals in countries bordering the Northeast lead to internal disturbances in the region from time to time. The second part cites three examples of prominent leaders from across the political spectrum trying to build their electoral future from these disturbances.New Delhi: Since 1947, whichever political party has been in the saddle in New Delhi has always set its priorities around border management by focusing more on its western border and Pakistan. This priority setting is prominently reflected in the New Delhi-centric national media. Any civil society upheaval or change of power in Pakistan has consequently alway been ‘page one’ material. This unremitting national focus on one neighbour, at times, gives the impression that India only has one international border, while in reality, it is bound by six other countries, most of them in the Northeast. This preamble here, of holding up the ‘Pakistan-first’ approach across the board in New Delhi, is worth taking note of to be able to comprehend better what mainland India has failed to understand when it comes to the Northeast, and its delicate peace structure – at least since the 1980s.With Manipur continuing to burn, it needs to be seen that the long-practiced ‘national’ approach of minimising upheavals in other neighbouring countries, particularly those bordering the northeastern states, has in fact succeeded in kicking up long-drawn-out internal turbulences. The Manipur violence playing out between the two communities since May 3 is the latest example of that phenomenon. Also read: Seven Reasons Why the Violence in Manipur Cannot Be Considered a Sudden OccurrenceHistory holds up a patternLet us look at the 1980s, the era in which Assam, hemmed in by Bhutan and Bangladesh, ushered in the first non-Congress government in 1978. A late fall-out of Emergency politics meant that Assam then had a Janata regime comprising political outfits of varying shades including the Jan Sangh. Through the late 1970s and the early 1980s, Assam had been on a political precipice – both internally, having removed Congress for the first time from power, and also beyond its international borders. That government was a result of this.In the early 1980s, across both its international borders, there was civil unrest. The tiny kingdom of Bhutan witnessed the ethnic cleansing of the Nepalis settled there. Thousands fled; several of those hapless families rushed into Assam through the open international border. That migration of ‘illegal immigrants’ triggered by the local upheaval in Bhutanese politics, didn’t go unnoticed by the majority Assamese community though. By then, another theatre of conflict affecting the fate of common people had erupted beyond Assam’s other international border – in East Pakistan. Even as the jungles of Assam, and what is Meghalaya now, were being used by the Mukti Bahini cadres to receive training secretly from the Indian security forces to mount a guerrilla warfare on the West Pakistani military, scared refugees fled to Assam (also to Tripura and West Bengal) through the open international border. While migration went up significantly in the early 1970s, the exodus, particularly of Bengali Hindus, had really begun 1960s onwards. In the local public psyche in Assam, those upheavals across the border leading to a gust of refugees into the state kicked up a fear that is all pervading in the Northeast – the fear of the ‘other’ usurping what residents see as their traditional land and the subsequent loss of their socio-political heft and identity in their own homeland. The rush of refugees from East Pakistan, supplemented by similar migration from Bhutan, firmed up the local opposition to ‘illegal immigrants’. The consequence of this was the All Assam Students Union (AASU)-led anti-foreigner agitation in the first half of the 1980s. Though in August, 1985, the Assam Accord was signed to put a lid on that agitation, not all were satisfied with that agreement handed down by New Delhi. It soon took a dangerous turn, birthing an outfit from within the majority community that took up arms against New Delhi. It was a movement against what they saw as the ‘step-motherly attitude’ of the Union government. The United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) went on to unleash violence with the state actors stepping in, leading to a protracted period of internal disturbance in Assam. The creation of Bangladesh in 1971 helped then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi radiate in mainland India an image as the new-age ‘Durga’ who had the ability to split Pakistan into two. Continued pursuance of that Pakistan-first approach in the corridors of power in New Delhi, also within the opposition (including in the Jan Sangh), and in the national media, ignored the fact that Assam was about to burst. Disagreements between the local community and the Union government over the settlement of refugees had reached its peak. Knowingly or unknowingly, New Delhi had evoked in the majority Assamese community what can be traced in every community of the Northeast – the fear of the ‘other’.Till day, the upheavals that had occurred across the international border in the 1980s have continued to affect peace in Assam. Lakhs of people left out of the updated National Register of Citizens (NRC) in 2019 is a result of that internal disturbance. Also read: Why Is No One In Assam Happy With the Final NRC?As to why such refugee migration to Tripura did not trigger an internal disturbance of the magnitude seen in Assam then was because that state already had seen the adoption of Bengali language at the behest of the Tripuri king. Such a factor had led several Bengali Hindu families to migrate to that northeastern state during Partition and afterwards. Lately though, the local tribal population becoming a minority in their own homeland has become an identity movement whereby the demand for a separate state for them has been raised alongside protection of their language, Kokborok. A similar pattern noted in Assam could be linked to local gripe in Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram too. With the East Pakistan government erecting the Kaptai Dam in Rangamati district of Chittagong in the 1960s, a large part of the homeland of the Chakma tribe went under the waters. No rehabilitation was planned for the tribe by the Pakistani government, pushing hundreds of families to move into Northeast India through the open borders. While some settled in the neighbouring Lushai Hills of Assam, which is Mizoram now, the government settled some others in North Eastern Frontier Province (NEFA) attached to Assam which is now Arunachal Pradesh.Assam-Manipur border in Cachar. Photo: EastMojoOver a course of time, this hapless set of refugees, became the reason why locals feared losing their own power over the land and community. That upheaval across the international border in the 1960s has continued to affect internal disturbances in both these northeastern states from time to time. A unique and strange phenomenon springing out of this internal disturbance in Arunachal is the inability of both the Congress and BJP governments to implement a Supreme Court order to grant Indian citizenship to those refugees because, making a move on that count would mean challenging the All Arunachal Pradesh Students Union (AAPSU) which has been leading the fight against ‘foreigners’ and ‘illegal immigrants’ in that state. The majoritarian politics in Mizoram too is pitched against the Chakmas, with powerful groups like Mizo Zirlai Pawl (MZP) leading strident agitations against conceding any rights to the Chakma residents of the northeastern border state even if they are Indian citizens.Manipur issueWhat is unfolding in Manipur is yet another sample of what an upheaval in a neighbouring country can do to a northeastern state. In Manipur’s case, it is the ongoing civil war in Myanmar against its military junta. With an open and long border with Myanmar, for some years now, it is commonly heard within the majority Meitei community in Imphal that Myanmarese nationals have been moving into the Kuki-dominated areas on the Indian side because of their common ancestry. The idea behind that notion is the same, the fear of the ‘other’ seizing socio-political weight and land. With the ongoing civil war in Myanmar displacing thousands, that fear of the ‘illegal immigrant’ swarming into their state has definitely intensified in a considerable section of the Meiteis. That fear of the ‘other’ has gone on to foment a fight that is refusing to die down even after over 50 days have passed. In Mizoram which also shares a long border with Myanmar, and also Manipur’s Kuki areas, the upheaval across the state and international borders has whipped up another front. It is a growing demand for a Mizo homeland by knitting together all the Kuki-Chin-Zo areas across the borders. The idea of a Mizo homeland or a ‘Kukiland’ has its roots in Zalen’gam, the land of freedom, which Kuki armed groups like the KNO interpret as the area up to the Chindwin river in Myanmar, stretching to the Chin state in that country. Here, let’s also not forget that a tree that the Mizos consider to be the tribe’s family tree lies in Myanmar’s Sagaing Region. Khampat Bungpui is a huge banyan tree located in Khampat village of Sagaing region, has been facing the danger lately of being washed away by the Khampat river.In 2016, the Narendra Modi government had conceded to the long-standing demand of the Mizo-Kuki people on India to put pressure on Myanmar diplomatically to protect their revered tree. The then external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj wrote to the Myanmar government to take steps to preserve it. Also read: India Writes to Myanmar Seeking Help to Protect Mizo Family TreeSuch an official move by the Ministry of External Affairs under Swaraj may have been an effort to reach out to the Mizo-Kuki voters across Manipur and Mizoram in the run-up to the assembly elections in those states. Nevertheless, it was a rare one by New Delhi which otherwise has been stridently focused on Pakistan.