Segregation policy

The Central government’s decision on February 8, 2024 to scrap the Free Movement Regime (FMR) along the Indo-Myanmar border, ostensibly to curb illegal activities like drug smuggling, is a shortsighted move that fails to address the root causes of cross-border crime while alienating the very communities it seeks to protect. Far from being an effective deterrent, the abolition of the FMR will only deepen socio-economic hardships for borderland tribes, potentially exacerbating security challenges rather than resolving them. Since last year there have been scores of protests across the north east after the union Home Ministry scrapped the Free Movement Regime (FMR) along the 1,643-km Indo-Myanmar border. The decision has sparked widespread unrest among the tribal communities of Mizoram, Nagaland, Manipur, and Arunachal Pradesh. These protests are not merely about policy-they are a cry against the erasure of centuries-old cultural and familial ties, severed overnight by bureaucratic decree. The British-drawn boundary of 1826 was an arbitrary line, indifferent to the shared histories of the tribal communities. For generations, the FMR allowed movement without visas-16 km under the 2018 rules, 40 km in 1968 -enabling trade, kinship, and cultural exchange. Its abolition disrupts not just logistics but the very fabric of life for borderland communities. The FMR was a pragmatic acknowledgment of a reality colonial borders could never erase such as- the interconnected lives of ethnic communities straddling the Indo-Myanmar frontier. The government’s rationale-security concerns amid Myanmar’s post-coup instability-is not unfounded. The move risks alienating the very populations whose cooperation is vital for border management. Fencing the border (only 10 km in Manipur is currently fenced) may curb illicit crossings, but it will also deepen grievances. The region’s tribes view the FMR as a lifeline, not a loophole. Also the assumption that ending the FMR will stem drug smuggling is misguided. Illicit networks thrive on stealth and evasion-they do not rely on legal border-crossing mechanisms. Enhanced drone monitoring, biometric tracking at checkpoints, and cooperation with Myanmar authorities would be far more effective than an outright ban on movement. When people dependent on cross-border trade and kinship are suddenly criminalized for routine movement, resentment festers-creating fertile ground for unrest. History shows that heavy-handed border policies often backfire, sparking hostility against the government. If the goal is long-term stability, alienating border communities is short-term and counterproductive. Further, fencing the entire 1,643-km Indo-Myanmar border is a logistical nightmare. The terrain-dense forests, rugged hills, and shifting riverine boundaries-makes physical barriers expensive and difficult to maintain. Even if completed, determined smugglers will find ways around them, as seen in other border regions globally. Instead of pouring resources into an unviable project, the Centre should invest in smart border management: sensor-based surveillance, community policing, and cross-border intelligence sharing. Engaging tribal leaders in border security efforts would foster cooperation instead of resistance. Security cannot come at the cost of humanity and those who believe in fencing must remember that the world has got rid of the Berlin wall mentality and the government must listen to those who live there-not those who want to shut them out.