Current Affairs · · GS3 · Internal Security

Four killed near Myanmar border as Centre extends AFSPA in Manipur

Four Tangkhul Naga civilians were killed at Pilong village in Manipur's Kamjong district, near the Myanmar border, on 24 September. A Naga civil body alleged armed groups crossed from Myanmar. The Centre separately extended AFSPA in most of Manipur for six months from 1 October.

Event date:

REq1
  1. Context1 / 7

    On the evening of 24 September 2026, four Tangkhul Naga civilians were killed near Pilong village in Manipur's Kamjong district, close to the India–Myanmar border. Officials said armed men targeted five villagers near border pillar 95; four died and one escaped to alert authorities. The Working Committee of the Tangkhul Naga Long alleged that Myanmar-based armed groups crossed the border and carried out the attack. Police had not officially confirmed this attribution. Separately, on 25 September, the Ministry of Home Affairs extended the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA) in most of Manipur for six months from 1 October, following a law-and-order review. This article presents reported positions and the legal framework without adjudicating competing community claims.

  2. Key highlights2 / 7

    The attack: Bullet-riddled bodies were recovered from an isolated part of the remote village around 1:30 am on 25 September and taken to Kamjong district hospital.

    The allegation: The Tangkhul Naga Long's Working Committee alleged that the Kuki National Army-Burma and Kuki militants backed by Myanmar's People's Defence Force crossed the Namya river and attacked. Police reportedly suspected a Myanmar-based group, but the attribution was not officially confirmed.

    The protest: The Tangkhul Naga Long called a 24-hour shutdown in Tangkhul Naga-inhabited areas of Ukhrul and Kamjong.

    AFSPA extension: The notification declares most of Manipur a disturbed area until 31 March 2027, unless withdrawn earlier. Areas under 13 police stations in Imphal West, Imphal East, Thoubal, Bishnupur and Kakching remain excluded.

    Beyond Manipur: The MHA also declared nine districts and 21 police-station areas in five Nagaland districts disturbed for six months from 1 October. The specific Arunachal Pradesh areas require verification.

  3. Key concepts3 / 7

    AFSPA and disturbed-area declaration: The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 applies only in areas formally declared disturbed under Section 3. A Governor, UT Administrator or Central Government may make the declaration when conditions are considered sufficiently disturbed or dangerous to require armed forces in aid of civil power. The Act provides certain operational powers, including powers relating to use of force, arrest without warrant and search without warrant, subject to its conditions. Section 6 requires previous Central Government sanction before prosecution or legal proceedings for acts done under the Act. A declaration is area-specific and time-bound; it is distinct from President's Rule under Article 356.

    Area exclusions: A State need not be uniformly covered. Manipur's notification excludes 13 police-station areas, reflecting a geographically differentiated application.

    Free Movement Regime: FMR allowed people in border communities to cross within a specified distance for limited periods without a visa, recognising family, ethnic and economic ties predating the boundary. Supporters emphasise livelihoods and kinship; critics cite possible security misuse. India has moved to review and restrict the arrangement and announced fencing plans; its exact current status and any replacement permit system need verification.

    Cross-border spillover: Conflict in a neighbouring country can lead to refugee flows, movement of armed groups, arms trafficking and safe havens. Myanmar has faced internal armed conflict since 2021. India shares roughly 1,643 km of difficult, hilly and forested border with Myanmar across Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram.

  4. Way forward4 / 7

    Review AFSPA periodically and by district rather than applying it uniformly or indefinitely. Investigate civilian deaths credibly and promptly, since public confidence depends on the response. Improve India–Myanmar intelligence sharing and border coordination while recognising practical limits from Myanmar's internal situation. Combine security operations with political engagement on inter-community distrust, displacement, land and representation. Continue rehabilitation for people displaced by violence since 2023.

  5. Note5 / 7

    The wider Manipur situation

    Ethnic conflict between Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities has continued intermittently since May 2023. The Manipur government told the State Assembly in September 2026 that 306 people had been killed and 49 remained missing; around 43,000 displaced people continued to live in relief camps. Human Rights Watch reported at least seven killed in clashes in late August 2026, bringing deaths in such incidents to 34 since February 2026. Around 22 September, at least 41 Naga houses were reportedly burned in Kangpokpi district. An electricity lineman was also reported killed amid firing along the IT Road corridor. Nagas, distinct from Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities, have also been affected. Casualty and displacement figures vary by source and date; attach source and date to any figures used.

  6. Note6 / 7

    The debate over AFSPA

    Arguments in support: Security agencies argue that operations in areas with active armed groups require legal protection for personnel acting in good faith, and that without it forces may hesitate in dangerous situations. Application has been periodically reviewed and withdrawn from some northeastern areas.

    Arguments against: Human-rights organisations and civil society groups have sought repeal, citing accountability concerns. Critics say prior Central sanction for prosecution creates a high barrier and prolonged application can become a standing arrangement rather than an exceptional measure.

    Official record: The Jeevan Reddy Committee (2005) and Second Administrative Reforms Commission recommended repeal, with some provisions incorporated into other law; the government did not accept these recommendations.

    Judicial position: In Naga People's Movement of Human Rights v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court upheld AFSPA's constitutional validity and laid down guidelines. The policy debate remains contested; present the competing positions fairly.

  7. Note7 / 7
    myn

Sources

Syllabus

PaperSubjectSub-topic
GS3Internal SecuritySecurity challenges and their management in border areas; linkages of organized crime with terrorism; various security forces and agencies and their mandate. Prelims and Mains.
GS2GovernanceIssues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure; government policies and interventions. Mains.
EssayPolity—

Topics

India Contemporary EventsInternational Relations and Current AffairsGovernance

Related previous-year questions

Asked in earlier UPSC Prelims papers on this topic. Answer, then check.

  1. UPSC Prelims 2011 · International Relations and Current Affairs

    With reference to “Look East Policy” of India, consider the following statements: 1. India wants to establish itself as an important regional player in the East Asian affairs. 2. India wants to plug the vacuum created by the termination of Cold War. 3. India wants to restore the historical and cultural ties with its neighbours in Southeast and East Asia. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 only
    2. 1 and 3 only
    3. 3 only
    4. 1, 2 and 3
    Show answer

    Answer: B. Correct Answer: 1 and 3 only India’s Look East Policy was launched in 1991 under the P.V. Narasimha Rao government. It aimed to strengthen India’s economic, strategic and cultural engagement with East and Southeast Asia. Statement-wise Explanation 1. India wants to establish itself as an important regional player in East Asian affairs — Correct This was a major objective of the Look East Policy. India wanted to deepen its engagement with ASEAN and East Asian institutions and become an important regional actor in economic and strategic affairs. 2. India wants to plug the vacuum created by the termination of Cold War — Incorrect The end of the Cold War influenced India’s foreign policy, but Look East was not meant to replace any superpower or fill a global vacuum. It was mainly driven by economic liberalisation, search for new markets and stronger regional engagement. 3. India wants to restore historical and cultural ties with its neighbours — Correct India has old cultural links with Southeast Asia through Buddhism, Hindu traditions, maritime trade and historical contacts. Look East Policy used these civilisational links as soft power to strengthen relations with neighbouring regions. Extra UPSC Info * Look East Policy was launched in 1991 during India’s economic liberalisation. * Its initial focus was economic engagement with ASEAN. * Later, it expanded to strategic and security cooperation with East Asian countries. * In 2014, it was upgraded into the Act East Policy. * Act East Policy gives greater focus to connectivity, security, Indo-Pacific cooperation and India’s North-East. * Important projects include the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway and Kaladan Multi-modal Transit Transport Project. Final Takeaway Look East Policy aimed to make India an important regional player in East Asia and revive historical-cultural ties, but it was not meant to plug a Cold War vacuum.

    Difficulty: medium · statement

    Open this question on its own page, with the full explanation →

Practice questions

  1. With reference to the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, consider the following statements: 1. It applies only to areas formally declared disturbed under the Act. 2. A disturbed-area declaration may be made by the Central Government or the Governor of a State. 3. Prosecution for acts done under the Act generally requires previous sanction of the Central Government. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 and 2 only
    2. 2 and 3 only
    3. 1 and 3 only
    4. 1, 2 and 3
    Show answer

    Answer: D. All three statements are correct. AFSPA requires a Section 3 declaration; the Centre, a State Governor or a UT Administrator may make it; and Section 6 requires previous Central sanction for prosecution.

    Difficulty: medium · statement

  2. Consider the following statements regarding India's border with Myanmar: 1. Manipur, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh share a border with Myanmar. 2. The Free Movement Regime permitted certain border residents to cross without a visa for limited periods. 3. Assam shares a direct international border with Myanmar. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 and 2 only
    2. 2 and 3 only
    3. 1 and 3 only
    4. 1, 2 and 3
    Show answer

    Answer: A. Statements 1 and 2 are correct. Assam does not share an international border with Myanmar.

    Difficulty: medium · statement

  3. With reference to the disturbed-area declaration under AFSPA, consider the following statements: 1. Once declared, the status applies permanently until Parliament revokes it by legislation. 2. The declaration can apply to only part of a State, leaving other areas outside its ambit. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 only
    2. 2 only
    3. Both 1 and 2
    4. Neither 1 nor 2
    Show answer

    Answer: B. Statement 2 is correct: Manipur's notification excludes 13 police-station areas. Statement 1 is wrong because declarations have specified durations, are periodically reviewed and may be withdrawn earlier.

    Difficulty: medium · statement

Mains practice

Answer-writing practice on this article. Attempt it first, then open the hints.

  1. GS3 · 250 words

    Cross-border instability compounds internal security challenges in India's Northeast. Examine this with reference to the India–Myanmar border, and suggest a balanced approach to border management. (250 words)

    Show hints
    1. Describe the roughly 1,643 km hilly and forested border across four States and the patrol challenges.
    2. Explain possible spillover from Myanmar's conflict since 2021, including armed-group movement and displacement.
    3. Present the Free Movement Regime debate: community ties and livelihoods alongside security concerns.
    4. Assess AFSPA's role and limits in addressing political and social conflicts.
    5. Suggest intelligence coordination, calibrated border regulation and political engagement alongside security measures.
  2. Essay · 250 words

    A border drawn on a map may divide land, but it rarely divides communities.

    Show hints
    1. Discuss historical ethnic and kinship ties that predate international boundaries.
    2. Examine the tension between border security and community livelihoods.
    3. Consider the FMR and similar arrangements on other borders.
    4. Explain how instability on one side can affect security on the other.
    5. Balance legitimate cross-border movement with legitimate security concerns.