In News:

In February 2024, Union Home Minister Amit Shah announced the scrapping of the Free Movement Regime (FMR) along the India–Myanmar border, citing national security concerns. The decision is reportedly influenced by the former Manipur Chief Minister, who blamed unregulated cross-border movement for ethnic violence in Manipur. However, the decision has not yet been implemented, and no formal notification or bilateral agreement has been issued. Mizoram and Nagaland have opposed the move, highlighting socio-cultural concerns.

What is the Free Movement Regime (FMR)?

• Introduced: 1968
• Current Limit: Movement up to 16 km on either side of the 1,643 km-long India–Myanmar border
• Eligibility: Members of hill tribes on both sides with a border pass valid for one year, allowing stay for up to 2 weeks per visit
• Purpose:
  • Preserve historical, cultural, and familial ties between border communities
  • Facilitate local trade and people-to-people exchanges
  • Complement India’s Act East Policy by promoting cross-border cooperation
• Regulations: Initially 40 km (1968), reduced to 16 km (2004), with tighter checks from 2016
• Formal Implementation: 2018

Impact on Border Communities:

• Deep Ethnic and Familial Ties: Many communities across Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh share ancestry and cultural links with communities in Myanmar, such as the Chin and Mizo peoples.
• Local Trade & Livelihoods: FMR supports livelihoods through informal trade. Its removal could disrupt economic dependence in these remote areas.
• Perceived as Redundant: Locals report that cross-border interaction predates FMR and continues with or without official sanction.

Security Concerns and Contraband Issues:

• Despite increased military presence post the Border Area Development Programme (BADP) in the 1980s, smuggling of contraband such as drugs, gold, and areca nuts continues unabated.
• Centre’s View: FMR allegedly facilitates illegal migration, drug trafficking, and infiltration contributing to internal instability.
• Local View: Scrapping the FMR alone won’t stop cross-border crime without comprehensive border management and community engagement.

Challenges with Border Fencing:

• Difficult Terrain: The mountainous and forested landscape makes border fencing logistically and financially challenging.
• Social Sensitivity: Fencing may provoke protests as the border cuts across ethnically unified communities.
• Unified Homeland Demand: Risk of reviving separatist sentiments, especially in regions like Eastern Nagaland, where demands for Frontier Nagaland exist.

Legal and Strategic Concerns:

• The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023 allows the use of forest land within 100 km of international borders for strategic projects, raising concerns about displacement and loss of ancestral lands.

Way Forward:

• Balanced Approach Needed:
  • Any changes must consider security needs as well as local sensitivities.
  • Community engagement and consultation are crucial to avoid unrest.
• Alternatives to Fencing:
  • Strengthen customs and intelligence units along the border.
  • Promote legal trade channels to formalize economic activities.
  • Enhance monitoring mechanisms without disrupting historical ties.
• Long-Term Strategy:
  • Address instability in Myanmar, Chinese influence, and Golden Triangle drug trade through coordinated regional efforts.
  • Align border governance with India’s Act East Policy, focusing on connectivity and cultural diplomacy.