Thirst as a Weapon: The Unforgivable Logic of Cutting Water in Conflict

In the hierarchy of human needs, water sits at the very base - more immediate than food, more urgent than shelter, and utterly non-negotiable for life. To deliberately cut off drinking water to civilians during an ethnic conflict is not merely a tactical decision; it is an act that collapses the boundary between warfare and cruelty. It transforms a basic necessity into a weapon, punishing the vulnerable for circumstances they neither created nor control. 

From a legal standpoint, such actions are profoundly indefensible. International humanitarian law, particularly the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, explicitly prohibit targeting objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population. Water systems - pipelines, reservoirs, wells  - fall squarely within this protection. See a  Thangkhul woman cutting drinking water supply line mean for the Kuki village 

When a Drunken Brawl Becomes a Communal Flashpoint: Lessons from the Litan Incident

The recent incident in Litan, where an individual-level drunken altercation spiralled into a communal confrontation, is yet another stark reminder of how fragile the law-and-order situation remains in Manipur. What should have remained a localised dispute between individuals quickly acquired a dangerous communal colour, exposing the deep mistrust, accumulated trauma, and administrative fragility that continue to define the state’s current reality.

At its core, the episode reflects a disturbing truth: in Manipur today, even the smallest spark can ignite a wider blaze. A drunken act, a personal insult, or a momentary provocation is no longer just an isolated occurrence. It is interpreted through the lens of identity, insecurity, and historical grievance. This is not merely a failure of individuals—it is a failure of the environment in which they are forced to live.