Context:

This editorial is based on the news “Misplaced priorities: On the scrapping of the Free Movement Regime between India and Myanmar” which was published in the Hindu. Recently, India has decided to scrap the Free Movement Regime (FMR) between India and Myanmar.

Reason for the Scrapping of Free Movement Regime (FMR)

• To ensure the internal security of the country.
• To maintain the demographic structure of India’s North Eastern States bordering Myanmar.
• To address illegal immigration.
• To counter counterfeit currency.

India-Myanmar Borders and Free Movement Regime (FMR)

• Bordering States: The border between India and Myanmar runs along four states – Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh. 
• Free Movement Regime: The Free Movement Regime (FMR) is a mutually agreed arrangement between the two countries that allows tribes living along the border to travel up to 16 km inside the other country without a visa.
  • Under the FMR, every member of the hill tribes, who is either a citizen of India or a citizen of Myanmar and who is a resident of any area within 16 km on either side of the border, can cross over on production of a border pass with one-year validity and can stay up to two weeks.
  • Implementation: It was implemented in 2018 as part of the India’s Act East policy.

Concerns and Challenges of the Scrapping of Free Movement Regime (FMR)

• Upholds People-centric Governance: Free Movement Regime (FMR) enables free access for border tribes to connect with their ethnic kin across borders. Revoking it deprives civilian communities and prioritises narrow security interests.
• Negated History of Ethnic Invariability: Tribes along the border have cultural ties predating modern nations and FMR recognized this history. Building barriers disregard people’s identities.
• Strategic Cooperation over Disruption: Porous borders can be better managed through collaborative governance frameworks rather than disrupting cross-border people ties.
• No Convincing Security Risk: Insurgency has weakened substantially in the Northeast. Drug trade is due to lack of enforcement and not just porous borders. Fencing the entire 1,643 km stretch may still not resolve security issues.
• Against India’s Act East Policy: FMR enabled trade and commerce across borders as part of India’s Act East policy. Revoking it negates this strategic outlook.
• Violate Refugee Rights: Myanmar civilians are taking shelter in Indian border states fleeing civil war. Fencing borders and stopping cross-border movement violates humanitarian commitments.
• Social and Economic Costs outweigh Benefits: Fencing the highly mountainous terrains will involve massive financial costs and manpower. Disrupting people-to-people ties also has massive social costs in the long term.

Conclusion

The decision to revoke the Free Movement Regime (FMR) holds immense significance for internal security and demographic integrity of the North Eastern States and to address illegal immigration. However, FMR holds an expression of the will of people of the region who share ethnic relations and the humongous exercise of fencing a border situated in rugged mountains and forests is a case of misplaced priorities and needs reconsideration.