The Unseen Guardians: Why Manipur s Village Defence Force Strike Matters
For over a year, Manipur has been gripped by ethnic violence that has displaced thousands and strained state resources. Amid this crisis, a lesser-known but critical force the Village Defence Force (VDF) has played a key role in maintaining security in rural and conflict-prone areas. Now, over 10,000 VDF personnel have launched an indefinite strike, demanding better pay, service regularisation, and legal recognition. Their protest raises urgent questions about the state s reliance on community-based security forces and the cost of neglecting their welfare. For North East India, where similar volunteer forces operate in fragile security environments, the outcome of this agitation could set a precedent for how governments engage with grassroots defenders.
The Backbone of Local Security: Who Are the VDF?
A Force Born of Necessity
The Village Defence Force was established as a community-driven initiative to support Manipur Police in areas where state presence is limited. Operating primarily in rural and "red zones" regions marked by high ethnic tension VDF personnel assist in patrolling, intelligence gathering, and emergency response. Unlike regular police, they are recruited locally, often from the same communities they protect, giving them deep contextual knowledge of the terrain and social dynamics.
Since the outbreak of ethnic clashes in May 2023, their role has become even more critical. With state forces stretched thin, VDF personnel have filled gaps in security, often at great personal risk. Yet, despite their contributions, they remain classified as temporary or contractual workers, lacking the benefits and protections afforded to regular police personnel.
Demands That Reflect Systemic Gaps
The current strike is not a sudden outburst but the culmination of long-standing grievances. The All Manipur VDF Employees Welfare Association has outlined three core demands:
- Implementation of Section 18 of the Police Act, 1861, which would align VDF recruitment with formal police service rules, granting them clearer legal status and operational authority.
- A pay hike to reflect the risks and responsibilities they shoulder, particularly in conflict zones.
- Regularisation of service, ensuring job security, pensions, and access to welfare schemes.
These demands highlight a broader issue: the state s dependence on informal security structures without providing them adequate institutional support. In Manipur, where trust between communities and formal law enforcement is often fragile, the VDF s local roots make them indispensable. However, their precarious employment status undermines their effectiveness and morale.
Government Promises and Delays: A Pattern of Inaction
A Committee Formed, a Report Pending
In May 2025, the Manipur Home Department constituted a high-level police committee to investigate the VDF s grievances. The committee was tasked with assessing their working conditions, security challenges, and welfare needs, with a deadline to submit its report by November 2025. However, as of the strike s commencement, the report remains pending, with no clear timeline for its release or implementation.
The delay has only deepened frustration among VDF personnel. Association leaders have pointed out that while the government has extended their contracts most recently until March 2026 under President s Rule it has not addressed the structural issues that leave them vulnerable. The re-engagement of 10,050 personnel without resolving their demands suggests a stopgap approach rather than a sustainable solution.
The Risks of Overlooking Grassroots Forces
The VDF s agitation is not just about wages or job security; it is about the state s failure to institutionalise a force that has become essential to its security architecture. Similar volunteer-based groups exist across the North East, from Assam s Village Defence Parties to Nagaland s Village Guards. These forces often operate in areas where formal policing is either absent or distrusted by local populations. However, their informal status leaves them exposed to exploitation, with little recourse in cases of injury, death, or unfair dismissal.
For Manipur, the stakes are particularly high. The ongoing ethnic conflict has already eroded trust in state institutions. If the VDF many of whom belong to the same communities they protect feel abandoned by the government, it could further destabilise an already volatile situation. The strike, therefore, is not just a labour dispute but a test of the state s ability to manage its security challenges without alienating those on the frontlines.
What Happens Next? The Broader Implications
A Test for President s Rule
The strike coincides with a period of President s Rule in Manipur, adding another layer of complexity. Under central administration, the state government s ability to negotiate is limited, and decisions must align with broader security and political considerations. The extension of VDF contracts until March 2026 suggests an acknowledgment of their role, but without concrete steps toward regularisation, the move may be seen as a temporary fix rather than a long-term solution.
For the North East, where central interventions are often viewed with suspicion, the handling of this crisis could influence perceptions of federal governance. If the VDF s demands are met, it may encourage other states to formalise their volunteer forces. If ignored, it could deter communities from participating in such initiatives, leaving security gaps that non-state actors might exploit.
The Cost of Neglecting Informal Security Structures
The VDF s strike underscores a critical lesson for conflict-prone regions: informal security forces cannot be treated as disposable assets. Their effectiveness depends on trust both from the communities they serve and from the state that deploys them. When that trust erodes, the consequences can be severe.
In Manipur, where ethnic divisions run deep, the VDF s role as a neutral or community-aligned force is invaluable. However, their current predicament reveals a paradox: the state relies on them to fill security gaps but refuses to grant them the stability and recognition they deserve. This contradiction cannot persist indefinitely without consequences for law and order.
Looking Ahead: A Call for Structural Reform
The indefinite strike by Manipur s Village Defence Force is more than a labour protest; it is a wake-up call for policymakers. As the state grapples with ethnic conflict and institutional fragility, the VDF s demands highlight the need for a coherent framework to integrate community-based security forces into the formal law enforcement apparatus. This means not just better pay or temporary extensions but a clear pathway to regularisation, legal protections, and operational clarity.
For North East India, where similar forces operate in similarly complex environments, the resolution of this crisis could serve as a model or a cautionary tale. The VDF s struggle is a reminder that security cannot be outsourced indefinitely without addressing the welfare of those who provide it. The question now is whether the government will act before the cost of inaction becomes too high to bear.