Too little, too late: Assam Cong on Modi’s Manipur visit

The Assam unit of Congress has described Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to Manipur as “too little, too late,” raising questions about the timing and priorities of the central government in addressing the northeastern state’s long-standing issues. According to Congress leaders, the visit came more than two-and-a-half years after unrest erupted in Manipur, while Modi was simultaneously traveling to 39 foreign countries during the same period.

Congress MP Pradyut Bordoloi highlighted that citizens of Manipur and the broader North East had been urging the prime minister to visit the state for over two years, and the delay reflects a lack of urgency in addressing regional concerns. Bordoloi also criticized the BJP for allegedly misrepresenting history, including false claims that Congress leaders supported Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, a counter-terror initiative post-Pahalgam attack. He stressed that Congress has consistently supported the Indian armed forces, citing public statements from Rahul Gandhi and party president Mallikarjun Kharge as proof.

The Assam unit further criticized political narratives that link historical leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru to current regional unrest, arguing that such references distract from addressing real, ongoing problems. Bordoloi pointed out contradictions in the BJP’s approach, comparing the central leadership’s alleged criticisms of Congress to the actions of individuals closely connected to the party, such as Jay Shah and Devajit Saikia, who participated in cricket matches against Pakistan.

On infrastructure, Bordoloi drew attention to Modi laying the foundation stone for the Narangi-Kuruwa bridge over the Brahmaputra, which, he claims, had already been initiated by former Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi. The Congress leader suggested that this could be seen as an attempt to claim credit for ongoing projects, rather than initiating new development measures.

Meanwhile, Leader of Opposition in Assam Assembly, Debabrata Saikia, emphasized the political contrast between BJP’s public celebrations, like Bhupen Hazarika’s birth centenary, and its alleged propagation of communal politics. While the Congress praised Modi for refraining from political statements during the centenary event, they argued that shifting the celebration date to suit the prime minister’s schedule reflects political optics over cultural respect.

The Congress leaders argue that while visits and ceremonies attract media attention, the real issues,economic development, security, and addressing local grievances,require sustained action, not short-term visits. They warn against symbolic gestures being treated as solutions while ground realities, including infrastructure gaps and community tensions, remain unresolved.

This perspective raises broader questions about governance in the North East: Are political optics overshadowing substantive engagement with citizens? Do frequent visits with little actionable follow-up serve the people, or do they primarily strengthen political narratives? Congress leaders argue the latter, emphasizing that accountability and timely intervention must precede ceremonial attention.

In conclusion, while Prime Minister Modi’s visit brought national attention to Manipur, the Assam Congress stresses that for citizens in the region, delayed action risks undermining trust in governance. They call for long-term planning and consistent engagement rather than episodic, media-focused interventions.