The Supreme Court’s decision to quash the criminal proceedings against the 30 Army personnel involved in the killing of 14 civilians raises complex questions about justice, accountability, and the rights of the Naga people. It also perpetuates conflict fatigue.
Conflict fatigue refers to a psychological and emotional exhaustion that individuals or groups experience due to prolonged exposure to conflict, violence, or political instability. It often leads to a decreased willingness or ability to engage with or care about ongoing disputes, as people become overwhelmed, desensitized, or apathetic after enduring long-term stress. In the context of political or armed conflict, this fatigue can manifest in reduced public support for peace efforts, a sense of hopelessness, or indifference towards resolution, despite the continued presence of the conflict.
Yes, conflict fatigue can be intentionally induced by a state as a strategic ploy to weaken the resolve of a section of people, particularly in the context of prolonged conflicts or political struggles. By allowing a conflict to drag on without resolution, or by continually subjecting a population to stress, violence, or instability, a state may hope to wear down the opposing side’s ability or willingness to continue fighting for their cause.
This tactic can involve several deliberate actions, such as prolonging and stretching out peace talks or political negotiations creating a sense of stagnation and frustration among those seeking change. Continuous military actions to instill fear, making resistance seem increasingly futile; propaganda and disinformation by spreading narratives that downplay the chances of success for those opposing the state, contributing to feelings of hopelessness; and employing other means to exacerbate hardships, leading to exhaustion and a focus on immediate survival over long-term resistance.
By inducing conflict fatigue, a state may attempt to shift the balance of power, pushing a population towards acquiescence, surrender, or compromise on terms more favorable to the state. This tactic is often subtle and psychological, as the goal is to break the spirit of resistance rather than achieve victory through outright force.