Given the multi-pronged and sophisticated mechanisms through which information about ground realities reaches the Prime Minister of India—from the Ministry of Home Affairs and specialised agencies such as the Intelligence Bureau to coordination with constitutional heads and state governments—the memorandum submitted by Tangkhul civil society organisations to the Prime Minister of India sounds as though it is attempting to address an entirely different audience, judging by its language and content.
It sounds more like an attempt to ignite solidarity and unity among the Naga tribes in Manipur amid the weakening grip of the NSCN-IM, which has historically been dominated by one particular Naga tribe in Manipur, over the other Naga tribes in the state. It also appears to be an attempt to rewrite the course of events and history in their favour by fabricating lies, exaggerating and manipulating facts surrounding the events that unfolded after the drunken brawl in Litan on 7 February 2026. This includes distorting and fabricating historical facts about Kuki customs and traditions to mislead audiences and justify the oppression and cruelty to which Kukis are subjected under the domination of other non-Naga communities.
The wise thing to do before forming a rational opinion would be to conduct independent research by reading the allegations made in this memorandum alongside the Kuki version, which is also publicly available, fact-checking the allegations, and corroborating them with official statements.
This article will therefore focus more on the important contexts necessary to understand the conflict better, debunking some of the conspiracy theories and historical distortions widely propagated as part of a smear campaign against Kukis, many of which can also be found in the memorandum. Rather than dwelling on manipulated and distorted accounts of the recent events mentioned in the article, I believe the tragedy in Manipur deserves to be understood for what it is. I fear that cycles of justification and counter-justification will reduce this tragedy to a bitter rhetorical battle of "we are good and they are bad" between the two sides, ultimately shaping public perception through competing narratives.
DEHUMANISING RHETORIC TO DIMINISH KUKIS' PLIGHT AND CLAIMS AND TO JUSTIFY THEIR OWN CRUELTY
The deliberate attempt to ensure that people associate KUKIS with the label of illegal immigrants in the memorandum speaks volumes about the sheer enmity, prejudice, and hatred directed towards them. Reducing an entire group of human beings to a criminalised legal status diminishes the public's natural empathy towards them, making it easier to justify harsh treatment and systemic exclusion.
Speaking out against alleged insurgent groups whom they consider culpable is well within the rights and responsibilities of any civil society organisation representing its community. However, dehumanising an entire community with whom they have co-inhabited reeks of malicious intent and a vested interest in depriving minorities of their rights under their domination.
Nagas and Kukis have kin across the border, and a significant number of Meiteis can also be found in Myanmar. Close kinship ties continue to be maintained by all stakeholders even today. Singling out Kukis alone will not change the fact that people from different communities have misused the porous border to wage war against India.
The notion that people would migrate from their own country to escape war and death, only to wage another war in a more powerful country, is logically untenable. The refugee crisis needs to be addressed in the manner adopted by Mizoram: identifying refugees and keeping them under strict surveillance while providing them with the security to live until the situation in their home country improves.
THE THEORY THAT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION LEADS TO THE MUSHROOMING OF VILLAGES IS A HOAX
The casual conclusion that the mushrooming of new villages is equivalent to an influx of illegal immigrants from neighbouring countries—an influx allegedly facilitated by both Meiteis and Nagas—stems either from analysing the situation through ethnocentric lenses or from a deliberate attempt to mislead people who are unfamiliar with Kuki culture and traditions by exploiting the cultural relativism through which they might otherwise attempt to understand the situation in Manipur.
Under Kuki traditions, new villages can be established with the consent of clan elders for various reasons. One such reason is the division of a household, whereby a younger brother establishes a separate household from that of his eldest brother.
Many new villages were founded by Kukis who were forcibly evicted from their ancestral homes during the Kuki-Naga conflict of 1992–93. They established settlements in other places, often retaining the names of the villages from which they had been evicted as a tribute to their origins.
So, yes, the establishment of new villages is not going to stop anytime soon, and it falls within the fundamental right of Kukis guaranteed under Article 29 of the Constitution. Continuity in tradition is one way of protecting one's culture.
Who is anyone to declare Kuki villages illegal or brand a village chief an illegal immigrant, except the Kukis themselves? Their tribal customs and culture are theirs to practise and reform. Such unsolicited activism is deeply disrespectful and totally unacceptable.
The allegation of DEMOGRAPHIC ENGINEERING reminds one of similar allegations made against the Nagas following biologically implausible population growth rates ranging from 123% to over 169% in three specific sub-divisions of Senapati district.
As a result, the Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India (ORGI) rejected or adjusted the population figures for specific sub-divisions in Manipur—most notably Mao-Maram, Paomata, and Purul in Senapati district—following the 2001 Census, citing abnormally high and unexplained population growth rates.
The facts are there for everyone to examine and establish what actually happened.
HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF
Reports of internal conflicts within NSCN factions and the waning popularity of the NSCN-IM among Naga tribes have been circulating on the ground for the past few years.
The Muivah-led NSCN-IM has a bloody history of waging a war of a genocidal nature against Kukis, allegedly as a diversionary strategy to distract from factional infighting and to secure its operational base in Burma when it came under threat.
What has unfolded now appears to be a classic case of history repeating itself.
For instance, the ethnic clashes between Nagas and Kukis in the early 1990s were a product of internal conflicts within Naga insurgent groups, particularly the NSCN-IM and NSCN-Khaplang.
On 30 April 1988, one faction of the Naga insurgent group, the NSCN-IM, was attacked by another faction of the NSCN, namely NSCN-Khaplang. The internal conflict resulted in the killing of many committed Naga nationalists. At such a juncture, Muivah, fearing Naga retribution, initiated an anti-Kuki campaign for two reasons. First, it served as a diversion from the factional conflict. Second, because of his enmity with Khaplang, Muivah no longer felt secure operating from Burma. Consequently, he had to establish his base in the hills of Manipur, where Kukis were active. Thus, Manipur witnessed one of the bloodiest clashes between the two communities in recent times.
(Excerpt from Emerging Trends in Ethnic Nationalism: Territoriality and Conflict in Manipur by Nameirakpam Bijen Meetei.)
As recently as November 4, a prolonged gunfight reportedly took place between the Zeliangrong United Front-Jenchui (ZUF-J) and a combined team of Naga insurgent groups, comprising the Zeliangrong United Front-Kamson (ZUF-K) and the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN-IM), at Taodaijang (Buanruang) village under Nungba Police Station in Noney district. Three people reportedly succumbed to their injuries, while six others were injured during the gunfight.
The armed people's uprising against the military junta in Myanmar, which threatens their operational base, coinciding with a popularity crisis faced by the NSCN-IM among the Naga tribes of Manipur, makes this a déjà vu moment. Adopting the same modus operandi to address such a crisis would hardly be surprising.
ON THE UNHOLY NEXUS BETWEEN ASSAM RIFLES AND KUKI MILITANTS
This allegation is a masterclass in psychological rage-baiting, and its supposed mastery deserves an ironic round of applause.
Kuki insurgent groups must be bewildered after reading this allegation. Given the number of combing operations and arrests they have been subjected to by the very same Assam Rifles they are accused of having an unholy nexus with, they might as well wish that the Assam Rifles would extend an olive branch and establish similar "unholy nexuses" with insurgent groups belonging to other communities.
What exactly happened on 17 October 2026?
Thus, the vilification of Colonel Tripathi merely because these villagers were rescued and provided assistance by the Assam Rifles is deeply troubling.
How can helping civilians possibly irk a civil society organisation?
This raises an important question: Were the dharnas observed by Naga women in sensitive areas intended to protest against the suspicious movement of the Assam Rifles, or were they intended to prevent the security forces from neutralising insurgent groups operating in the district, which pose a threat to law and order?
One of the biggest failures of President's Rule in Manipur would be its inability to contain the formation of armed village volunteer groups in Naga areas, if these groups are indeed innocent civilian formations and not merely aliases used as a smokescreen for insurgent groups.
Multiple innocent civilian protesters were killed by security forces in Churachandpur in the aftermath of 3 May. They were among those who were merely guarding government buildings where Meitei civilians had taken shelter to ensure a safe exchange of people. Yet, we do not identify ourselves with the perception that the entire security apparatus considers us enemies.
Demanding accountability over official conduct is the democratic right of every citizen. However, generalising the actions of a few officials as representative of the entire security establishment is totally unacceptable. No individual official is powerful enough to represent an entire armed security force entrusted with the responsibility of safeguarding our nation.
The deep influence of NSCN-IM ideology on how ordinary citizens identify themselves is clearly evident. The misconception they have developed about their own position and identity is a problem that India needs to address immediately. The spillover effect on other communities could be catastrophic if this issue is not addressed in time.
The organised drug racket operating in Manipur needs to be freed from its exclusive association with Kukis. The danger threatening the future of every youth, regardless of the community they belong to, deserves proper attention and investigation to uncover its extensive networks and connections and to find a lasting solution.
These criminals, regardless of the communities they belong to or the positions they hold, must be treated as a common enemy who needs to be weeded out.
CONCLUSION
The root cause of Manipur's problems lies in the fearmongering of vested community leaders pursuing their own political and personal interests. They create solidarity among in-group members by portraying other communities as potential threats to either their patriotic movements or the privileges they enjoy today.
The problem has taken different forms and shapes over time, and addressing its consequences will require proper deliberation, coordination, participation, and trust-building processes among all stakeholders.
Therefore, scapegoating illegal immigration as the root cause of Manipur's problems will lead the state nowhere. It is not a solution.
The Hills Journal
K. Salbung, Churachandpur
Manipur-795128
