KOHUR Rejects Nagaland Tribal Hohos Coordination Committee (NTHCC) Convenor's Characterisation of the Kuki People as "Nomadic Mercenaries"

The Kuki Organization for Human Rights Trust (KOHUR) has categorically rejected the remarks attributed to Thejao Veihnou, Convenor of the Nagaland Tribal Hohos Coordination Committee (NTHCC) and President of the Angami Public Organisation, as reported on July 15, 2026, in which he described the Kuki people as "nomadic in nature," who "came to this part of the globe as mercenaries," and are "attempting to establish a homeland by driving out the indigenous people."

KOHUR stated that these assertions are historically unfounded, deeply offensive, and fundamentally irreconcilable with the very appeal to "peaceful coexistence" that Veihnou invoked in the same statement.

"One cannot advocate coexistence while simultaneously denying a neighbouring people their indigeneity, their history, and their legitimate place on their ancestral lands," KOHUR said in a release issued on Wednesday.

On the allegation that the Kuki are "nomadic," KOHUR stated that the label of a "nomadic" or migratory people was not uniquely applied to the Kuki. Early British administrators recorded similar observations regarding the Nagas themselves.

KOHUR recalled that Lieutenant Gregory, one of the earliest colonial officers in the Naga Hills, observed that the Nagas were "like the birds of the air; they build their nests in one place, and change to another when it suits them."

The observation referred to shifting settlement patterns associated with jhum cultivation, a traditional agricultural practice common to virtually all hill communities across the region, including both the Nagas and the Kuki. Shifting cultivation is not evidence of foreignness. It is a shared indigenous agricultural tradition of the hill peoples of Northeast India. To weaponise this historical characteristic against one community while disregarding its equal application to another is neither intellectually honest nor historically defensible.

On the allegation that the Kuki are "mercenaries" and "not indigenous," KOHUR stated that the Kuki people are an indigenous people of the hills of Manipur whose presence is well documented throughout recorded history.

"Their existence is reflected in colonial administrative records, official gazetteers, ethnographic accounts, and the constitutional history of the erstwhile State of Manipur, including representation in the Manipur Constitution-Making Committee of 1947," the release added.

Their service and sacrifice during both World Wars in defence of the region are likewise matters of historical record. To portray an indigenous people as imported "mercenaries" is a gross distortion of history advanced in service of a contemporary political narrative.

On the Shared History of the Naga National Movement

It is a matter of documentary record, not merely oral tradition, that the Kuki people were not outsiders to the early Naga national movement but recognised constituent members within it.

The human rights body stated that the Naga National Council (NNC) formally included the Nzemi and Kuki Tribal Council under the Kohima Central Council as one of its recognised tribal councils.

"This was not an informal association; it placed the Kuki squarely within the constitutional framework of the NNC itself. This historical record is further confirmed by the NNC's own Provisional Programme for the Reception of the Constituent Assembly's Sub-Committee on Minorities and Tribal Areas, issued by the Office of the Naga National Council, Kohima, and signed by Joint Secretary T. Sakhrie on May 10, 1947," KOHUR stated.

Among the tribes and organisations officially invited to participate were the "M-Zemi and Kukis Tribal Council members," alongside the Angami, Ao, Rengma, Lotha, Sema, Sangtam, and Chang tribal councils (Source: Nagaland State Archives, Kohima, Confidential Department File No. 7 of 1946).

Stating that Kuki participation extended even to the Naga Army, KOHUR said historical accounts indicate that, at Medziphema, sections of the Angami leadership opposed the inclusion of the Kuki in the Naga Army despite their membership in the NNC.

This reluctance reportedly left Kuki members in a position of uncertainty until they were eventually enrolled in the 18th Battalion of the Naga Army in 1959. That episode is historically significant because it demonstrates that attempts to exclude the Kuki from equal participation are not new, KOHUR added.

The present remarks by the President of the Angami Public Organisation, KOHUR said, regrettably echo an earlier reluctance to acknowledge the Kuki as equal partners in a political movement of which they were already recognised members.

Communities that served together within the same political organisation and, subsequently, within the same army cannot credibly be recast decades later as alien invaders or foreign mercenaries.

It is therefore regrettable, KOHUR stated, that a letter of doubtful provenance from an obscure and unrepresentative source should now be elevated as the basis for grave inter-community accusations.

When the Kuki Tribal Council itself was a recognised constituent body of the NNC, such questionable documents should not be resurrected to manufacture divisions between peoples whose histories are demonstrably intertwined.

On "Peaceful Coexistence"

KOHUR said it firmly believes that peaceful coexistence is the only sustainable path forward, and it is a principle that the Kuki people have consistently upheld. However, coexistence cannot be built upon the denial of another people's identity or the erasure of their history.

Genuine coexistence requires that all indigenous communities—including the Kuki, the Nagas, and others—recognise one another's equal rights to their respective homelands, histories, identities, and dignity.

Narratives that portray one indigenous community as alien intruders or foreign mercenaries are fundamentally incompatible with the principles of peace, mutual respect, and reconciliation.

KOHUR therefore urged all community leaders to refrain from inflammatory and historically discredited rhetoric that risks deepening mistrust and endangering lives. The human rights body called upon all stakeholders to engage in dialogue grounded in historical evidence, mutual respect, and a shared commitment to peaceful coexistence.