Kuki leh Naga |English version|

By D.Letkhojam Haokip

The author is a social worker and research scholar (PhD student) in the Department of History, Manipur University.

This topic has been conceptualized to look into the Naga – Kuki problem and its genesis. It appears that many misguided conclusions are being projected over the years, after the Naga-Kuki conflict since 1992. My attempt is to clarify some aspects of this cataclysmic conflict and find a solution to the problem. I have indeed worked upon the problem for quite sometime and here I want to shares my thoughts with you.

Historical data reveals how some Tangkhul Nagas invited the Kukis to establish or set up Kuki villages and to protect them from the attacks of wild beasts like tigers, leopards etc and their enemy villages within Tangkhul tribe1. In 1982, Saichang and Monglham Villagers hunted a tiger when the later stal1ed eating their domestic animals. This shows that helping each other between neighbouring villages against wild beast is a historical fact which cannot be denied. This mutual dependence brought affinities between many tribal groups who shared the same territories, fought with each other reconciled, and continued to stay together. Love, hatred and neutrality all persisted together though their manifestations could not be checked easily because the feeling of hurt or guilt always affected the tribals’ world view and personnel points, as they were simpletons and their expressions were momentary. But in the 19th and 20th century politics pervaded their lives and hence such incidences persisted for longer periods, which definitely affected their lives and their societies.

Head Hunters
Both the Tangkhul Nagas and the Kukis living in Manipur’s Eastern region were head hunters. The Tangkhuls displayed the heads they hunted on the front walls of their houses. The Kukis displayed human skull at ‘Khomol’ a village altar for performing ‘ai’ ceremony. The Kukis firn1ly believe that ‘ai’ ceremony surely elevated one’s status and earn respect in the next stage of life. Being head hunters both the community never dreamt of its consequences and killings, butchering, kidnapping for slaves was rampant in the society. It is very interesting to note that killing one for the sake of taking one’s head for religious merits had existed. The Tangkhuls believed that the heads hunted from other villagers other than their own would add to the fertility of the soil. Perhaps the Kukis too believed this but replaced human head by sacrificing mithun just before cultivation started, T.C. Hodson said that “it must be borne in mind that the successful issue of a raid at the beginning of the cultivating season brings prosperity for the crops”. Both the Tangkhul Nagas and the Kukis, had used the number of heads one could capture and the feast of merit one could arrange as a very important step for gaining social recognition.

But when a warrior attacked another warrior the situations were never communalized. It appears that the victim’ s descendants or next of kin did the same thing, until the tally of head was numerically equal. Besides head hunting, land disputes between two or more villages among the Tangkhuls also invited war. It was reported that Hundung Khunou was once saved by Monglham Kuki from the attack of Hundung. To mark their respect honour and also to continue such cordial and humane relations” the ruling family of Hundung Khunou gave ’sating’ to the Monglham Chief.

This reveals that at times some Tangkhul Naga Villages and Kuki who were at daggers drawn maintained cordial and peaceful relationship more than with their own tribesman. It also appears that head hunting had been practiced mainly by the tribal chiefs, warriors and men of courage who were convinced by the socio-political status in life time and in life after death. Head hunting culture continued till the second half of the 19th century. Some Tangkhul leaders opine that head hunting culture is largely responsible for the development or more than 200 (two hundred) dialects among the Tangkhul. The Meitei term “Haona mikok thiba Chatpadah “also reveals the existence of head hunting in Manipur. There is no doubt that such practices developed distant relations between two individuals, villages and tribes.

There also exist myths which centre around the killing of a slave by the tribal warrior of the Chassad and the Tangkhul. According to this myth the Chassad Chief was buried along with his slaves which can be presumed as the most important cause responsible for the blood feuds. But thorough investigation reveals that there were instances of burying the Kuki Chiefs with human skulls (head), perhaps for the posterity of the Chiefs soul in life after death. When the British came to North East Manipur, they came across the facts of ill relations existing between the head hunters. To put an end to the head hunting culture, the idea of preaching Christianity evolved in the minds of the British administrators. The British always tried to do away with age old negative customs and introduced laws which could expedite the processes of customs rather rapidly with either persuasion or through force. Social changes were thus effected in the tribal world.

The role of Kajol in sustaining peaceful co-existence
The role of ‘Kajol’ (ka = my/ mine and jol = friend/ relations) in maintaining peace & cordial relations between two individuals, villages and communities needs reflection here. The term ‘M’ is used to expand or extend one’s family’s relations even outside one’s own community or tribe. Exchange of things like paddy, chillies, seeds and lending paddy without interest. organizing annual feast, helping one’s ‘M’ at the time of difficulty, giving a sliced backbone flesh of an animal killed and animal skins were some of the salient features and the concept of ‘jol’. Whenever a vi1lage chief made another chief as his ‘Jol’ indirectly all the villagers of the two vi1lages learnt to maintain cordial relations. The term ‘Nehbom gam’ (Neh = eat; bom= sharing and gam = territory) also reflects how two or more villages shared a territory and its resources. Similarly, when two chiefs quarreled villagers were also at war. It was on the basis of collectivity and unity, integrity and sense of suffering or enjoying the losses or victory together. This sense was too strongly manifested among the Tangkhuls and the Kukis who demonstrated often in their social milieu. The term ‘jol’ integrated even two different families or individuals belonging to different communities. In this way the term ‘jol’ played a vital role in maintaining peaceful co-existence. The Kabuis called it ‘champan’ or ‘chamran’ and the Tangkhuls called Mangai or Ingai. It is evident that few individuals who had ‘jol’ or mangai disclosed the policy of their militants and saved their friends life and property.

The impact of British policy upon the relation between the Kukis and the Nagas
There is no doubt that both the Tangkhul Naga and the some of the Chassad Kukis were maintaining a very cordial relationship. It is reported that by the 1820s the British had already established their relations with the Brahmaputra valley of Assam and Imphal valley of Manipur. It was in 1870s, when the Political Agent established relations with the Chassads, efforts were made to obstruct the proposed alliances. When the Chassad Chief, Nehlam Haokip came to Manipur (Imphal) under safe conduct from the Political Agent he was murdered by a high official, the brother-in-law of Chandrakirti Singh. Another Kuki Chief, Soya who had established himself independent was also murdered by the Manipuri King. Such bad acts affected the relationship and compelled the Kukis to seek help and the hands of the Raja of Ava against the Manipuri King. In the raids that followed besides killing some Manipuris, six Manipuri sepoys were also arrested in the Kongal to effect the release of one Chassad man from the Manipuri Prison.

By December 1879, it was quite clear that Tonglhu the son of Nehlam had declared himself to be independent of Manipur. The then Political Agent opines that “the Chassad Chief had received presents from the Sumjok Raja to incite him to effect the subjugation of all these villages and induced them to transfer their allegiance from Manipur to Burma. He also opines that “Chingsow was selected for attack as it was a powerful village. The punishment of which would induce all other Thangkhul or Lahupa villages to transfer themselves peaceably”. Chingsow was attacked on the 19th February, 1878. 45 men were killed and three others were carried off as slaves. The raiders were from ChumJong (Thomjang) Chungle (Changlei) and Manoye (Molnoi) which is situated within the territory of Ava. The raiders included five Tangkhul Nagas from Chatik and five Chassads. Contradicting to the story narrated by the victimized villagers, the Kukis stated that such unfortunate incidents took place as the Chingsow villagers had refused to pay compensation to them which the mithuns or cattle of the later had trampled. It must be noted that victimized villages also reported that about 30 Chassad men came and claimed tribute before the incident took place. Further the British policy of disarmament and levied heavy house taxes, which had compelled the Kukis to migrate into the Sompa tract (Unadministered area). The Kukis called ‘mapgam’. After making the Tangkhuls as their tributary, the Kukis also pushed further north-west and raided Naga villages even though they were within the sphere of influence of the Naga hills.

Colonel Johnstone opines that it was due to the corruption of the Burmese frontier officials, than to the unwillingness on the part of the court of Mandalay to come for settlement. It was also reported that in one Kuki raid on the Tangkhul village, Konke, about 153 men, women and children were massacred and the village burnt. Some section of the Nagas also accused the Meiteis and the Kukis for helping the British to invade Kohima on the 11th February, 1832 and killed over three hundred Nagas. In 1893 a Tangkhul Naga village of Swami (Chingjaroi) was raided by a large group of armed Kukis. The figure of victims is different in different letters and reports. According to one report, 297 people including women and children were killed and 40 housed were burnt down. The reason behind the attack is not furnished by some reporters. The traditional accounts of the Kukis stated that on a certain occasion Kisong a Tangkhul Youth, who mainly depended on Nangkhopao alias ‘Tukih’ was sent to Chingjaroi to collect grains/ paddy which his master claimed from the Chingjaroi villagers as compensation against the trampling of crops caused by the mithuns of Chingjaroi. But the Chingjaroi villagers killed Kisong and performed ceremony of ‘victory’. On hearing the news, Nangkhopao proceed toward Chingjaroi for revenge but return home without any action. He requested two Kuki chiefs for revenge. It is also reported that Tukih and the two chiefs informed the matter to the State Durbar and the later permitted them to kill five persons to restore law and order in the region. However, when the warriors attacked such massacre took place and it got added to the accounts handed down by the Kukis.

There is no doubt that the incident had taken place. But it is difficult to ascertain whether the incident was a continuation of Chingsaw incident, or due to non payment of compensation claimed by the Kuki Chief. Domestic animals, trampling crops was of course one of the most important cause of dispute between two individuals, villages or more villages. It was considered a great loss of crops etc. since life in the hills was rather difficult.

During the First World War the British recruited labour corps to work in Mesopotamia or France. It was against the traditional religious rites called ‘Hun’. It is the ceremony which could be performed only by a householder, compulsorily once in a year. To cross the sea was considered a polluted act. Besides the Kukis also opines that if they left their villages for a far of places, the Nagas might take advantage of their long absence and killed their women and children. Before they openly fought the British, the Kuki Chiefs informed their own clansmen and other cognate tribes not to lend support to the Britishers. After the Kuki Chiefs declared war the Kukis fought almost for three years. The Kukis also punished those Chiefs, villagers or tribes, irrespective of caste or creed who were believed to be lending support to the British forces in different ways. The Kuki warriors attacked several Naga and Kuki villages. Mention may be made that of Chingmai, a Chiru Naga village, Khongakhul, a Kabui Village, Kasom Tangkhul Dulen, Santing, Joupi and Khongde who were either surrendering to the British or lending support in one way or the other.

Seven muslims of Kwakta village were killed by the Kuki rebels on the 3rd June 1918. During the Anglo- Kuki War, 1917-1919, the British confiscated about 1570 arms from the possession of the Kukis of India and Myanmar. The British also burnt down 120 Kuki ‘villages and wiped out not less than 86 villages. The Kukis refrain from war until the outbreak of the Second World War. During the Second World War too, they were fighting the British in collaboration with the Japanese. Many Kukis joined Indian National Army. Perhaps during the war some casualty occurred among the civilians, it happened during the Anglo-Kuki war. A saying goes among the Kukis “When two bulls fight plants suffer and when warriors fight it affect the life of civilians”. In brief the Anglo-Kuki war has also deepened the enmity between some sections of the Nagas and the Kukis. Thus the Kukis and Nagas hatred evolved out of the British policies and the indigenous culture was broadened and made wider during the Anglo-Kuki war 1917-1918.

As stated earlier most of the Kukis and Nagas also maintained cordial relationship between them. This is partly due to the term ‘Kajol’ / Mangai/ champan/ which exist from the early times and the rapid growing of Christianity. The rapid expansion of Christianity to various tribes also led to the formation of Manipur Christians’ Association and the Manipur Baptist Convention in 1928. However, formation of Church associations along the tribal lines began after the Second World War. In 1943 representative of Kuki churches met at Saikul to form Kuki Christian organisation. In 1949 Kuki Baptist Churches had its formal fellowship at Tuijangwaichong. In 1950 Kuki Christian Association with its headquarter at Motbung was form. Zeliangrong Nagas also organized ZCA Zeliangrong Christian Association on April 1946. MBC was splited into five associations based on ethnic groups. Division of church associations on ethnic or tribal lines, surely widened the relations among the Christian leaders in particular and members in general. Among the Kukis this division continues till all the major clans formed church organisations on the basis of clans.

Nagaisation of Old Kukis
Chandel district is populated by many old Kuki tribes. Viz. Aimol, Anal, Komrem, Moyon, Monsang etc. The cultural affinities of these Old Kukis, with the New Kukis were established. The Culture of Maring tribe is still interwoven with the culture of the ‘Lai’ tribes of Mizoram. Scholars opine that they are racials from the same stock. The Kukis thought that they solely commanded huge territories and blood relationship could never be broken by any external forces. As such they never bothered their kins men, Perhaps it led to the believe that one’s kinsmen is nobody’s kinsmen. Infact beyond the expectations of the Kukis, Christian fellowship and political alliances had shaken the Old Kukis and the New Kukis. With the Nagaisation of Old Kukis the Nagas of Manipur, particularly the Tangkhul Nagas greatly influenced the people of Chandel. In fact it is historic events, which made a landmark in the history of Manipur. The establishment of Kuki company at Imphal and Electoral politics were also responsible for widening of the ties between Old and New Kukis. The Kukis subscribed Re one 50 or 25 paise for the establishment of a company based on their economy. Later on some Kukis were called by the rate of their subscription. Those who contributed 50 and 25 Paise were called Kuki makhai and Kuki siki.

Moreh became one of the most important base for the Naga outfits, where the Kuki and Naga militant exchanged fire for the first time in 1992. Scholars therefore, concluded that the Anals and other Old Kuki tribes who shifted their nomenclature as Nagas were culturally the Kukis and politically under the Nagas.

The growth of arm militants
Both the Nagas and the Kukis accused the British and the Government of India for the division of territory and the people. Some Nagas opine that the British gifted about one-third of the Naga territory to Burma and India divided the Naga territories, in Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur and Nagaland. Some section of the Kukis also blame the British and India Government for sowing the seeds of division, communal and thereby disintegrating the Kukis of Manipur in particular and others in general. It is a matter of fact that Government of India had recognized 33 tribes. It became the basis for framing some of the reserved Assembly Constituency in Churachandpur District.

In 1946, Naga National Council was formed to fight for independent Naga homeland. NNC established Naga Federal Government in 1956. The formation of Na a under round organisation is felt by many Kukis who are living with the Nagas especially TangkhuI. In fact arm Nagas collected tax, even from some section of the Kukis, soon after they are well organized, some intelligent section of the Tangkhuls propagated that sooner or later the Nagas (Tangkhuls) and Kukis will fight. This intelligentsia even instigated the Kukis of Maphou Dam area to dispose off their paddy field. Besides the Naga militants also terrorise the Kukis. Perhaps the combination of such factors resulted to wiped out about ‘80 Kuki villages between 1948 and 1983. It appears that Chingsaw and Chingjaroi incidents was still alive in the hearts of some sections of the Tangkhuls. The emergence of Naga militants is also coupled with kidnapping and murdering of Kuki leaders. It is reported that about 42 people were killed between 1950s and 1960s. In November, 1975 Naga Federal Government, an underground organisation of Nagas and Government of . India signed ‘Shillong Accord’. Different opinions came up among the Nagas. Th. Muivah, General Secretary and Isak-Swu Vice President, NNC denounced the accord and formed the National Socialist I Council of Nagaland, (NSCN). In 1988 factionalism developed among the outfits leading to fratricidal killings within the organisation. It affected Ukhrul district as well.

In January 1993 NSCN (IM) become a member of the unrepresented Nations and People’s Organisation. Many Nagas observed the 25th March, 1993 as thanks giving day. NSCN (IM) now dominated majority of the Nagas of Manipur.

Among the Kukis, Kuki National Assembly was formed in 1947. It was the apex body among the Kuki Social Organisation. Later on it gets recognisation as a political party. KSO is formed in Kuki khanglai,lompi is formed in 1987 to mobilize and spread social education. It aim at helping the needy. The Kukis also revived the ‘Kuki Inpi’ the apex organisation of the Kukis in 1993. Within no time the Kukis also formed so many armed organisations. It is reported that KNA was formed on the 5th August 1987.
Kuki National Front was formed on the 18th May 1988. Kuki National Organisation, Kuki Commando Force, Kuki Front Council, Kuki Defence Force, Kuki Independent Army (KIA) and Chin-Kuki Revolutionary Force came up suddenly. The Kukis wanted a Kuki land or a state comprising all the Kuki inhabited areas.34 Both the Kukis and Nagas attack and looted several police outpost to build up their arms and ammunition. At present about 14 militant groups, dividing into two group is operating among the Kukis.

Militants in action
It was reported that Senapati and Ukhrul District Magistrate issued maximum number of gun licence on the eve of the Kuki and Naga militant conflicts. Collection of taxes, demanding ransom, kidnapping torturing and butchering of innocents by armed militants and armed conflicts or exchange of fire occurred frequently since 1990s. On the pretext of Kuki and Naga militants and on suspicion many innocents were put to death. On June 3, 1992 Onkholet Haokip (26) an assistant teacher Dr. Calvin Academy, Moreh and a social worker of World Vision of India, was shot dead by NSCN (IM). On July 13, 1992 mass exodus of Naga civilians started from Moreh area. The United Naga Council also issued quit notice to the Kukis During 1992 alone not less than 25 Kukis were killed by the Naga militants, from different villages. It is reported that six persons from Moltuh, Chandel District were waylaid by the Naga militants, who were touring to some other villages for performing “Naopui” ceremony. Three women were gang raped and killed. (vide post mortem report) Another incidents which draw the sentiments of the Kukis includes the Tingkai incidents. It was on the first April 1993, a group of armed militants suspected to be NSCN (IM) paraded almost all the householder of Tingkai and shot them dead. The incident at Loutei Kuki in Ukhrul district also shocked the sentiment of the Kuki militants. In this way in 1993 alone, almost 400 Kukis were killed. At Joupi incidents where 87 Kukis mostly the householders were waylaid and militants tied their hands and killed them. They were suspected Naga militants NSCN (IM). It provoked the sentiments of the Kukis in particular and other tribes or people of Manipur. It was still observed as “Black September” by the Kukis of Manipur.

The event was broadcast by the British Broadcasting Corporation. It was also recorded that arm militants picked out 13 male infants at Taloulong transit camp and butchered them. In September,1993, Central Government released an additional grant of 5 crores for modernization of Manipur Police and another 6.5 crores for raising reserve battalion in Manipur. It must be noted that the Kuki militants are suspected to be receiving support from official agencies of both from the Manipur and Central Government. Manipur Chief Minister, Shri R.K. Dorendra Singh and Shri C. Doungel are also suspected to be donating Rs. 1,09,000 and Rs. 2,00,000 lakhs to CKRF. From the Hindustan Times, dated July 22, 1993 Kuki National Army is allegedly seeking financial assistance from the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). The government of the People’s Republic of Nagaland, while stating the statement on Kuki atrocities, against the Nagas, NSCN (IM) also categorically stated that the Kukis claim Kuki homeland or a Kuki state from the Naga territories.

Burning down of helpless or outskirted villages, killing of civilians, innocents, gang rape before killing, mostly took place where Kukis and the Nagas lived together. Such unexpected ugly incident relates the Kukis and the Nagas for almost a decade. On October 19, 1994, Kuki militants pushed down a passenger bus down a deep gorge of 400 fts. 37 individuals including men, women and children died. It is a historical fact that both the Kukis and the Nagas militants forcedly pulled out their youths to attack, kill and burn down houses. The general public did not involve themselves in the conflicts.

There is possibility that civilians of both the communities were provided better weapons to guard their villages. In Maphou dam area, the Kukis formed area volunteer to safeguard themselves. The volunteer members were collected from the area itself. They also confiscated company made guns like SBBL, from the possession of the Kukis. In fact the Kuki militants could not protect their villages their property and the life of civilians from the onslaught of the Naga militants. The Naga militants too could not save the life and property of so many Nagas. It is a historical fact that thousands of Kuki and Naga houses were burnt down and many villages were uprooted. Thousands and thousands have become displaced or refugees. Destruction of lives and properties continue with no sign of respite from official report, About 905 Kukis were killed and 360 Kuki villages have been either destroyed, burnt or wiped out, ( For major incidents see Table II). So many children stop schooling. Many tribal women mostly from the Kuki communities who were widowed start selling their flesh. They got involved in flesh trade. It was reported that these women recruited innocent young girls to carry on the trade. It does not mean that flesh trade did not exist earlier, but historical facts reveals that the number of people involved suddenly increased. The other impact of the Kuki¬-Naga conflict was that of growing in the number of arm militants and groups of armed organisations among the Kukis. It surely affected the educational career of many youths from both the communities. The conflict also indirectly affected the communities living in Manipur. On the pretext of the Kuki-Naga conflicts, thousands and thousands of security personnel were deployed in Manipur.

Sadar Hills issue 
Some scholars opine that the factor behind the demand of a Kuki state within the frame of India Constitution is nothing but on account of the step motherly treatment of the Kukis of Sadar Hills by the State Government. It is a historical fact that six Autonomous District Council was given as package grant of Manipur Statehood in 1971. All of them were upgraded into a full-fledged district after 1972, except Kuki dominated autonomous, Tengnoupal and Sadar Hills. In 1974 Tengnoupal was upgraded but Sadar Hills was left out. It is so till today. In 1982 State Cabinet decided to inaugurate and successive government too did not translated it into action. The long negligence of Manipur State Government invites unnecessary evils. In 1998 Chief Minister Nipamacha Singh’s Government formed a sub-committee so as to create Sadar Hills as a full-fledged Revenue District and 30th June was fixed as the day of submission of report. Seeing the development and progress, the United Naga Council had called economic blockade on two national highways No.39 and 53 against the creation of Sadar Hills.

When the Govt. failed to inaugurate four Kuki MLAs resigned from their Ministership in the interest of the Sadar Hills public. The economic blockade of the UNC came to an end after a month when Manipur Government and the UNC signed an MOU which contained that ‘No Sadar Hills District will be created as a full-fledged Revenue District in the absence of the UNC representatives”. It clearly indicated that creation of Sadar Hills, involved, more party or authorities. The State Government also signed ‘an MOU with the District Demand Committee. The MOU contains that all the power and function of D.C and S.P. be given to ADC and Addl. S.P. besides opening branch offices of the entire major department at Kangpokpi. However, the contents of MOU were not translated into action. From all these historical facts it clearly reveals that the long standing demand for creation of Sadar Hills is not directly related with the demand of a Kukl State. It must be noted that the decision and demanding of a Kuki State goes back to 1960 under the leadership of Kuki National Assembly. KNA also submitted memorandum to the Prime Minister of India Shri (Late) Jawaharlal Nehru on the 24th March,1960.

Conclusion
Rapid historical survey concerning Kuki-Naga relations reflected loses of life, public property and its impact upon socio-economic life of the tribals. The Kuki and Tangkhul Nagas lived cordially for the past many years. There exists a very deep cordial relation between the two, through the term ‘Kajoll/Mangai/Champan etc. At so many places individuals and families of both the communities still favour their ‘Jolpa’ or ‘Mangai’ and were beaten by armed militants. Several Naga villages were saved and protected by the Kukis, which also strengthened ‘jol’ relationship. These peaceful co-existence and cordial relationship was disrupted when the Kukis had raided Chingsaw and Chingjaroi in 1878 and in 1893 respectively. From the literature and sources available it appears to be the first raids on the Tangkhul Nagas by the Kukis on a large scale. Both the Naga militants and over ground including Church leaders forum spread out the deteriorating Kuki-Naga relations through pamphlets, video tapes, press release etc. The Manipur Naga Baptist Church Leaders Fellowship also compiled the Kuki militants actions and submitted to the World Baptist Alliance. The Kukis made a rejoinder to it. Both the tribes accused or blamed each other for all the misfortune, miseries which befall them. It appears that the Nagas lived with only the Negative aspects of the Kukis and the Kukis too lived only with the negative aspects of the Nagas at least for a decade or two. We come across how the Chassad relationship with Chingsaw had got shakened when the Maharaja Chandrakirti’s relationship with the Kukis was disrupted, perhaps due to the impact of British policy in the form of jealousy. From the materials available it can also be assumed that the past had shakened relationship partially which had resulted in complete break down when the Naga militants lost their heart from the news reports, which reflected suspections on Kuki militants and the State and Central Government nexus. Both the accused statements were lacking in-depth knowledge on the subject matters, due lack of thorough investigations. In short it can be said that the idea of raiding Chingsaw came to the Chassad Chief Tonglhu as he wanted his people and territory to be a part of Sumjok raja.

The recent Kuki-Naga conflict too is nothing but the result of the policy of integrating Naga inhabited areas with the present Nagaland. So, it is very clear that the ideology of politicians, Chiefs etc frequently affected the life of the civilians in one way or the other as far as Kuki and Naga relationship is concerned. Kuki and Naga militants action is gradually halting when the Government of India initiated peace talk with the NSCN (IM) in 1997 onward. Many Kukis and the Nagas returned to their village. Relief to the victims had been distributed phase wise and many are yet to cover. Duplication and replacement of actual victims name can be seen. The misery of the public remains unattended. The Kuki Inpi Manipur submitted several memorandums to solve the Kuki problems. It appears that the idea of merging certain parts of Manipur with adjoining territories is repeated. From all these reasons it is very clear that alienation or marginalization of minority or Weaker sections and also the policy of depressing one’s contemporary for the sake of opportunity cripples with lots of unwanted incidents. To ensure better society where all the ethnic communities could live peacefully, the role of transparent policy makers, intellectuals, and the state Government is very important. Since we are governed by laws, everyone must see that laws especially which concern the tribals and minorities should be checked and fulfilled accordingly.

Let us hope that the word “Kajol/Mangai/Champanor marup in Meities” take its own course in the days to come among the Kukis and Naga in particular and the Meitei in general Bonds of friendship must be foster with henceforth.

*The author is a social worker and research scholar (PhD student) in the Department of History, Manipur University.

Notes:

1. Prim Vaiphei, The Vaiphei Tribe; Kholep village in Ukhrul district is set up for the protection of them(Tangkhuls).
2. The Scholar is reading Class (I) by this time. He also sees the hunted tiger with his naked eye.
3. William Shaw, Notes on the Thadou Kukis . Appendix K, Photo Plate 5 fig. 2.
4. T.C Hodson, The Naga Tribes, New Delhi, 1911, P58
5. Letkhojam Haokip, Historical Traditions and customary laws, P.40.
6. Interview Jamkholun Haokip (65) K. Salbung village. He migrated to Churachandpur from Sadar Hills Monglham in1982.
7. ‘Sating’ is a slice backbone flesh of an animal killed. One side of it goes to one’s senior clan or elder brother. The otherside is given to one’s ‘jol’ i.e. one who maintain close relation.
8. Interview K. Prongo a prominent Tangkhul leader on 15/3/06 at his residence, Dewlaland
9. Letkhojam Haokip – op. cit P.41.
10. Thadou Kuki Text book (MIL) Class (XII), Churachandpur 2003.
11. ‘Jol’ relationship is taken and drew out from the relationship maintained by Monglham Kuki and Itham Tangkhul of Manipur East. This type of relation existed since time immemorial among the tribal of Manipur.
12. 1 2. An introduction to Ethnic problem in Manipur and a reportage on the Naga-Kuki Clash, Naga Student Federation,Publication.
13. L. Chandramani, The boundaries of Manipur Imphal, 1970, P. 61
14. William Shaw – op. cit. PP. 46-47
15. A letter from C.J. Lyall to AC Lyall No. 578 dated Shillong, 22nd April 1880, P.2
16. Ibid­
17. A letter from officiating secretary to the Chief Commissioner, British Burma to Minister for Foreign affairs, Mandalay dated Rangoon the 10th September 1880.
18. Ibid­
19. Interview T. Lunkim (82) Dewlaland on 15/3/07 and Jamkholun (65) K. Salbung, CCpur. See also Lal dena’s – BritishPolicy forwards Manipur, 1891-1919 P.23
20. W. Street’s report to the Commissioner Sagaing Division, dated the 3151 December’ 1920 PA.
21. Laldena – op cit P. 23
22. See Fn. 19
23. Ibid
24. Kamu, Saichang, Bongjang & Monglham Kuki who are living on the frontier of Sadar Hills East and Itham in Ukhrul district live very closely. Due to trampling of crops in the field by mithuns. Sometime they maintain distant relations. Mithuns trampling crops has been compensated by the mithun owners from the remote past.
25. Chishti, The Kuki uprising in Manipur, 1917- 1920 Spectrum publications, Delhi, 2004, p. 17-18
26. Ibid – P. 18
27. Elungkibee Zeliang , A history of the Manipur Baptist convention Imphal, 2005, P. 53
28. Ibid­
29. An introduction to the Ethnic problem in Manipur, Naga – Kuki Clash, Naga Students Federation. P. 6
30. In Churachandpur district the organisation of A/C is purely based on tribe.
31. Response to the Manipur Naga Baptist Church leader fellowship (MNBCLF), by Kuki Baptist Church leader Council.P.19
32. NSCN(IM) Massarce of over 900 innocent uprooting over 350 Kuki village-A rejoinder/counter response by P.S Haokip P.9
33. An introduction to the Ethnic problem in Manipur. P.12
34. Memorandum of the Kuki national front submitted to the Prime Minister of India, 1998
35. An introduction to the Ethnic problem in Manipur. P.13
36. Bio-Data- A brief sketch of Onkholet’s life,(1967-1992), P.7,; see also Response to the Naga Baptist Church leader Fellowship.P.21
37. P.S Haokip- A rejoinder/counter response. P.42
38. Ibid
39. Ibid-P.13-14; See also Response to MNBCLF, P. 24
40. Ibid-P.15
41. Response to the MNBCLF by Kuki Baptist Church leader Council Manipur, P.24
42. An introduction to Ethnic problem in Manipur P.14
43. A memorandum submitted to the Hon’ble chief minister, Manipur, for creation of sadar hills as a full fledged District, P.3
44. Detai reports-prepared by sadar Hills district demand Committee, 1974-2002, P.2
45. Ibid, P.3
46. Dr. T.S Gangte-Land problem and Ethnic Tension in North-East India with special reference to Manipur.

Source: Manipur Comments