Dialogue, peace and the reality of a deepening conflict

Imphal Times of 17 April carried the headline: “CM Khemchand calls for dialogue, peace during emotional visit to various villages of Ukhrul District.” The Chief Minister was on a trust building mission in a bid to bring peace between Nagas and Kukis. He called for a dialogue as a way of bringing peace. He of course did not spell out what that dialogue would entail.

The Chief Minister was visiting Ukhrul, home to the Tangkhul Nagas in the aftermath of the latest spurt of violence in which, for the first time since the violence erupted in May 2023, the Nagas are being systematically targeted making an already volatile situation even more violent.

Media tends to forget that that there are more than 12 Naga tribes living in Manipur and some of these communities live across the international border into Myanmar.

What are the causes of this new dimension of violence in which the Nagas have become a party?  We cannot expect the Government, either the State or the Centre to present us with facts.  Commission of Enquiry which is supposed to go into causes of the 2023 has still not submitted its report; its date of submission has been further extended to May 2026.

The violence in Manipur continues unabated.  This time the victims include Nagas, who had remained neutral during the Meitei-Kuki conflict of May 2023.  Although there were incidents in which the Nagas were targeted, the Nagas kept away although they did provide shelter to fleeing Kuki families.

Kuki–Naga violence in Ukhrul began in early February 2026, with an assault on a Tangkhul Naga man at Litan by a group identified as Kuki‑Zo triggered clashes, stone‑pelting, gunfire and the burning of around twenty houses mostly belonging to Naga villagers in the Litan–Sareikhong area.

The state-imposed curfew and a five‑day internet shutdown, and deployed Army and Assam Rifles and other forces, with reports of flag marches and area domination to prevent further escalation. However, this had little effect of bringing normalcy.

Then came news of the abduction of 21 Tangkhul Naga civilians, 16 were men and five women on Wednesday, 11 March 2026.

The individuals were detained by armed men and villagers from the Kuki community while travelling along the Imphal–Ukhrul road.  The abduction took place at Shangkai village, a Kuki dominated village in Ukhrul  district along National Highway 202. After intense negotiations the people were released but it was reported that their vehicles (an Alto and a Baleno), mobile phones, and cash totalling over Rs 8.5 lakh were reportedly looted or held. 

It was also reported that shortly after the release of the 21 civilians, the bodies of the two missing Kuki men were found in a forested area, which led to further ethnic tensions.

The Tangkhul civil bodies have framed the 8 February incident and subsequent abductions of Nagas as “calculated aggression” against Tangkhul Nagas, explicitly accusing “Kuki militants” of targeting Nagas in Ukhrul and elsewhere. It is important to see these individual incidents in context of past grievances. First, it should be remembered that more than ten different Naga tribes have been living in Manipur spread over several districts of the State.

This article focuses on the recent attacks on Tangkhul Nagas living in Ukhrul District. This is the tribe to which Th Muivah, the General Secretary of the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (I-M) belongs and Ukhrul has been the stronghold of the insurgency led by the NSCN (IM) which signed a ceasefire agreement with the Government in 1997. However, the peace talks which began in 1997 have failed to produce any concrete results and the political situation has become even more volatile.

One of the reasons for the failure of the talks has been the issue of the ceasefire between the Government of India and the NSCN (IM), first declared in 1997.   The Nagas wanted the ceasefire to extend to the Naga areas of Manipur, more specifically to Ukhrul, a NSCN has a strong base.  The Meiteis opposed the extension of the ceasefire because they did not want to admit that there were Nagas living in Manipur and such an admission would perhaps have legitimized the Naga demand for integration of Naga-inhabited areas in Manipur with Nagaland (and Naga areas in Assam and Arunachal Pradesh).

The Nagas have pointed out that the creation of Nagaland state itself was a part of India’s counter-insurgency programme to divided Nagas of Nagaland from the Nagas of Manipur.

Naga demand for integration was opposed by the Meiteis as well as the Kukis who also have a demand for Kuki homeland called Zai’langam which includes Ukhrul District.

The Nagas have opposed the Kuki-Zo community demand for a separate district which would have a majority of their communities. The Nagas objected to carving out of the Kuki-Zo from Naga-inhabited districts.  When in   2016 Manipur Government announced the creation of seven new Districts the Nagas opposed it because they felt the new districts were being created to undermine Naga unity and a concession to the Kukis.

Commenting on the creation of the seven districts, the IDSA observed:  “The Manipur government had announced the creation of the seven new districts post haste without having the basic infrastructure in place. While Chief Minister Ibobi Singh reiterated that the creation of these new districts is a response to the longstanding demands of the local people as well as for reasons of administrative convenience, Naga leaders feel that it was an attempt to divide the Naga people by merging them with non-Naga areas to form the new districts. Further, they have also taken exception to the Manipur government not consulting the Hill Area Committees before taking the decision. And they have questioned the timing of the decision, which, in their view, was driven by political considerations keeping the recently concluded assembly elections in mind.”

The article goes on observe: “Subsequent events in Manipur further aggravated the situation. On 14 December, the day Chief Minister Ibobi Singh was to inaugurate the new Tengnoupal district (earlier part of Chandel district), three police commandos were killed and 11 injured in two ambushes. And on 17 December, 70 NSCN(IM) militants reportedly attacked a police post in Tamenglong district and took away nine automatic weapons and ammunition.

“Given these developments, there is a need to understand the perspective of the Nagas and the reasons for their agitation. That is essential for the governments at the Centre and the State to suitably address the issues involved and work towards bringing peace and harmony in Manipur.”

The IDSA Brief points out that “There were four Memoranda of Understanding signed between the Naga civil society and the Manipur Government. According to these, all stake holders would be consulted, and the land rights of Naga people would be ensured. Given this, the Nagas perceive the creation of the seven new districts without consulting the stakeholders as a demonstration of utter disregard for the four memoranda as well as for the assurances given to them about consultations on matters affecting them.”

The Nagas have been aggrieved by the formation of the division of the new districts, and their grievances have been compounded by the discrimination by the Manipur Government against the Hill Districts in terms of fund allocation and development. Added to which the Manipur State Assembly has only 40 members from the Hill districts (naga-Kuki combined) whereas the Meiteis have 60 members.

The failure of Indo-Naga talks has deeply affected the Nagas and dashed their hopes of peace and progress. Not only have the talks failed but the Indian intelligence agencies have worked overtime to divide and rule, both Nagas versus other communities but also Naga society itself and creating divisions among the insurgents the Naga National Political Groups (NNPGs), a coalition of seven Naga insurgent outfits, are also involved in separate negotiations.

Intra-Naga clashes have been taking place in Manipur between different Naga armed groups.  In a recent incident, on March 29, 2026, an angry mob in Ukhrul town set fire to the NSCN‑IM’s regional office after news spread that four cadres of the NSCN “Eastern Flank” had been killed in a suspected factional attack in neighbouring Kamjong district (carved out from Ukhrul District) the previous night.

On the night of March 28, around 8:30–9:00 pm, a vehicle carrying six cadres of the NSCN Eastern Flank was intercepted near Hongbei village junction in Kamjong district.Attackers opened fire on the vehicle, killing four cadres on the spot while two reportedly escaped; the bodies were recovered later by a police team.

The Eastern Flank group alleged that the ambush was carried out by a rival armed group, naming individual NSCN‑IM-linked figures, and accused NSCN‑IM of involvement, which fueled local anger.

NSCN‑IM has publicly denied ordering or authorising any offensive action against rival factions in this period, calling itself “shocked and grief‑stricken” by the killings.

The Eastern Flank is led by Ramsan who has had differences with the NSCN (IM).  A security analyst told the Print that Ramsan, who has close ties with China and is opposed to the smart wall proposed by the Government of India to be built between India and Myanmar.

The China factor in Northeast situation has been largely ignored by the media although is of considerable concern to the security establishment. And that is linked to the developments in Myanmar. The Manipur situation cannot be understood without a reference to the developments in Myanmar since it shares almost a 400-km border. This border area is known for drug trafficking, arms smuggling insurgency as well.  Each of these issues requires to be addressed separately.

One of the main grievances of the Nagas of Manipur is the infiltration of Kukis from Myanmar. These are not the bona fide refugees but migrants who have settled on Naga lands and the exponential growth of Kuki villages in Naga inhabited areas, including in Ukhrul seems to corroborate this allegation.

Nagas allege that the Government of India is “using” Kuki militants under the SoS framework as a proxy force in Naga areas, implying that security forces, including Assam Rifles, are either complicit or not acting decisively to protect Nagas from Kuki attacks. The reports from various sources including responsible sources have repeatedly alleged that  “Kukis are attacking Nagas in Ukhrul and Assam Rifles is just watching / on the sidelines with them and the Nagas also allege that Chin armed groups in Myanmar are supporting Kukis

Home Ministry communications, and media investigations linking Chin/Kuki‑Zo networks across the border to funding, training, and arms flows for Kuki groups in Manipur.

The Union Home Ministry has said on several occasions that the press, explicitly stated that some Manipur‑based Kuki militant groups were receiving funds from “Chin‑Kuki‑Zo groups in Myanmar” to perpetrate violence in Manipur and pursue a project of a larger Chin‑Kuki‑Zo state spanning Manipur, Myanmar and Bangladesh.

The question arises is why cannot the Indian security forces protect the Nagas in this particular situation when they have been attacked by Kukis. The Nagas accuse the Assam Rifles of working with a section of Kukis in counter insurgency operations from early 1980s.

The allegations of corruption and bias is specifically against Assam Rifles and sometimes specifically against specific battalions.

The role of Assam Rifles has been controversial from the 1980s and both Nagas and Meiteis have complained about its role in counter-insurgency operations both in the Valley and in the Hills.  The force has been accused of committing large scale violation of human rights by human rights activists.

Even the former Chief Minister, a Tangkhul Naga and an ardent Congress man Rishang Keising, hated by the Naga insurgents had written in a Memo to the then President of India in the aftermath of the NSCN attack on the Assam Rifles post in Oinam village in Senapati District in July 1987:

“…Civil Rule, has, unfortunately, ceased to operate in Senapati District of Manipur due to excesses committed by the Assam Rifles with complete disregard shown to the civil administration. The Assam Rifles are running the parallel administration in the area. The Deputy Commissioner and the Superintendent of Police were wrongfully confined, humiliated and prevented from discharging their official duties by the Security forces. The Chairman, Hill Autonomous District Council was forced to proceed on foot from national highway upto Oinam  village and confined during the night and thereby prevented from discharging his official functions. Whereas the acts of certain misguided elements need to be condemned strongly, we can hardly afford to term the entire population as anti-national as being projected by the Assam Rifles. This is an extremely dangerous trend which must be avoided at all costs. We shall request you to kindly use your good offices to restore the rule of law in the affected areas immediately.

“…..Finally, we shall be most grateful to you, Sir, for paying august visit to the State and offer an opportunity to vent our feelings. We are, let me assure you, committed to the maintenance of unity and integrity of the country which is dearest to our lives for which no sacrifice is too great.”

If peace is to be brought this force should be removed as a first step to build confidence among all communities.

However, the Government did not pay heed to the Chief Minister’s warnings, and this has continued till today. Meanwhile, the people of Manipur across communities continue to suffer.  The situation cannot be described as merely a breakdown of law and order or ethnic conflict; it is an entrenched low‑intensity civil war‑like situation.

Nandita Haksar is a human rights lawyer who took up the case against Assam Rifles in 1987, and the final hearing finished in 1991, but the Gauhati High Court did not give any judgement in a case till 2019 only to state that the case files were missing. See Nandita Haksar and Sebatian Hongray, The Judgement that Never Came army rule in Northeast India (2011)