Kuki Black Day: Extreme desperation to Nagas
- Part 1 -

CN Alen Kuki *

25th anniversary of 'Sahnit', Kuki Black Day at Churachandpur on 13 September 2018 :: Pix - Shankar Khangembam

The 25th Sahnit-Ni (Kuki Black Day) observation on the 13th September 2018, at Churachandpur District has been unique in several ways. Since day one, Naga civil societies and its armed wing, the NSCN-IM, kept engaged in a desperate attempt to fend itself against the crimes committed to innocent Kukis in the 90s. The desperation is even more evident amongst Naga intellectuals as it is perceived to be a threat to the ongoing political dialogue with the Government of India.

A week or so have passed where a [practicing] colonial advocate Sira Kharay stoops to defend the crime his leadership commits by counteracting to the Kuki Black Day observation in the The Sangai Express (20 Sept. 2018). The counter allegations that Kukis are 'aggressor' implies being completely unprofessional and insensitive after it left over a thousand dead, hundreds of settlement uprooted and lakhs homeless. Mr Kharay's arguments find itself in a pit of loopholes which needs rectification.

On colonial invention

Mr Kharay seems to have no other accounts to better explain the origin and the authority of the Kukis, except his reliance on colonial text. In fact colonial historiography has been largely bias towards Kukis for being hesitant to be ruled in their own land. In an attempt to delegitimize Kukis of its orgin and authority, Naga adversaries, for the matter, have the habit of quoting heavily from colonial writings while it is a known fact that Nagas do experience the same misrepresentations in colonial history.

September 24th 2016 edition of the Eastern Mirror runs a heading 'Scholars Warn: Colonial image of Nagas could impede Identity'. Dr Lanusangla Tzudir cautioned, 'for so many years we have taken these [colonial writing] sources as authentic', it further urge Nagas, 'to be very careful of using these (colonial literature) in the construction of Naga identity'. In line with the views as expressed by Dr Tzudir, large chunk of scholars in the region have downplayed colonial literature as it underrate and is divisive in nature.

Yet the variation Kharay maintained against the 'general' Naga school of thought could be its geo-political inclination. Decades prior to independence have been a turbulent phase of struggle for Nagas [of Naga Hills/Nagaland]. The relationship the tribes maintained, though occupied, has never been cordial. Divide, subdue and rule continues against the tribes. Therefore, British policies towards the Naga Hills do not receive much appreciation from the present day scholars of Nagaland. However, the case has been different to Manipur Nagas. Colonial writings largely describe them as 'friendly and peaceful'. Against the perception maintained by the Naga scholars of Nagaland, colonial text became the 'Bible' of drawing legitimacy to Manipur Nagas.

Logically, by being consistent to the views held by colonial authorities on the Kukis, it is ample clear that Nagas of Manipur have been purely an advocate of colonialism and colonial writings. As such, in a desperate attempt to delegitimize the Kukis of their authority, Mr Kharay has failed to acknowledge the academic discourse of other Naga intellectuals which largely disowns colonial writings on people whom they colonized.

Kukis in colonial historiography

It is a commonly accepted fact that Kukis has been largely underrepresented in colonial writings, as compared to the peaceful Nagas of Manipur. Being misrepresented and underrepresented, Nagas of Manipur often trade charges against Kukis based on colonial materials. However, if colonial writings are accepted as valid and authentic it is pertinent to have the other side of colonial perspective.

Origin of Kukis: As mentioned by Kharay, Kukis are often referred to have migrated to Manipur in the 19th century. These arguments are based on the accounts of Johnstone (My Experience in Manipur and the Naga Hills, 1896), McCulloch (Valley of Manipur, 1980), and Shakespeare (Luhai Kuki Clans, 1912). These accounts in 'few lines' has been quoted extensively by the Nagas to describe Kukis.

However, the claim is one-sided owing to the fact that the Kukis were little known till the close of the 19th century. Alexander Mackenzie (Northeast Frontier of India, 2014) describe the length of settlement o the Chahsads as: "The Chahsads, for that matter, who settled a long time ago in the region bordering Burma (Myanmar), came to notice only in 1870s". Now, it is logically safe to conclude that colonial writers generalize the migration of few groups of Kukis during the period without ascertaining the fact that the hill areas under Kukis' authority were largely unnoticed, as it was the case of the Chahsads.

According to Pooyas, the traditional records of the Meitei Kings, it mentions 'two Kuki chiefs named Kuki Ahongba and Kuki Achouba who were allies to Nongba Lairen Pakhangba, the first historically recorded king of the Meithis [Meiteis], in the latter's mobilization for the throne in 33 AD.' The record herein dates to two millennia ago. Tarantha, a Buddhist monk, in 'Account of the Spread of the Doctrine in the Ko-Ki [Kuki] country in the East' mentions his close association with Kuki country to the east of Bengal. Taranatha's account dated back to 1608 AD.

Without doubt it is safe to deduce that Kuki settlement dated to several thousand years ago. Even a Naga historian Gangumei Kabui (History of Manipur, p24) concluded, "Some Kuki tribes Migrated to Manipur hills in the pre-historic times". The problem being the arrival of few groups of Kukis was extensively generalized which eventually undermined the independent existence of Kukis in the Hills since time immemorial. The worldview of Naga elites [of Manipur] based on colonial historiography is abhorrent and suicidal taking the fact that Nagas of Nagaland does not consider colonial writings as the basis to further political ideals. Therefore, while pointing fingers, learned individuals like Kharay should not try to hoodwink the general public as it was done to him.

Manipur Nagas- the Underdog and a colonial puppet: Nagas as unique, warrior tribe or any description of that sort in historical record is a reference given to the Nagas in their home state- Nagaland, and has nothing to do with the Nagas of Manipur. Colonial records mentions tribes like Angami, Sema, Lotha, etc of Nagaland as powerful tribes of Nagaland. In this context Alexander Mackenzie (Northeast Frontier of India, 2014) describes Kukis as "the only hillmen in this quarter who can hold their own against the Angamis". Though the description is brief it speaks volume.

The peculiar difference of the Manipur Nagas is that they are filled with inter village rivalry conflicts. Headhunting tribe which several Nagas claim themselves in the present day bears dark secret of inter-rivalry conflicts. Each tribe or village hunts heads amongst themselves in struggle for power over the other. Gangte (Significance of Kuki Uprising, 2011) pointed, "In fact there had been more rivalries amongst the Tangkhuls themselves than with the Kukis; and the same is true of the Kabuis".

Similar argument was made by Rowney (Wild Tribes of India, 1885) that the Nagas "…as caterans and murderers and also for being perpetually at feud with each other, their feuds going down from generation to generation". Therefore, the assertion of being warrior and headhunting is rather self-humiliating.

However, the history of the hill areas is more of the history of authority of the Kukis. As Nagas were the subject of the Kukis, there has been constant campaign against and 'erring tribes' by Kuki chiefs, being the authority. Protagonists of Kuki genocide who asserted that Kukis first begin conflict in the past logically accept Kuki supremacy in the past.

Colonialism for the Nagas, rather, has been a boon as they are freed from bondage of Kukis. In trying to win the acceptance, the British began forging alliances with the Nagas, whereas the Kukis strongly opposed to colonial influence in the region. Prior to colonialism they assume the role as a subject, and with the arrival of the British they have been used as a puppet against the Kukis.

Massacre of Nagas: The later decades of the 19th century brings a lot of change in the administration of the northeast region. With the fall of the Meitei kingdom in 1891, constant attempts by colonial authorities to make inroads to the hills have increased. On the hand, the Kuki chiefs still remains adamant and suspicious to the policies of the British.

To check British influence in the hills, Kuki chiefs became more strictly vigilant in and outside their territories. The situation led to the introduction of capital punishment against anyone committing treachery to the Kuki chiefs and their interests. It was during this period that the Kuki chiefs assume its absolute authority to its subjects.

It is true and has been a fact that the Kukis killed Nagas in great numbers during that period. Johnstone (My Experience in Maanipur and the Naga Hills, 1896) provides the account of Chingsow killings where Kukis killed 45 Tangkhul Nagas which Kharay describes the act of Kukis as a 'defiance of British order'.

From the fact above, as Kharay describes, the British assumes the messiah to the Nagas, or the Tangkhul Nagas. To the Kuki chiefs, however, the act of cooperating the British amounts to betrayal which attracts serious punishments. The Kukis as the aggressor should not just be limited to the colonial worldview alone, rather it will be more appropriate to take Kukis perspective into account on the attack on Naga villages.

Kuki Genocide: Kuki Genocide as having began over the control of Moreh, a border town with Myanmar, between Kuki and Naga militants, in the later decades of the 20th century is a deeply flawed conception. In fact, the issue of conflict over the control of Moreh Township may have led to an overt conflict, yet this does not substantiate the whole argument. The extreme hatred towards Kukis lies on vengeance and greed which is never a part of the teaching in Christian faith; vengeance over the past deeds Kukis committed, and greed over Kukis land when they are vulnerable to defend.

Initially, the Nagas systematically targets Kuki chiefs as they constitute the 'achilles heel' of Kuki social and political life. The first killing of Kuki chiefs began in 1957 when Thangjalam, Chief of Toljang was killed by the Naga armed voluntters, who later came to be known as the NSCN. Within a decade a total of 40 Kuki chiefs and important personalities were killed. Till 1990, about 57 Kukis were killed; of which eleven were village chiefs (Plight of Indigenous Kukis, 2009, KUMHUR Publication).

The general argument that the conflict began as a result of struggle for control of Moreh Township between NSCN-IM and Kuki militants, therefore, is neither convincing nor validated by facts. The conflict was more of a systematically executed plan dating back to the 1950s.

Charges against KNF/KNA: As killings of Kuki chiefs and important personalities continue, the Kukis began to felt the need of raising a defense force against targeted killings of Kuki chiefs by the Nagas. The insecurity amongst the Kukis was more evident as Rishang Keishing, a Tangkhul Naga became the Chief Minister of Manipur. Instead of taking the issue at hand, Rishang cited petty issues like "lack of resource and the immobile force" as an excuse to the blunder he commits against the Kukis (NDTV The World This Week Documentary, 1993).

With the free hand given to NSCN-IM by the Rishang Keishing's government, Kukis began the need of protecting its interest by taking up arms. Thereafter, KNF came into being in May 1988 whereas KNA is known to have formed in February 1988. Kharay got completely wrong on all these facts. Furthermore, KNF and KNA never ever merged instead it maintained its distinct organizational setup till today.

As speculative Nagas are, Kharay's assumption of KNF/KNA as formed at the behest of RAW and the Government of Manipur is calculative, irrational and illogical. After the learned Kharay got wrong on when KNF/KNA got formed, he builds his hypothesis of KNF/KNA as colluding with the government without ever ascertaining the fact that there are flaws in the hypothesis every Naga youth is taught and indoctrinated.

The charge against the then cabinet minister C Doungel is nothing more of a conspiracy. In fact during the height of the genocide, Doungel stood against all odd against the NSCN-IM onslaught. The Hindu (26th March, 2014) records 'several assassination attempts on Doungel in the past', for the NSCN-IM considered him as an impediment to the ongoing pogrom. A bomb attack that left her wife blinded serves as a reminder of all possible strategy adopted by NSCN-IM to crush Kukis.

The state force then was, without doubt, under the control of the Chief Minister Rishang Keishing. When C Kholen and Thingphai were attacked on 6th August 1993, 6th MR personnels and the Assam Rifles stationed at Leisan Tangkhul Village, just a kilometer away, did not intervene nor responded to the crisis. The attack lasted for 5 hours and 16 villagers lost their life.

The list goes on. From 1992 till 1997, the state government under the Chief Ministership of Rishang Keishing, a Tangkhul Naga, gave free-hand to NSCN-IM which led to the death of thousand innocent Kukis, besides leaving lakhs homeless.

India Today (October, 1993) runs a report:

"More than a week before the killings, Naga militants had warned that they would attack a Kuki village. Five days before the incident, the superintendent of police of the neighbouring Senapati district, while on a visit to Celnch village in Tamenglong district, was disarmed and sent packing by the militants. But none of this roused the administration which was caught twiddling its thumbs when the Nagas actually struck and killed the villagers. Nor did anything much happen after the killings. The local superintendent of police, the district collector and the commanding officer in charge of the Manipur Rifles battalion went on leave within days after the incident despite the simmering tension in the district."

To be continued.....