The Kuki National Organisation is a revolutionary movement based in Zale’n-gam: land of freedom, the ancestral territory of the Kuki people…
The Kuki National Organisation is a revolutionary movement based in Zale’n-gam: land of freedom, the ancestral territory of the Kuki people. The ancestral Zale’n-gam comprises the contiguous region in Northeast India, Northwest Burma, and the Chittagong Hill tracts in Bangladesh. Zale'n-gam is the land where the Kukis originated, on which they were raised, developed, excelled and fought valiant battles for its preservation and protection. Following the ‘Kuki Rising, 1917-1919’ (OIOC), which was a culmination of resistance to British colonialists’ aggression that began in 1777, Zale’n-gam was divided between India and Burma by the colonialists. Despite the historical injustice resulting in the division of Kuki territory without their consent, and the consequent separation of their people, successive generations of Kuki have not forgotten that they are one nation. They have neither abandoned nor faltered in the pursuit of their right to regain freedom.
The Kuki National Organisation, on behalf of the Kukis, of the present and future generations, pledges to restore the ancestral Kuki territory to its rightful status. The Manifesto and ideology of KNO is based on the resolution of the Kuki chiefs, who fought against the British in the ‘Kuki Rising, 1917-1919’. The resolution reads:
At all cost, we should fight against the British for the preservation of our independence, and for the protection of our land, culture and tradition (in JC Higgins’ letter No 1243, 7 November 1917, to the Chief Secretary of Assam).
The zeal and sacrifice of our forefathers made nearly one hundred years ago remain fresh in our hearts and minds. Not daunted by the might of the world’s most powerful imperialists of the time, they fought them to preserve the territorial integrity of Zale’n-gam. Their fortitude and tenacity continues to inspire KNO in its obligation to restore Zale’n-gam to its status, which is the birthright of the Kuki people. KNO pledges to pursue its goal through means that are noble and which do not compromise the integrity and commitment demonstrated by our ancestors.
The Kukis were a sovereign nation before the advent of the British...
Prior to the advent of the British, the Kukis were in their own right a sovereign nation. Kuki polity, based on chieftainship, functioned with a full complement of governing bodies, such as Semang (Home Minister), Pachong (Defence & External Affairs), Lhangsam (Minister, Public Relations & Broadcasting) Lawm Upa (Minister of Youth, Economic & Cultural Affairs), Thiempu (Priest), Tollai Pao (Law and Order Enforcement Minister). At the national level, this governance is known as the Kuki Inpi. The pattern is replicated at the Lhang (district) andGamkai (state) level. Integral to Kuki polity is the Inpi, the apex body, in which each Kuki Chief is a member.
The Inpi met to execute policies and programmes, and as matters of importance, such as which affect the security and safety of the entire Kuki nation arose. One such instance took place in 1917: the Kuki Chiefs from the entire length and breadth of Zale'n-gam held a series of conclaves at Chassad, Jampi, Longya, and Khongjang. At these conclaves they resolved to rise against the British to protect the sovereignty of Zale’n-gam. To mark their resolve for a concerted effort, the Kuki Chiefs performed Sajamlhah and ate the heart and liver of the mithun or bison killed for the occasion, symbolising commitment from the depth of one's heart or core. As is customary, portions of the meat are sent to every Kuki village Chief not present on the occasion. The tradition of Thingkho le Malchapom (hot king-sized chilly tied on to smouldering firewood) was launched, signifying a declaration of war against the British. Thingkho le Malchapom was sent to every Kuki village to convey that an offensive against the British has begun. This practice, which also indicated the Kukis were fully prepared, enabled the united Kuki Rising of 1917-1919.The traditional Kuki Inpi, which remained latent since India gained independence from Britain, was revived following the fresh lot of crises faced by the Kuki people from 1980s and 1990s.
The relationship between the Kuki Chief and the Meitei Ningthou (Raja or Chief) was one of mutual respect and understanding. They stuck together through thick and thin, helping each other in times of external aggression. An eloquent ancient Meitei aphorism bears testimony to this relationship: Chingna koina pansaba, Haona koina panngakpa, Manipur sana leimayol.... (Rough translation) Encircled by the range of hills, secured all around by the people who dwell therein; Oh Manipur, thou golden land. The aphorism clearly demarcated Kuki and Meitei territories. The ‘people’ or ‘Haona’ refer to the Kukis, who were masters of the hills, where they received tax and tributes from the Tangkhuls and Kabui Nagas; Manipur sana leimayol, the golden land, refers to the ancestral Meitei territory consisting the valley, which lay safely surrounded by Kuki hills and their braves.
Contrary to some academics’ view, the Kuki Chiefs were not 'vassals' of the Meitei Ningthou, neither were they ever treated as such. The Kuki Chiefs were independent and benevolent autocrats, who kept their territory secure and intact. In the words of JH Hutton, The Kukis were ruled by their own organized chiefs and treated as they had been in the past at any rate, by the Manipur State as allies (Introduction to William Shaw’s book, Notes on Thadou Kukis (1929), written by JH Hutton, July 1928, p 3). The Kukis protested the transfer of hill administration to the Manipur State Durbar and made clear their stand by stating: The hills were never a part of India prior to the annexation of these frontier hills (Statement of KNA, 1947). This position was reiterated by KNA: The unchallenging fact is that, if the British government left the country, then naturally the Kukis should be free (Memorandum to the Prime Minister, 1960).
The freedom loving Kukis were politically subjugated by the British, but morally they remained independent and this manifested itself from time to time...
The aggressions of the British on Kuki territory, which began in 1777 culminated in the Kuki Rising of 1917-1919. The British Government let loose a reign of terror on the Kukis both during and after the Kuki Rising. To this day bitters tears are shed when experiences are related of the torture, oppression, and extent of losses in terms of property and lives suffered at the hands of the British. The intensity of Kuki defiance is cited by Maj Gen DK Palit (1984, 62) in Sentinels of the North-East: rather than attend a Durbar the Political Agent of Manipur organised to discuss the issues that incensed the Kukis, Chief Ngulbul of Mombi (Lawnpi) and Chief Ngulkhup of Longya sent a message that they have ‘closed the country to the British.’ In today context, Chief Ngulbul and Chief Ngulkhup’s dominion is the Chandel district of Manipur.
In spite of the cruel suppression meted out by the British, our forefathers’ courage, hope and love for freedom did not falter, and this manifested periodically through WWII. Shakespear (1929, 224, History of the Assam Rifles), wrote that the events of the Kuki Rising of 1917-1919 covered the ‘entire hills of Manipur’; Meluri Sub-division and Peren District of present-day Nagaland; and in Eastern Zale’n-gam, of present-day Burma, up to the river Chindwin and the Kale-Kabaw Valley. This concerted offensive led by the Chiefs is a tribute to the traditional Kuki polity, which is embodied in the Inpi. The Kuki Rising is also significant as it highlighted the historicity of Kuki Polity and Kuki unity across the present-day international boundaries of India, Burma and Bangladesh. The British government, cognizant of this fact, and dreading the strength of a united Kuki people, had a system of border meetings between officers of Manipur and those of Somra Tract in Upper Burma, Chin Hills, Naga Hills and Lushai Hills. After obtaining detailed accounts of the Kukis and fully assessing their strength, the British Indian Government began reorganizing administrative regions to divide and control Kuki territory.
By the Act of 1935, Government of India, Burma was separated from India in 1937. This deft imperialist masterstroke split Zale’n-gam between British India and British Burma, without Kuki consent. In the words of William Shaw (1929, 50), ‘The unprepared Kukis could not, however, openly challenge the Britishers but had to wait for an opportune time when they could re-assert their freedom.’ The opportunity to regain their freedom came in World War II. In this Great War the Kukis and the Indian National Army fought on the side of Japanese. The Kukis entered into a political agreement with the INA and the Japanese army regarding the future of the Kukis after the war ended.
In a booklet (written in the vernacular) Manipur a Kuki te leh Christianity (1984), Pu Jamthang gives an account of the agreement between the Kukis and the Japanese held in present-day Burma at Koija (north of Homalin) and Zalen (south of Homalin) camps, on 5 Oct and 12 Oct 1943, respectively. The number of Kuki Chiefs and elders present on the occasion was 310; Imperial Japan was represented by 3 Japanese officers, namely Ezemia, Nokamisan and Nakamisang. A translation of the text regarding the treaty at Koija and Zalen camps is as follows:The Kukis and the Japanese killed a mithun or bison to formalise the treaty. They ate the animal’s liver and heart (symbolising deepest commitment to the treaty) and declared that a tiger devour either party that reneged!
The points of the Kuki-Japanese agreement are as follows:
a) In war time, Kukis would help the Japanese in combats against the British, provide local guides, intelligence, provisions and other materials
b) In the course of the war, the Imperial Japanese army would respect the dignity and honour of the Kuki people
c) Following victory of the Axis powers, the Kukis would regain independence, as was prior to the advent of the British, and Japan would facilitate in the process of Kukis rebuilding their nation
The victory of the Allied forces and subsequent independence of Burma, India and Pakistan resulted in Kuki territory being incorporated within the three state-nations. The British not only divided our ancestral lands, but also divided us into ‘Old Kuki’ and ‘New Kuki’ with the sole intention to subdue and prevent us from becoming a strong and united nation.
India and Burma have interpreted the peaceful movement of the Kukis since 1940s as a sign of weakness, and as a result, failed to address their issues…
Unyielding to the forced division of Zale’n-gam, the Kuki National Assembly was formed in 1946 to demand independence from India. Within Burma, as a mark of protest, the Kuki people did not participate in the widely acclaimed Panglong Agreement of 1947, held at Panglong in the Shan state. The Panglong Agreement was a conference, which was attended by certain Members of the Executive Council of the Governor of Burma, and representative of the Shan States, the Kachin Hills and the Chin Hills – but not the Kukis. Despite the enforced circumstances of the Kukis, their mode of expressing grievance and seeking redressal in India and Burma has been non-violent. However, this gesture has not been appreciated by the respective governments of both countries; they appear to interpret the peaceful movement of the Kukis since 1940s as a sign of weakness, and have ignored the Kuki question. The governments of India and Burma have failed to protect the lives, liberty and property of the Kuki people. In other words, the basic human rights of the Kuki people have been denied in their own lands. These, and other grievances, have been patiently borne to a point where forbearance ceases to be a virtue. Our anticipation for the concerned governments to take proactive initiatives has so far proven futile. We are therefore obligated to consider, deliberate and articulate our political goals, which is our inherent right and sacred duty to posterity.
In the Indian Union, the states are organized on ethno-linguistic lines in recognition of the existing mosaic of ethnic identities, languages and cultures. The right to govern their own affairs within their traditional territory has been denied to the Kukis, whilst it has long been extended to other ethnic entities in the Northeast. As a result, the Kuki inhabited areas of Manipur Hills, Karbi-Anglong and North-Cachar Hills of Assam and Tripura remain grossly underdeveloped and the people live in abject poverty. Fair developmental programs have consistently been denied to Kuki inhabited regions by the state machinery dominated by the majority communities. The long years of neglect and sufferings of the Kuki people under these state governments, dictated by the interests of the majority communities, have rendered the Kukis economically, socially and politically backward and deeply vulnerable. Please note: ‘Unity in Diversity’, the basis of Indian Polity, can work only when the diverse communities are on the same pedestal and can relate to each other with mutual respect.
The Kukis have been subjected to political adversity and their neighbouring communities have taken advantage of their consequent vulnerability. This fact was highlighted by the Kuki National Assembly in 1960: ‘Unless strong measures are immediately taken up for self-preservation, namely establishment of a separate state of their own within the Indian Union, they will surely succumb sooner or later to a process of extinction and extermination, which has been threatening them very seriously.’ The Indian government has not addressed the Kuki issue and thus continues the saga of the Kuki people’s never-ending sufferings and struggles. From 1950-1990, the Tangkhul people of Ukhrul District in Manipur carried out selective and systematic elimination of Kuki chiefs and elders, totalling 42. This was done to implant a fear psychosis among Kukis so that they may leave their hearths and ancestral lands. In the process, 64 Kuki villages were uprooted, which are now occupied by the Tangkhuls. In an ever-worsening scenario, on 22 October 1992‘Quit Notice Served by United Naga Council (UNC) to Kukis’ was issued, signed by RK Thekho, president of UNC, Imphal. Copies of the notice were distributed to all Naga villages, Sub Divisional Offices/District Commissioner Offices of the Manipur state government, and to the Editors of Manipur Mail and Manipur News for publication. As a result, from 1992-1997, the NSCN (IM) led by Thuingaleng Muivah, a Tangkhul, launched the infamous Kuki genocide. The casualties totalled over 900 Kuki people dead (a significant number of them women and children), 350 uprooted villages, and more than 50,000 people displaced.
The degree of human rights violations committed by the NSCN-IM is reflected in the statement of Yambem Laba, a noted journalist from Manipur:
The Naga cry against human rights abuse perpetrated by the Indian army for over fifty years was, completely overshadowed by one incident of Zoupi village on 13 September 1993.
The above remark refers to one of the many incidents in which NSCN (IM) cadres at gunpoint tied up and massacred 107 Kuki men (87 died at the spot; 20 later succumbed to injuries), butchering them with matchetes and spears. In fact the Nagas served notice to the Kukis to quit Zoupi village by 15 September. In spite of the people leaving the village on the 13th, two days ahead of the deadline served, they were butchered. This reveals the treacherous mentality of the NSCN-IM.
In addition, Dr Isak, Medical Officer of Chandel, who conducted the post-mortem of one of the three women raped and killed by the NSCN (IM) guerrillas at Moltuh village in 1992, reported:
Face blindfolded. Gang raped before being killed. Throat split up with knife. Left portions of the skull completely battered up. Left breast badly bruised. A piece of stick measuring about seven inches was found inserted in her vagina.
Pu Tobu Kevichusa, Secretary of Naga National Council statement at the funeral service of Pu Mangkholen Hangsing, IAS, Commissioner of Taxation and Excise is noteworthy:
Isak and Muivah, the leaders of NSCN (IM), have proclaimed among the international community that the Government of India have killed innocent Nagas and abused their human rights. On the contrary, here is a stark example of their role of engaging in fratricidal activity by killing blameless people like Mangkholen to benefit their sectarian policy.
The atrocities committed on the Kukis and on those who stand for justice clearly violate not only basic human rights, but also contradict NSCN-IM’s slogan, ‘Nagaland for Christ’. Rather surprisingly, many people – both within India and in the international community – are more concerned with Nagas’ self-determination and violations of their human rights by the Indian security forces without ever a thought regarding the NSCN (IM)-led Naga violation of human rights against the Kukis! The KNO possesses and will produce at the appropriate time, concrete evidence of NSCN (IM)’s brutal murders and other atrocities. These include photographs of those killed and mass graves of slain Kuki villagers (where it was impossible to have individual burials), dates and places of killings and a list of Kuki villages uprooted.
Ever since the 1950s and 1960s, the Kuki people have submitted numerous memorandums demanding a separate state and also appealed for protection and restoration of their uprooted villages. Unfortunately, the government of India and Burma have so far chosen to ignore the Kuki people’s positive overtures. The indifference of the Government of India has resulted in escalation of atrocities against Kukis that beggar description. The government, instead of addressing the Kuki question, has kept up its negotiations with NSCN-IM, the perpetrators of Kuki genocide, while completely evading talks with KNO. In August 2005, KNO signed the Suspension of Operations with the Indian Army, which represented the Central Government, in order to facilitate political dialogue with Government of India. To date, talks between Government of India and KNO have not begun. This speaks volumes about the indifference and extreme callousness of the GOI towards the Kuki people and their problems.
In the meantime, capitalizing on the vulnerability of the Kukis, the Meitei insurgent outfits have infiltrated Kuki areas in large numbers, where they have set up bases and wantonly indulged in inhuman harassment and torture of Kuki villagers. They also launch attacks on Indian Security Forces, mindless of the reprisals on civilian Kukis, and engage in laying anti-personnel Landmines to the detriment of the village folks. Many Kukis are therefore either killed or incapacitated by landmine explosions. The Meitei insurgents who have understanding with the military junta are also operating from Burmese territory. The Government of India remains a mute spectator to these sufferings of its Kuki citizens and has failed utterly to protect them.
In Burma, the Kuki people have been subjected to persecution and torture by the state machinery dominated by the majority Burmans, ever since the 1962 military coup under General Newin. The Government of Revolutionary Council headed by General Newin had since 1967 forcibly evicted more than 20,000 Kuki villagers in Kabaw Valley during the iniquitous ‘Khadawmi Operation’ led by U Muang Maung into neighbouring India. The pretext for the eviction was either non-possession of National Registration Cards or possessing bogus ones. The rightist military introduced the system of National Registration for citizens soon after it assumed power in 1962. This was intended primarily to deprive citizenship to ethnic minorities, including millions of ethnic Tamil Indian Businessman in and around Rangoon. Besides, the Registration Cards, meant to be issued free of cost were illegally sold at a high price. From the early 1980s there have been renewed attempts at displacing the Kukis and transplanting ethnic Burmese population in the Kabaw valley. Some existing examples of such transplanted settlements are Ongchija, Tanan, Myothit, Nanaungow, Mantong and Ywatha, which were deliberately set up by the military junta. Besides such acts of discrimination, the junta has been extracting forced-labour from Kuki villagers in the Kabaw Valley and dispossessed the Kukis of many of their villages. Construction of new churches has also been categorically stopped.
The military junta in Burma has also persistently pursued a policy of Burmanization of periphery minority ethnic communities. This has been carried out through a process of assimilation, acculturation, suppression and forcible imposition of the Burmese language and the Buddhist religion. In the course of action, Churches of many Kuki villages in Myanmar has been burnt down. The pastors and community leaders have been tortured, and villages forced to move in order to set up Burmese (pro-military Junta) settlements or Army bases. The State Law and Order Restoration Council, which grabbed power in the post 1988 democratic uprising, intensified the persecution and eviction of Kuki citizens. The State Peace and Development Council, the new face of the Junta, despite promises to restore democracy, has displayed no change whatsoever in their approach towards the ethnic nationalities. Neither has the military’s disdain and mockery of democracy and national reconciliation diminished.
The Kuki National Organisation’s objectives and policy: Re-Unification of our ancestral lands divided between India, Burma and Bangladesh...
The Kuki National Organisation is committed to self-determination for the Kuki people in their ancestral lands. The KNO’s present definition of self-determination is the right of the Kukis to govern their own affairs within a defined territorial entity (Statehood), one in India (Western Zale'n-gam) and another in Burma (Eastern Zale'n-gam) as a first step towards re-unification of the Kukis. Our forefathers, the patriots of the Kuki Rising of 1917-1919, fought the British colonialists to preserve Kuki polity and the people. In like manner, KNO stands for statehood to secure the ancestral lands of the Kuki people, their identity, culture, customs and traditions. These fundamentals are essential to promote an all round development of our people. KNO will steadfastly strive to achieve these noble objectives. The objectives are based on the historicity of Kuki ancestral polity and territory. The KNO calls upon the entire Kuki populace around the world to come together as a nation whose people share a common origin, culture, customs and traditions. We also appeal to every capable Kuki to contribute his or her strength in the struggle we have embarked upon to redeem our national pride and heritage and to establish freedom, liberty, security and welfare, which is our people’s right in Zale’n-gam.
The present political objectives of KNO – statehood for Kuki ancestral lands, each within the Union of India and Union of Burma – provide clear evidence of our conciliatory stance towards the respective governments. We urge the governments of India and Burma to pay heed to the numerous pleas and memoranda that have been placed before them to date and expedite the process of granting statehood to the Kuki people. KNO has opted for a conciliatory stand and anticipates the governments of India and Burma will reciprocate meaningfully.
The KNO also call upon the United Kingdom to facilitate this process and thereby help remedy the present predicament of the Kukis and the state of their ancestral territory for which they are historically responsible. We appeal to Germany and Japan, the partners of the Kuki people during World War I and World War II, to extend due moral and political support for the realization of KNO’s objectives.
With statehood and its vital elements of self-governance, its inherent infrastructure and other provisions, our socio-economic and political condition that was destabilized by the British and neglected by the successor states would appropriately be restored. A new era of peace and development that shall dawn upon the Kuki people once our objectives are realized will create conditions that engender peaceful co-existence with our neighbouring communities, which is essential to develop a symbiotic relationship and join the global march towards progress.
The KNO adheres to a reconciliatory approach towards our neighbours, particularly the Nagas and Meiteis. With regard to the Meitei people, the Kukis, aware that the ancestral lands of both peoples, the Hills and Plains, were being clubbed together as a single entity by the powers that be, and vigilant of the possibility therefore of both peoples losing their ancestral territories, national freedom and sovereign inheritance to the emergent Indian state-nation if the Manipur Ningthou were to sign the merger proposal, vehemently opposed it. The Meiteis failed to appreciate such statesmanly opposition of Kuki Chiefs to Manipur being annexed in 1949 into the Indian Union, and instead continue to make every effort to trivialize this significant effort made by the Kukis to preserve both peoples’ political and territorial inheritance. Furthermore, when the NSCN (IM) launched the ethnic cleansing of the Kukis in the hills of Manipur in the 1990s, both the revolutionary and civil society groups of the Meiteis did not intervene to prevent the Kuki genocide. We therefore urge our one-time Meitei brothers to withdraw their armed cadres from Kuki territory. They are also urged to immediately abandon setting up landmines in Kuki territory. The KNO are signatory to the Deed of Commitment to ban landmines, an initiative of Geneva Call, Geneva.
The NSCM (IM)’s aggression on the Kukis from 1990s that went beyond traditional warfare has left an indelible mark on the minds of the Kuki people. The KNO would like to remind them of a statement made by the Kuki National Assembly:
While our heartfelt sympathy and good wishes go to the Nagas for the achievement of their demand, they may at the same time be cautioned not to come in the way of the same demand of the Kukis (Vide- A Kuki State: A Memorandum of the KNA to the Prime Minister of India, 1960).
The KNO, therefore urge both the Nagas and Meiteis that as partners in observing and claiming human rights, let aggression and intimidation be shunned, and civilized and charitable conduct be our crowning glory. The KNO, in order to create peaceful co-existence among the Kukis, Nagas and Meiteis within their respective territories, is open to a tripartite dialogue. For this to succeed the later two communities must relinquish their territorial acquisitiveness and hegemonic policies.
The KNO presently adheres to a policy of pursuing our objectives in an amicable manner. The dove with two olive branches on our Website’s Homepage symbolizes our goodwill towards all. The symbol also makes clear our intent to achieve a harmonious resolution of differences with the governments of India and Burma. Given the Kuki people’s history of opposition to British colonialism to preserve the integrity of our ancestral lands, KNO’s appeal for Kuki lands to be accorded statehood, one in India and another in Burma, is rational and legitimate. Fulfilment of the rights of the Kuki people for self-determination in this respect within a reasonable time frame will ensure our goodwill to endure. The KNO shall be duty-bound to consider alternatives to our present approach if the governments’ apathy and negligence persist concerning Kuki aspirations.
No comments:
Post a Comment