Since February 2026, when the Litan crisis broke into the open, Ukhrul and Kamjong districts have been drawn into a conflict that many outside journalists and observers still fail to grasp in both its complexity and urgency. What is often reduced to yet another chapter of the broader “Manipur conflict” between Kuki and Meitei communities is, on the ground, a far more specific and deeply calculated situation shaped by land, mobility, and control, and driven by forces that extend beyond the immediate local context.
A brief clarification: this editorial is specific to Ukhrul and Kamjong districts.
Also read Ukhrul: Over 20 Houses Set Ablaze in Litan Village, Manipur
At the heart of the present situation in these predominantly Tangkhul Naga districts lies a stark and troubling reality: over 230 Tangkhul Naga villages remain effectively cut off. This is not captivity in the conventional sense, but a condition no less severe, marked by chocking, intimidation, and aggression. Armed Kuki elements operating from three villages, Shangkai, Thowai, and Mongkot Chephu, situated along a roughly 10-kilometre stretch of National Highway-202, have rendered large swathes of the two Tangkhul Naga districts inaccessible and insecure.
To establish the context, the Nagas in general, and the Tangkhul tribe in particular, have never laid claim to Churachandpur as their land. However, the same cannot be said of certain Kuki supremacist ideologues, whose assertions extend into parts of Ukhrul and Kamjong districts, reflected in the contested and widely circulated maps associated with the Kuki-Zo Council and other Kuki CSOs and individuals. At this day and age, even the slightest renaming of places between countries is a major diplomatic trigger.
Also read Tangkhul Villages: A Comprehensive Guide to Their Distribution and Heritage
The events of February were not an isolated eruption of mistrust. On the ground, especially for the Tangkhul Nagas, there is growing clarity that the aggression reflects a calculated design. The targeting of areas in the LM Block under Ukhrul district points to a larger strategic objective: to sever geographical continuity and assert control over a corridor of both logistical and political importance. This stretch is not incidental, it sits at a critical junction, intersecting areas in between Kangpokpi (East) and Ukhrul (West) Districts, where Kuki armed groups under Suspension of Operations maintain designated camps.
Also read SoO in Name, Violations in Practice?
This corridor is not merely about territory; it is about influence and leverage. For Kuki armed groups facing shrinking operational spaces elsewhere, the push into Tangkhul Naga jurisdiction appears aligned with a broader project of territorial consolidation under the idea of a “Kukiland.” Whatever the political articulation of that demand, the methods being alleged—including coercion, blockades, and the disruption of civilian life—remain largely misunderstood or insufficiently examined by sections of Delhi-based journalists. Vast majority of the national coverage continues to miss these specifics.
Also read Thousands Rally in Ukhrul After Civilian Killings
A sharp observation by Nitin Sethi, Founding Editor of The Reporters’ Collective, captures this disconnect well. He notes that: “The increasing conflict between Kuki and Naga armed groups in the hills coupled with anger/protests in the Imphal valley by Meitei citizens and CSOs against killing of innocent children has left Delhi journalism of self-proclaimed right and liberal left so confused because the ‘story’ does not fit anymore into eithers’ cognitive traps and/or agenda.”
This confusion demands addressing. When reporting is forced into pre-existing templates, “tribal vs tribal,” “state vs insurgent,” or selectively framed humanitarian narratives, the specificity of places like Ukhrul and Kamjong and the Tangkhul Naga people who have been living in these lands for centuries, disappears. The condition of Tangkhul villages under siege becomes, at best, a passing mention.
The consequences go beyond poor journalism. They risk enabling distortion. And it already is, unfortunately.
At the same time, the sharpening of organised propaganda, particularly in the digital space, has added another layer of complexity. Narratives are being rapidly constructed, amplified, and contested, even as realities on the ground grow more precarious. The danger lies not just in misreporting, but in the unchecked expansion of narratives that obscure rather than illuminate. This is why we come back to three Kuki Villages blockading over 230 Tangkhul Naga villages. This should be enough to explain why the Tangkhul Nagas are reacting to the Kukis.
There is a deeper risk in misreading, (or refusing to read) the situation accurately. A lack of understanding of the history, geography, and demographic realities of Ukhrul and Kamjong has led to troubling oversimplifications. Hence, the binary of a “Meitei valley” versus “Kuki hills” not only erases the presence and stakes of the Tangkhul Nagas, or for that matter all the Naga tribes living in Manipur for centuries, but also distorts the very nature of the conflict. Please refer to 2011 census and the several census backwards. It might help for starters.
What outside journalists are not getting is this: the story is not confusing because it lacks coherence. It is confusing because it demands rigour, context, and a willingness to move beyond established frames. Until that happens, the people of Ukhrul and Kamjong districts will continue to live a reality that remains underreported, and largely overlooked.
If these distinctions continue to be overlooked, it raises serious questions about whether such ground realities are being reported with the depth and seriousness they demand, instead of being filtered through distant, Delhi-centric narratives.