From Guests to Occupiers–I: The Kuki Takeover of Nagas’ Lands

SOME PEOPLE POSSESS a chameleon-like adaptability, honed not merely for survival but for strategic conquest. They arrive as humble guests, appearing simple or even naïve, only to gradually entrench themselves until they dominate their hosts. Such has been the tragic experience of the Naga people with the Kuki tribes.

History recalls that the Kukis were nomadic outsiders, first brought into our region by the British, who used them as a buffer against other native hill peoples. Our forefathers, in a spirit of hospitality, permitted them to settle as tenants and refugees, for they had no land of their own. Initially deferential, the Kukis projected a posture of submissive obedience. But like a Trojan horse that slipped past the vigilance of our elders, they revealed their true ambitions over time. They became like the bird in our oral traditions that lays its eggs in another’s nest, only for its young to grow up and devour the very one who sheltered and raised them. To this day, we call them refugees, a pointed reminder that their presence stems from Naga kindness, not ancestral right.

Over generations, the Kukis expanded their foothold through cunning and calculation, claiming vast stretches of our ancestral hills. Their descendants, along with continuous inflows of ethnic kin from across borders, now occupy swathes of Naga territory. This was no open conquest but a stealthy campaign: decades of unregulated migration, strategic encroachment, and exploitation of bureaucratic loopholes. They took advantage of weak land records, vague legal frameworks, and the absence of codified, binding customary land laws across Naga villages and tribes. Illegal settlements were gradually transformed into state-recognized villages. New hamlets emerged in remote corners and were later legitimized through bribes, political pressure, or government apathy.

What began as opportunistic squatting became de facto ownership through forged documents. Once these settlements secure voter IDs, revenue records, or inclusion in administrative maps, their inhabitants become eligible for welfare benefits and political representation. Bureaucratic alchemy legitimizes occupation. By the time Nagas recognize the encroachment, legal reversal becomes nearly impossible. Resistance is criminalized. The state treats their presence as a fait accompli.

This is no ordinary demographic shift. It is a political project disguised as peaceful settlement. The Nagas are not simply witnessing the arrival of displaced persons, but a deliberate strategy of territorial seizure. What presents itself as humanitarian refuge is, in truth, the weaponization of numbers, a calculated attempt to redraw boundaries, overtake ancestral lands, and reengineer the political balance. This campaign is advanced through a multi-pronged strategy: administrative manipulation, coordinated village expansion, political lobbying, and the active presence of Kuki militant groups who act as both enforcers of encroachment and silencers of resistance. New settlements are no longer informal clusters; they are backed by armed cadres, legitimized through revenue documents, and strategically positioned to shift electoral power. Encroachments become constituencies. Refugee camps evolve into permanent vote banks. Undocumented migrants are converted into paper citizens.

Related | From Guests to Occupiers–II: A Forensic Examination of Kuki Expansionism in Northeast India

Strengthened by organized militancy, coercive and calculating politicians, diplomatic lobbying, and bureaucratic maneuvering, this campaign is systematically reshaping the demographic, cultural, and political landscape of the Naga hills. Its momentum has been enabled not only by state complicity and neglect, but also by the internal fragmentation of Naga society. The silence of village headmen, the inertia of tribal councils, the fading strength of cultural institutions, and the disunity of civil bodies have all created space for this encroachment. Most critically, our political and factional leaders, weakened by rivalry and short-sighted ambition, have failed to offer a unified strategy of resistance. The danger we face is not only external. It is the compounded result of calculated aggression and collective internal failure.

Colonial Policy: British Buffers and Mercenary Settlers

The Kuki infiltration is not anecdotal but a documented historical process. In the mid-19th century, the British systematically relocated Kuki populations into Naga territories to serve as buffers against indigenous resistance. Political Agent William McCulloch, operating in the 1840s, oversaw this transplantation, granting them land and arms in exchange for their loyalty as irregular colonial enforcers. These “sepoy villages” were not natural settlements but militarized installations intended to suppress Naga autonomy and facilitate imperial control. McCulloch explicitly described the Kukis as lacking fixed attachment to any territory, rendering them pliant tools of empire (UNC Statement, 7 August 2023).

The United Naga Council (UNC) has repeatedly highlighted this colonial arrangement as the root of present territorial distortions. In a detailed 2023 statement, the UNC emphasized that the term “Kuki” first appeared in Manipur only between 1830 and 1840 and described the notion of “Kuki Hills” as a modern political fabrication devoid of historical or cartographic legitimacy (UNC Statement, 7 Aug 2023 – Nagaland Tribune; Naga Body Statement, 21 Aug 2023 – Indian Express)

In recent years, this colonial legacy has been revived and repackaged by Kuki elites through the politicization of history. Central to this effort is the rebranding of the 1917–1919 uprising as the so-called “Anglo-Kuki War.” However, contemporary British records describe it as a violent rebellion involving coordinated Kuki assaults on Naga villages, widespread arson, forced conscription, and looting. No official British archive records any recognized Kuki state, war credentials, or political structure. By mythologizing these events and retroactively portraying refugee settlements as sites of ancient sovereignty, the Kuki narrative fabricates a false lineage of indigeneity. This is not history, it is strategy.

Unregulated Migration: Refugees Turned Settlers

The porous Indo-Myanmar border has long served as an unguarded gateway for successive waves of Kuki-Chin migration into Naga territories. Major upheavals in Myanmar, such as the 1962 military coup, the 1988 crackdown, and the 2021 junta takeover, unleashed repeated inflows of migrants into Indian border states, particularly Manipur and Mizoram. The post-2021 wave alone brought in tens of thousands, many of whom quietly vanished into Kuki-dominated villages and forests beyond the reach of official oversight(Ukhrul Times, 7 April 2023).

India’s lack of a national refugee policy has forced state governments to absorb these movements through reactive, inconsistent decisions. In Manipur, officials admitted there is no concrete mechanism to regulate or verify these entries, leaving the region exceptionally vulnerable to demographic manipulation (Ukhrul Times, 7 April 2023).

Within months, many migrants obtained Aadhaar cards, ration books, and voting rights. State welfare followed. Without rigorous verification, many merged into existing Kuki settlements while new illegal villages appeared in remote zones. In several cases, political actors facilitated this process in exchange for future electoral support.

The demographic impact is stark. Ancestral Naga lands are being reshaped by foreign families who clear virgin forests, terrace poppy fields, and lay political claims equal to the indigenous. What appears as humanitarian shelter is in reality a calculated expansion of territorial and electoral control. This is not organic settlement, it is engineered demographic invasion, cloaked in the language of compassion and sustained by systemic failure.

Kangpokpi and Beyond: Demographic Engineering

Kangpokpi district, formerly known as Sadar Hills, stands as the most visible battleground of demographic engineering in Manipur. Historically part of the Naga ancestral domain, the district has undergone drastic transformation. In 1969, it had only 179 villages. Today, it hosts approximately 721 villages, the vast majority dominated by Kuki settlers. Even more alarming, official records now recognize 1,878 Kuki villages across Manipur, a staggering increase from just 73 recorded in the 1881 Census (Census of India 1881, UNC Statement, August 2023).

This expansion is not the result of natural population growth, but of orchestrated migration, land seizures, and administrative manipulation. The UNC has warned that “Manipur is flooded with illegal immigrants… especially in areas that have historically belonged to the Nagas”(UNC Statement, August 2023).

Each newly recognized village means more than lost land. It brings new voting blocs, inflated claims to autonomy, and government funds diverted into encroached zones. Even public institutions, such as schools, health centers, water and electricity services, are increasingly sanctioned in these areas, accelerating de facto territorial consolidation.

This is not a routine land dispute. It is a strategic campaign to redraw the political geography of the Naga hills. But the hills bear witness. The land, the forests, and the ancestors remember their rightful stewards. Surrender is not an option. Through truth, unity, and unwavering resolve, the Nagas will defend their homeland.

The “Kuki‑Zo” Myth: Manufactured Unity for Political Gain

Compounding the challenge, the Kuki establishment has recently engineered the “Kuki-Zo” label, a politically expedient construct designed to fabricate ethnic unity where none historically existed. This hyphenated identity artificially bundles Kuki, Chin, and Mizo groups with kindred tribes like the Zou, Hmar, Paite, and Vaiphei under the pretext of shared “Zo ancestry.” In reality, this label is a modern invention, absent from historical records and tribal consciousness before the 2023 conflict. Its sole purpose is to amplify Kuki political claims by inflating demographic numbers and manufacturing a false narrative of collective victimhood.

Tribal Rejections Expose the Deception

• Thadou Declaration of Independence: In November 2024, Manipur’s largest tribe issued a landmark resolution stating that “Thadou is not Kuki, or underneath Kuki, or part of Kuki, but a separate, independent entity.” The declaration condemned the “Any Kuki Tribe” (AKT) classification, inserted into Manipur’s Scheduled Tribe list in 2003, as fraudulent and illegitimate. The statement reaffirmed the Thadou’s distinct language and uninterrupted census recognition since 1881.(Thadou Convention, Nov 2024; Thadou Convention rejected label).
• Legislative Rebellion: By August 2024, three MLAs representing the Hmar, Paite, and Vaiphei tribes publicly rejected absorption into the “Kuki-Zo” construct. Hmar legislator Ngursanglur Sanate declared he would “never endorse any platform erasing the Hmar identity.” These statements expose efforts to erase tribal distinctions through political pressure and public posturing.(Kuki‑Zo wrong term; MLAs oppose label).

Historical Divisions vs. Artificial Unity

• British colonial administrators forcibly grouped disparate hill communities under the label “Kuki,” which triggered immediate resistance from the Paite and Zomi, who historically self-identified as Zomi, meaning “children of Zo.” (Wikipedia: Zomi people).
• The 1997–1998 Kuki-Paite ethnic conflict, driven by land disputes and identity tensions, resulted in hundreds of deaths and widespread displacement. This bloodshed stands in direct contradiction to claims of historic unity. (Wikipedia: Kuki–Paite Conflict).
• In September 2023, the “Zo United” coalition was hastily formed in Mizoram, weaponizing the 2023 violence to apply pressure on the Indian government. The coalition inflated numbers through broad tribal conscription and presented an exaggerated image of pan-Zo solidarity. (Zo United leadership; Zo Groups symbolic push).

Kuki Elites’ Expansionist Agenda

This manufactured identity serves three strategic objectives:

1. Land Grabs: By presenting Zo-affiliated tribes as a single nation, Kuki leaders demand autonomous territorial zones that overlap and encroach upon established Naga areas. (CasteFiles analysis).
2. Resource Hijacking: Inflated population claims divert government welfare allocations into Kuki-aligned networks. Smaller tribes like the Hmar are increasingly deprived of development benefits.(Misrepresentation issue).
3. Insurgent Legitimacy: Militant outfits like the Kuki National Army justify their actions by invoking this pan-tribal identity, disguising insurgency and cross-border trafficking as “Zo resistance.” (Insurgency disguised).

Exposing the Facade

As Nagas, we uphold every tribe’s right to distinct identity and self-determination. Our critique is directed at Kuki political elites who seek to erase others’ uniqueness to justify expansionism. We stand with the Thadou, Hmar, Paite, and all communities resisting demographic manipulation and identity fraud. The world must understand: the “Kuki-Zo” project is not genuine ethnic solidarity. It is colonial divide-and-rule logic repackaged for modern political conquest.

(To be Continued)

Note: The next installment will delve into three critical areas: the machinery of Kuki propaganda and digital misinformation, the betrayal and complicity of certain actors from Nagaland as Southern Nagas face mounting threats, and a strategic roadmap for resisting Kuki expansionism through informed, unified, and coordinated action.

The author can be reached at <thediplomaticquill@gmail.com>

(The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Ukhrul Times. Ukhrul Times values and encourages diverse perspectives.)