At about 8:30 a.m. on August 27, suspected Kuki armed militants ambushed a vehicle carrying Naga civilians on the Imphal-Tamenglong Road between Makui Ashang and Thanamba Naga in Kangpokpi district.
Four Naga civilians were killed and another two were injured.
The dead were Wisobou Charenamai, chairman of the Chawangkining Village Authority and former vice president of the Liangmai Naga Council; Tadsongbou Ringkangmai, founder and principal of Right Path School, T. Khullen; and Makui Youth Club executive members Mariakdibou Wijunamai and Anil Wijunamai.
Ahjapou MK, a student leader from Thonglang Akutpa, survived the attack. Gaikamang Ringkangmai also survived the ambush injured.
The United Naga Council alleged that cadres of the Kuki National Front (P), Kuki National Front and Kuki Revolutionary Army, operating under the Suspension of Operations framework, carried out the attack. The Working Committee of the Tangkhul Naga Long also attributed the assault to Kuki armed cadres. Initial reports said the attackers had not been officially identified, while the KNF rejected the allegations.
The UNC has demanded the arrest and prosecution of those responsible and a Special Investigation Team.
The Makui-Thanamba attack came less than two weeks after another attack on Naga civilians. On August 14, about 50 gunmen attacked Langka Naga village, killing village volunteers Wiriliangbou Chawang and Kawidinang Abonmai and injuring two others. The UNC attributed the attack to Kuki armed militants affiliated with KNF-P. Police registered a case.
ALSO READ: Survivor Gaikamang recounts ambush that killed four Nagas along IT Road
These were not isolated incidents.
Since March, Naga civilians and villages have been repeatedly caught in armed attacks and abductions across Naga-inhabited areas. On March 12, 21 Tangkhul Naga civilians were abducted near Shangkai along the Ukhrul-Imphal road and later released. On April 18, two Naga civilians, including a retired Indian Army soldier, were killed near TM Kasom. Six days later, Naga Village Guard member Horshokmi Jamang was killed near Sinakeithei, where four others were injured.
Ringui came under repeated attacks in late April and early May. On May 7, Namlee, Wanglee and Choro villages in Kamjong district were attacked, with houses burned and civilians injured. Naga organisations alleged that armed militants had crossed from Myanmar and attributed the attack to the Kuki National Army-Burma and People’s Defence Force elements.
The violence continued through May and June. On May 13, 20 Naga civilians were among those abducted during a wider hostage crisis involving both communities. Six Naga civilians remained missing and their bodies were recovered on June 10 near Kharam Vaiphei in Kangpokpi district. Reports said the bodies had been mutilated and dismembered.
Four people were subsequently arrested. The NIA and police said efforts were continuing to apprehend others. The Manipur High Court took up the case as PIL No. 8 of 2026 and sought Action Taken Reports while the investigation continued.
The record does not establish that every incident was carried out by the same group. Many of the allegations remain subject to investigation. But the frequency and geographic spread of the attacks raise a question that cannot be avoided: what is deterring armed actors from attacking Naga civilians?
An investigation after a killing is necessary. It is not deterrence.
Deterrence requires armed groups to know that attacks on civilians will carry consequences. When fresh attacks occur before earlier cases have resulted in full accountability, the state is dealing with the aftermath rather than preventing the next attack.
This brings the Suspension of Operations framework into focus.
The revised SoO ground rules require KNO and UPF constituents to abjure violence and prohibit ambushes, raids, sniping, attacks causing death or injury, kidnapping, extortion and intimidation against security forces, other groups or the public.
The Government of India has said the Joint Monitoring Group will monitor compliance and that violations can lead to action, including review of the SoO agreement.
That raises a straightforward question. If armed organisations associated with the SoO framework are alleged to be involved in attacks on civilians, what mechanisms are being used to verify those allegations and enforce the ground rules?
If such allegations are established, the government must account for the functioning of monitoring, camp discipline, weapons restrictions, movement controls and enforcement.
The SoO framework cannot become a substitute for criminal accountability.
Naga organisations have also alleged that central security forces have provided food and essential goods to Kuki communities while Naga villages along the IT Road have received inadequate protection and assistance. These claims require verification.
The issue is not whether Kuki civilians deserve protection. They do. The question is whether Naga civilians receive the same protection.
There is also a political consequence to the continuing attacks.
Repeated killings create pressure on Naga armed organisations to respond. Kuki organisations have made allegations against the NSCN-IM, while the NSCN-IM has rejected claims of involvement in terrorism and denied allegations it considers false.
A military response by Naga armed groups could undermine the Indo-Naga ceasefire and provide grounds for expanded state action against Naga organisations. But continued attacks without a response can weaken confidence in the Naga political movement.
ALSO READ: Remains of 4 Nagas Killed in Attack Brought to Senapati District Hospital
That is the strategic dilemma.
The attacks cannot be allowed to become a mechanism for drawing the Naga movement into another armed conflict. Retaliation could widen the violence and place the peace process at greater risk.
Restraint is therefore a strategic choice. But restraint also requires the state to provide protection.
The Kuki-Zo Village Volunteers, Twilang Lhang, alleged that armed miscreants attacked Kuki farmers at Naibet village in Senapati district on the same morning as the Makui-Thanamba attack. The allegation had not been independently confirmed at the time of writing.
It should be investigated.
But an allegation of violence against Kuki civilians does not, by itself, establish equivalence with the documented incidents involving Naga civilians. Competing claims should be tested against evidence rather than treated as automatically equal.
The same principle applies to allegations against Naga armed groups.
The six-Naga hostage case shows that institutions are capable of acting. The NIA investigation led to arrests. The High Court has taken up the matter. But accountability remains incomplete, and further attacks have occurred.
That is where the state’s credibility will be tested.
The UNC has demanded the abrogation of the SoO agreement with Kuki militant groups and the arrest and prosecution of those responsible for attacks on Naga civilians.
Whether or not the government accepts the demand for abrogation, it cannot avoid the underlying issue. Armed groups operating under a ceasefire framework must be subject to its rules, and civilians must be protected from those who violate them.
If individuals or organisations are found responsible for attacks on civilians, they must face prosecution and the consequences prescribed by law.
The Makui-Thanamba killings add four more names to a growing list of Naga victims this year: SW Chinaoshang and Yaruingam Vashum, killed at TM Kasom on April 18; Horshokmi Jamang, killed at Sinakeithei on April 24; the six Naga hostages whose bodies were recovered on June 10; Chunjanglung Panmei, killed at Pongringlong on June 8; Wiriliangbou Chawang and Kawidinang Abonmai, killed at Langka on August 14; and Wisobou Charenamai, Tadsongbou Ringkangmai, Mariakdibou Wijunamai and Anil Wijunamai, killed at Makui-Thanamba on August 27.
The pattern carries a clear risk. Civilian attacks create pressure for retaliation. Retaliation can widen the conflict. A wider conflict can threaten the Indo-Naga peace process. And when perpetrators are not held accountable, deterrence weakens.
Also read Four Naga civilians killed in Kangpokpi ambush to be buried at Chawangkining today
That cycle must be broken.
The answer is not revenge. It is protection, accountability and enforcement.
The Naga people have the right to live and travel without fear in their ancestral areas. The responsibility for protecting that right lies with the state.
The Government of India and the Government of Manipur must therefore answer a simple question:
Who will stop the attacks on Naga civilians, and when will those responsible be held accountable?
The demand has been made. What remains is the state’s answer.
Views expressed are personal. The author is an independent researcher and writer focusing on the Indo-Naga issue, Naga political affairs, and the political, historical and contemporary affairs of Northeast India.
Author’s Note
This article examines attacks, abductions and killings involving Naga civilians in Manipur and their wider political and security implications. It draws on official records, media reports and statements from organisations involved in the conflict.
It distinguishes established facts from allegations and attributed claims. Allegations of criminal responsibility remain subject to investigation. No ethnic community should be held collectively responsible for the actions of particular armed groups or individuals.
Markson V Luikham is an independent researcher and writer focusing on the Indo-Naga issue, Naga political affairs, and the political, historical and contemporary affairs of Northeast India.
Sources
- Manipur High Court, PIL No. 8 of 2026 — proceedings concerning the abduction and killing of six Naga civilians and the Court’s directions regarding the investigation.
- National Investigation Agency — official case records concerning the May 13, 2026 abduction case.
- Government of India / Press Information Bureau — revised Suspension of Operations ground rules governing KNO/UPF constituents, including prohibitions on ambushes, sniping, attacks, kidnapping, extortion and intimidation, and provisions for Joint Monitoring Group oversight.
- The Indian Express — reporting on the April 18 TM Kasom ambush and the June 25 Kuki-Zo Council statement on the six Naga killings.
- Hindustan Times — reporting on the May 2026 hostage crisis and the July 18 arrests in the six-Naga case.
- India Today / India Today Northeast — reporting on the March 19 Ukhrul firing, April 24 Sinakeithei ambush, May 8 Sinakeithei violence, June 8 Pongringlong killing, June recovery of the six bodies and the Konsakhul pipeline ambush.
- EastMojo / New Indian Express — reporting on the April-May Ringui attacks, March 12 abduction of 21 Tangkhul Naga civilians and the May 7 Namlee-Wanglee-Choro cross-border attack.
- NDTV / New Indian Express — reporting on the release of Kuki hostages held by Naga groups, the May 13 hostage crisis and accounts concerning humane treatment.
- Imphal Times / The Sangai Express / Ukhrul Times — reporting and statements concerning the Sinakeithei attacks, Ringui incidents, August 14 Langka attack and August 27 Makui-Thanamba attack.
- Amnesty International — June 2026 assessment of the expanding Naga-Kuki hostage crisis and call for justice and protection of civilians.
