A fresh wave of discontent has emerged within Kuki civil society after A.K. Mishra, Advisor to the Union Home Ministry for the Northeast, rejected the longstanding demand for a separate Union Territory (UT) for the Kuki-Zo community. The remarks came during the latest round of political dialogue with Kuki armed groups in New Delhi on November 6 and 7, 2025.
The talks involved representatives of the Kuki National Organization (KNO) and the United People’s Front (UPF)—two umbrella bodies that together account for 25 Kuki armed outfits currently under a Suspension of Operations (SoO) agreement with the Centre and the Manipur government. These groups, with an estimated cadre strength of around 226, mainly function along the India-Myanmar border and have been in peace negotiations for over a decade.
“Insensitive and Dismissive”: KHRC Reacts
Shortly after Mishra’s statement circulated, the Kuki Human Rights Council (KHRC) issued a sharp response, accusing the Home Ministry advisor of belittling the political aspirations of the Kuki-Zo people.
“We see this remark as an outright dismissal of a community’s legitimate pursuit of political rights and self-determination,” the KHRC said, adding that the demand for a separate administrative unit was “not an act of defiance, but a plea for survival and dignity.”
Mishra had acknowledged the Centre’s “concerns and sensitivity” regarding the Kuki-Zo community’s situation, but clarified that the government is “not inclined towards creating new Union Territories at this stage.” He also underscored that any structural change in Manipur’s political map would require consultations with other ethnic communities, hinting at the complexities involved in the state’s fragile sociopolitical fabric.
Conflict Context and Calls for Separate Administration
The demand for a separate Kuki-administered UT, with its own legislature, has grown stronger since the ethnic violence that erupted in Manipur in 2023. Kuki organisations argue that the conflict deepened longstanding mistrust and made coexistence with the valley-dominant Meitei community increasingly untenable.
The KHRC reiterated those concerns, referring to widespread displacement and destruction during the conflict. According to its statement, more than 200 Kuki lives were lost and over 200 villages were destroyed, allegedly involving Meitei militant groups, state forces, and armed mobs. The Council claims these events prove that “a shared administration no longer guarantees safety or equality” to the Kuki-Zo population.
| Key Stakeholders | Position on Separate UT Demand |
|---|---|
| KNO & UPF (Armed Groups) | Strongly in favour; core demand in peace talks |
| KHRC | Supports UT, calls it a human rights necessity |
| Government of India | Not inclined to create new UTs at present |
| Other Manipur Communities | Yet to be consulted, expected to oppose |
What Happens Next?
With the Centre holding firm on its stance, the dialogue is expected to continue, but without any immediate shift in policy. Insiders say future rounds may explore alternative frameworks for autonomy, administrative restructuring, or enhanced local governance — short of UT status.
For now, the KHRC’s strong pushback signals that the Kuki-Zo leadership is unwilling to settle for diluted concessions. As the political stalemate continues, the spotlight remains on whether New Delhi will consider a middle-ground model or maintain status quo.