The Thadou Academic Society (TAS) has expressed its gratitude towards the Assam Rifles and Manipur University for hosting the North-East Seminar 2026, themed “Resurgent Manipur: Framework for Stability & Sustained Growth” on January 13. The event facilitated pivotal discussions regarding security, governance, reconciliation, and development. TAS, which represents Thadou scholars, researchers, and citizens, reaffirmed its dedication to preserving the Thadou identity within the diverse multi-ethnic landscape of Manipur.
However, TAS firmly rejected the characterization of Manipur as a “tri-ethnic state” comprising solely Kuki, Naga, and Meitei, as incorrectly stated in the seminar’s first plenary session. TAS criticized this description as factually incorrect, historically indefensible, and politically destabilizing, arguing that it diminishes Manipur’s acknowledged multi-ethnic reality to a simplistic and dangerous administrative construct. This issue is compounded by historical mislabeling rooted in colonial errors, which has allegedly caused significant harm and played a crucial role in the recent 2023 Manipur crisis.
In their statement, TAS endorsed Banita Naorem, IRS, for accurately recognizing Manipur’s multi-ethnic identity and underscored the importance of correctly identifying the indigenous communities within the state. The organization called for all relevant state institutions—particularly defense personnel, the Indian Army, and academic and government bodies—to abandon the reductive Kuki–Naga–Meitei framework in all forms of administration, recruitment, and identifying entitlements. They argued that perpetuating this artificial grouping breeds mistrust and undermines the potential for peace.
TAS emphasized that the indigenous peoples of Manipur are legally recognized as Meitei, Meitei-Pangal, and Scheduled Tribes (ST), and criticized the blanket labeling of diverse ST communities—such as Thadou, Paite, Vaiphei, Hmar, Mizo, Simte, Gangte, Zou, Aimol, Kom, and others—as “Kuki.” They stressed that this misrepresentation fails to accurately depict the distinct identities of these groups, which have consistently rejected the Kuki label.
TAS elaborated on the fact that there is no singular “Kuki” ethnic group in Manipur, pointing out that the administrative category of “Any Kuki tribes,” established in 2003 and registering only 28,342 individuals in the 2011 Census, was created with insufficient ethnographic consultation. They contend that this limited classification can neither supersede the self-identified ethnic identities of the distinct indigenous groups nor justify the homogenization of these historically diverse communities.
Persistent mislabeling, whether through ignorance or intentional oversight, poses risks of legitimizing radicalized Kuki narratives that could exacerbate exclusion, instability, and violence in the region. TAS argued that misidentification transcends a mere semantic debate; it functions as a fundamental conflict driver within Manipur.
In closing, TAS urged policymakers, security forces, academia, and media outlets to dismiss erroneous labels, acknowledge Manipur’s true multi-ethnic character, and foster dialogue rooted in truth, mutual respect, and a commitment to rejecting violence and separatist rhetoric. The Thadou community reaffirmed its dedication to peace, coexistence, education, and the collective progress of Manipur.
