UNC reaffirms stand, ridicules ‘war’ claim

SENAPATI, 16th Oct: The United Naga Council (UNC), in its presidential council meeting on Wednesday in Senapati, re-affirmed the resolution of September 5 presidential council meeting with regard to the Indo-Naga political issue.
The UNC presidential council meeting then took a strong resolution that in the "ancestral land" of the Nagas no one can make unfounded claim.
Meanwhile, issuing a press statement with regard to the Kuki Inpi, Manipur (KIM) commemorating the centenary of the “so called Anglo-Kuki War of 1917-19" with the slogan “In Defence of Our Ancestral Land and Freedom” scheduled to be observed on October 17 in Saikul sub-division by erecting a stone monolith, the UNC appealed to “fellow Kuki brethren to kindly” restraint from making any provocative statement and activity. “The UNC would appreciate if one does not concoct or twist the history at one’s own convenience and interpret as one like it. It will be good that one knows properly one’s root and history”.
According to the UNC, the nomenclature “Anglo-Kuki War” is a misnomer from terminological and historical perspectives. The term “war” is proper only for the conflict between two independent countries, said the UNC. “For instance, when the Nagas were with daos and spears, in those years, the Kukis raided, massacred and killed many Naga villagers with muzzle loading guns provided by the Britishers. It is more proper to call the conflict feuds. When this feud went violent in the Naga villages the Britishers attempted to put them down to control the situation, it was not a war against the Britishers”, the UNC pointed out.
Therefore, according to the UNC, no right thinking historians had ever used the term war for the conflict but they used the term rebellion. “This is more appropriate because the Kuki rebellion against the Britishers was for Labour Recruitment drive under Labour Corps Plan which was the direct cause of the rebellion. Thus, the nature and cause of the Kuki rebellion of 1917 gives no justification in any sense for the use of the term war or in defence of any Kuki political homeland”.
The UNC then said that there were no problems of territorial question or disruption of Kuki political authority or Kuki political organisation which was politically non- existent, as each Kuki chief administered their respective hamlet jurisdiction without any organised political territory or authority. “Therefore, how it was possible that they use of the term ‘Anglo-Kuki War’ which was purely a non-political rebellion with the Britishers?” it asked. The council also observed: “While reading between the lines, it is irrefutable to say that the intent of the use of the term war is more of a sinister political twist to popularise and to legitimise their unfounded claim for the so called ancestral land in Manipur”.
The Naga body then advised that it will be much better for “all of us if we can be contented with what we are, for we all know the history of Manipur. Let us not cross the limit with historical distortion”.
The UNC then said it expected the Manipur Government to act responsibly that no community should take the history of Manipur for a ride. “Any fallout of the above consequences, the Nagas should not be held responsible,” it warned.

© 2016 - 2020 The People's Chronicle. All rights reserved.