The Thadou Burden of Misidentification as Kuki: Why Thadou Identity Must Be Recognised

For the Thadou people, identity is no longer simply a matter of terminology. In the deeply fractured environment created by the violent conflicts in Manipur, identity can determine how a person is perceived, treated, protected—or put at risk.

For decades, Thadou people have faced persistent misidentification, misdescription and misrepresentation as “Kuki”, despite the community’s repeated assertion that Thadou is a distinct people with its own identity, language, culture, traditions, history and aspirations. Thadou people have also borne the brunt of what they regard as a sustained campaign of cultural genocide and identity suppression by Kuki religious and church bodies, political and social organisations, and armed Kuki militant groups, including SoO and non-SoO groups, which are allegedly facilitated, sponsored, or used as proxies by certain establishments. The perception of Kuki appeasement by elements within the state and central governments has further deepened concerns among Thadous about the protection and recognition of their distinct identity.

Thadou people have been among the greatest victims of violence associated with Kuki armed movements and have suffered deeply in conflicts involving Kuki groups, including the Kuki–Naga conflict (1993–1997), the Kuki–Thadou conflict (1992–1993), the Kuki–Zomi conflict (1997–1998), the Kuki–Meitei conflict since 2023, and the renewed Kuki–Naga violence. Since the outbreak of violence in Manipur in May 2023, the consequences of such misidentification have become particularly serious. In an environment where ethnic labels carry profound political and security implications, incorrectly identifying a Thadou person as Kuki can expose them to suspicion, hostility and danger, and can potentially trigger misunderstandings, confrontation or violence between communities.

The recent detention of three Thadou civilians—two men and one woman—by Naga volunteers at Namdilong Village, Kanglatongbi, on 14 August 2026, reportedly following their misidentification as Kuki, brought this danger into sharp focus. The incident occurred only a few hours after an attack on Langka Naga village in Kangpokpi district, in which two Naga men were reportedly killed by suspected Kuki SoO militants.

The three Thadou civilians were released the same afternoon after their identity was clarified through the intervention of Thadou and Naga community leaders, Manipur Police and Central security forces, following swift action by Thadou Inpi Manipur. Their safe release was a welcome outcome and demonstrated the importance of timely communication and inter-community understanding. At the same time, the incident should serve as a wake-up call to all: in a conflict environment, misidentification can have serious consequences and can potentially turn an innocent person into a target.
But the incident raises a fundamental question: Why should Thadou people have to prove that they are Thadou?

Misidentification Is Not a Harmless Mistake

To an outsider, confusing one community with another may appear to be a simple error. In Manipur today, however, it can have serious consequences. When individuals are automatically classified as Kuki because of their appearance, surname, language, residence, or perceived social associations, their own declarations of identity are disregarded.

A Thadou person may have no connection whatsoever to Kuki political organisations or movements and may explicitly reject the Kuki label, yet still be assumed by others to belong to it. Consequently, a community that has itself experienced violence, identity denial and political pressure can be mistakenly perceived as part of a political project with which many Thadous do not identify. It is deeply painful that Thadous, who have long asserted their distinct identity and have themselves suffered violence and human rights violations at the hands of Kuki armed and supremacist forces, continue to be misidentified as Kuki by many people, including those who oppose Kuki groups. Such misidentification not only denies Thadou identity but can also place innocent Thadou individuals at risk in an already volatile environment.

The result is an extraordinary burden: Thadous are increasingly forced to explain who they are before others will acknowledge who they are not. For many years, Thadou people have faced what they regard as a sustained campaign of identity genocide and annihilation involving more than 40 Kuki militant groups, alongside Kuki social, political and church organisations, which Thadous allege operate in concert and with the backing or tacit support of certain establishments. This has made the struggle for recognition of the indigenous Thadou identity—free from the Kuki label and from the yoke of Kuki supremacist control—not merely a question of terminology, but a matter of dignity, security, cultural survival, and the fundamental right of a people to determine, preserve and be recognised by their own identity.

In light of this, the bold and just stand taken by Thadous, often at considerable personal risk, to assert their identity and freedom from Kuki control must be fully acknowledged and supported by civil society organisations, neighbouring communities, the broader Indian community, government authorities, the media and the international community. Respecting and supporting this legitimate assertion of Thadou identity and their right to self-determination is essential to ensuring that Thadous can live with dignity, security and freedom, without being compelled to accept an identity they do not claim.

The Thadou Convention 2024: A Collective Reaffirmation

The Thadou Convention 2024 in Guwahati was therefore significant. Jointly organised by the Thadou Community International (TCI) and the Thadou Students’ Association, the Convention brought together Thadou leaders and delegates and adopted a ten-point declaration affirming Thadou identity and distinctiveness.
The declaration stated unequivocally that “Thadou is a distinct ethnic group of people.” It further affirmed that Thadou is not Kuki, underneath Kuki, or part of Kuki, but a separate and independent identity. The Convention called upon governments, media organisations, academics, civil society and others to identify 
Thadou people correctly as Thadou, without a prefix or suffix.

This demonstrated that the assertion of Thadou identity is not merely the stance of isolated individuals; it has been collectively articulated through a representative community convention. The Convention explicitly challenged organisations that use the Thadou name while misrepresenting Thadous as "Kuki," "Thadou-Kuki," or a sub-group of Kuki, making it clear that such framing does not reflect the community’s position and true identity. The indigenous Thadou identity remained unsullied for thousands of years until the colonial term "Kuki" was imposed by British authorities and chroniclers for their own administrative convenience—a process further exacerbated by the rise of armed Kuki militancy in the 1980s.

Role & Impact of Thadou Organisations (TCI & TIM)

Established in 1984 as the Thadou National Council (TNC), Thadou Inpi Manipur (TIM) operates locally across Manipur and India. It has consistently rejected the term "Kuki" and compound terms like "Thadou-Kuki," actively engaging authorities, civil society, and neighbouring communities—notably achieving a community understanding with Manipur CSOs in Imphal in August 2025 following rounds of confidence-building meetings. 
Working alongside TIM, Thadou Community International (TCI) was formed in August 2024 to provide a global platform for defending Thadou human rights, fostering inter-community understanding, and campaigning against misidentification by advocating that the ethnic group be recognised solely as "Thadou" without prefixes or suffixes. 

Together, both organisations prioritise clear identity recognition as a critical security measure during conflicts, leveraging direct dialogue—such as TIM's May 2026 appeal to the Naga community—as a vital mechanism to de-escalate regional tensions and safeguard lives from identity-based confusion.

From Identity Assertion to Practical Protection

TIM has also sought to translate identity recognition into practical measures. In June 2026, it advised Thadous travelling through areas where misidentification could create risks to carry their Tribe Certificates, with the tribe recorded correctly as “Thadou” without any prefix or suffix, for identification and verification.
TIM has also encouraged genuine Thadou people to register through the community’s online platform.Ideally, no person should need documentary evidence to establish their ethnic identity simply to avoid being mistaken for another community. Yet when misidentification has security consequences, such mechanisms can become practical protective measures.The fact that they are considered necessary is itself an indication of the seriousness of the problem.

Recognition Must Extend to Institutions

Misidentification also has institutional consequences. When government agencies, media organisations or political representatives use labels such as “Kuki” or “Kuki-Zo” for non-Kuki communities, such as Aimol, Gangte, Hmar, Kom, Paite, Simte, Thadou, Mizo, Vaiphei, Zou, that do not accept those descriptions, they risk perpetuating the very misidentification that Thadou organisations have repeatedly challenged.
Government documents should identify people according to their recognised identity. Media reports should not assume that everyone from a particular geographical or linguistic community is automatically Kuki, a colonial term that originated in Bangladesh’s Chittagong Hill Tracts from a Bengali word used by British colonial authorities for their own administrative convenience, without the consent, or against the wishes, of the people. Academic and historical writings should distinguish between historical misclassifications and contemporary self-identification and genuineethnic identity. Political organisations, likewise, should not claim to represent communities whose members explicitly reject that political identity.

There is no Kuki tribe or Kuki in Manipur, except the “Any Kuki tribes” that was added to the list of scheduled tribes of Manipur in 2003 for political reasons, despite strong objections from the Thadou community. The Manipur Government under former Chief Minister N. Biren Singh subsequently recommended its removal, citing national security concerns and the potential for the category to be misused by illegal immigrants and non-Manipur, non-tribal populations seeking to claim Scheduled Tribe status, with potentially serious implications for India’snational security, integrityof the state and the people of Manipur.The issue therefore remains contested and should be addressed with due regard to constitutional provisions, community identity and the rights of indigenous communities.
Respect for identity and accurate identification is ultimately a matter of dignity, accuracy and justice.

Recognition Is Not Exclusion

Recognising Thadou as a distinct identity does not require denying the existence, dignity or rights of any other community. The principle is simple: if other communities have the right to define and identify themselves, Thadous must have the same right.Recognition should therefore not be portrayed as hostility towards another community. On the contrary, it is essential for genuine coexistence. There can be no meaningful peace if communities are expected to accept identities imposed upon them, and no genuine reconciliation if differences are suppressed for political convenience.The political narrative of one community should not be permitted to define the identity of another.

Thadou Be Thadou

The 14 August Namdilong incident should not be remembered merely as an episode that ended with the safe release of three Thadou individuals. It should be understood as a warning about how quickly identity misidentification can become a security issue. It also demonstrated the value of communication and understanding between communities. The intervention of Naga community leaders, Thadou leaders and security authorities helped resolve the situation peacefully. That should become the model: communication rather than assumption, recognition rather than mislabelling, accurate identification rather than mistaken identity, and cooperation rather than suspicion.
The message articulated by the Thadou Convention 2024, carried forward by TCI and reinforced by TIM, is straightforward:

Thadou is Thadou.

A distinct people have the right to be known by their own name and identity. They have the right to preserve their heritage, determine their own political aspirations, and be recognised on their own terms. Thadou should neither be treated as a prefix or suffix to another identity nor reduced to a subordinate or political appendage of another community.
The Thadou burden of misidentification will end only when this basic principle is accepted—not only by Thadous themselves, but by governments, institutions, the media, civil society and all communities with whom Thadous share Manipur, a truly multi-ethnic society where people from more than 30 communities have coexisted for centuries and call the state home.
Recognition of Thadou identity is not a threat to peace. It is part of the foundation upon which a just and lasting peace must be built.
The writer, Jalun Haokip,is a Melbourne-based Manipur native with professional experience in social work across both mainstream and Indigenous Australian communities in various parts of Australia. He currently works as a family violence practitioner with the Victorian Government in Melbourne. He can be reached at jalunhaokip@gmail.com.