Have you seen a lying academic? Go to JNU and meet Thongkholal Haokip

Recently, the Kangleipak Students’ Association has raised concerns regarding the misrepresentation of the origin of the ongoing Manipur conflict in the Monorama Yearbook. The entry in the 2024 Manorama Yearbook was written by JNU faculty member Thongkholal Haokip. Thongkholal Haokip makes two fictitious claims in this entry: One has to do with the history of Manipur and another is regarding the origin of the ongoing conflict. The first fictitious claim he makes is: “Tangkhul historian ASW Shimray believed that the Nagas migrated from Southwest China, and the Meiteis also probably emigrated from the northwest borders of China in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, as claimed by Robert Boileau Pemberton.’ This claim goes against all archaeological evidences and academic studies of oral narratives. There are also other colonial ethnographic sources that suggest otherwise.
The second fictitious claim Thongkholal Haokip makes is regarding the origin of the ongoing violence. He writes: ‘A counter blockade was imposed in the Imphal valley and interrupted the participants of peaceful protesters in Churachandpur from their return after the rally was over.’ It is true that a counter blockade was organized in Moirang in the valley, but the question is, how did the Meitei protesters in the valley stop the Kuki-Zo protesters in Churachandpur from returning to Churachanpur? Anybody with basic knowledge of the geography of Manipur will understand that Thongkholal is spewing nonsense here. The anti-ST demand protest organized by All Tribal Students Union Manipur, an organization in support of drug lord Lukhosei Zou, happened in Churachandpur, and the violence occurred when these protesters, armed with assault rifles, came down from the hills towards the valley. Thongkhoklal has made it look like Churachandpur protesters had plans to roam around the valley and then return to Churachandpur.
Thongkhoklal Haokip has been engaging in such malicious activities for quite some time. He can be called one of the architects of the crisis along with a half-baked retired military intellectual. The retired military pseudo-intellectuals, in order to give legitimacy to the Indian military’s unholy alliance with the Kuki gangs in the hills to attack NSCN IM and later valley-based underground groups, propagated the narrative of the Anglo-Kuki War. Thongkholal Haokip’s job has been to push these narratives in academia. He is the one who has edited the book on the Anglo-Kuki war. Their attempt is to show that Kukis have fought the British and they were not subjects of Meitei overlords.
Anyone with basic intelligence to read colonial ethnography and other Manipur State administration reports will know what was going on. Their narrative also goes against what has been accepted by Kuki-Zo intellectuals such as Lal Dena, who clearly says that some sections of the Kuki community rebelled against the princely state of Manipur over taxes in the first half of the twentieth century. How did it become the Anglo-Kuki war which opposed conscription of Kukis in the labor corp of the British to be used in the First World War? It has historically been accepted too that many so-called Kuki-Zo community members took part in the labor corp.
It’s crucial for scholars and writers, especially when dealing with sensitive topics like ethnic conflicts, to adhere to rigorous standards of accuracy, impartiality, and sensitivity to the perspectives of all parties involved. Misrepresentations and inaccuracies can exacerbate tensions and hinder efforts towards reconciliation and understanding. Thongkholal Haokip’s Anglo-Kuki War narrative is one issue which is at the heart of the ongoing conflict, and the author is still engaged in spreading such misrepresentations. The concerns raised by the Kangleipak Students’ Association warrant careful consideration and rectification of any inaccuracies or misrepresentations in the Manorama Yearbook entry authored by Thongkholal Haokip. The state assembly should also discuss these concerns so that such malicious pseudo-intellectual exercises by lying academicians can be checked.