The NSCN (I-M)’s assertion that no Eastern Flank exists appears inconsistent with the March 2026 killing of four Eastern Flank cadres, the subsequent expulsion of its commanders, and the internal inquiry ordered by the NSCN (I-M).
By Navin Upadhyay
July 7, 2026: The deadly ambush on an Assam Rifles convoy near Nongshangkhong (Lungshang River) along National Highway-202 in Manipur’s Ukhrul district on Monday has once again exposed the fragile security architecture in the hill state. While the NSCN (Isak-Muivah) has denied any role in the attack that killed two Assam Rifles personnel, the location of the ambush, the operational environment and the history of insurgent activity strongly suggest that investigators should closely examine the role of Naga militant networks.
The Kuki CSO Working Committee, Ukhrul, in a statement titled “The Politics of Blame,” rejected attempts to blame the Kuki-Zo community for the attack. Instead, it alleged that the assault bore the hallmarks of Naga militant activity and demanded search operations in Tangkhul Naga areas suspected of sheltering militants. The organisation argued that the attack followed a series of incidents targeting Kuki-Zo civilians in the area and accused sections of the valley media and Tangkhul social media activists of attempting to shift the blame onto the Kuki community without evidence.
Whether or not investigators ultimately establish the involvement of any particular group, four compelling factors make it difficult to attribute the ambush to any insurgent outfit other than Naga militant networks operating in the region.
Earlier, condemning the deadly attack Khanuithot-Khon (Voice of the Naga Youth) blamed armed Kuki militants and urged security forces to intensify operations in the area.
In a statement issued on July 6, the organisation claimed the ambush was part of a continuing pattern of violence along the highway. It further alleged that the attack was intended to divert security agencies from investigating the recent abduction and killing of six Naga civilians. These allegations have not been independently verified.
The youth body appealed to the Assam Rifles, other central security agencies and the Manipur government to launch coordinated operations against armed groups operating in the Litan and Yaolen areas. It also urged the Centre to review the Suspension of Operations (SoO) agreement, alleging repeated violations of the ceasefire framework by militant groups.
The Geography Points Towards Tangkhul Militant Presence
The most significant factor is the location itself.
The ambush occurred at Nongshangkhong, barely seven kilometres from Ukhrul town, deep inside Tangkhul Naga territory. The stretch of National Highway-202 where the convoy was attacked passes through villages overwhelmingly inhabited by Tangkhul Nagas.
This is not an area where Meitei valley-based insurgent organisations such as PLA, PREPAK, KYKL or KCP are known to maintain operational infrastructure. For decades, Ukhrul district has remained the principal area of influence of the NSCN (I-M), whose leadership is predominantly Tangkhul.
Such a carefully planned military ambush would have required detailed local knowledge, reconnaissance, logistical support and secure escape routes, making it extremely difficult for an outsider to execute without assistance from networks familiar with the terrain.
Kuki Militants Had No Strategic Motive
Equally important is the absence of any apparent motive for Kuki-Zo militant organisations.
Since the ethnic conflict erupted in May 2023, Assam Rifles has been widely perceived by the Kuki-Zo community as the central force that has consistently acted as a buffer against larger attacks on Kuki villages. Several Kuki civil society organisations have repeatedly demanded that Assam Rifles continue to remain deployed in buffer zones.
An attack on Assam Rifles would therefore be strategically counterproductive for Kuki armed groups, as it would alienate the very force that has often prevented wider ethnic violence.
The Kuki CSO Working Committee also highlighted this contradiction, arguing that attempts to blame Kuki-Zo groups ignored both ground realities and the community’s relationship with the central force.
Historically, the NSCN (I-M) and Assam Rifles have been involved in numerous violent confrontations, particularly before and even during periods of ceasefire, despite the 1997 truce.
Over the years, NSCN (I-M) cadres have been accused of attacking security forces, extorting civilians and asserting territorial dominance in Naga-inhabited areas. The organisation has repeatedly criticised Assam Rifles, accusing it of intelligence gathering and interference in areas under its influence.
Given this history, security analysts believe the possibility of Naga militants carrying out the latest ambush cannot be dismissed merely because of the outfit’s denial.
Pattern of Recent Violence
The latest attack also comes against the backdrop of increasing violence in the Ukhrul-Kamjong belt.
According to the Kuki CSO Working Committee, on the very day of the ambush:
- A bandh disrupted movement near Yaingangpokpi.
- Armed men allegedly opened fire towards Kuki farmers near Lamlang Gate-New Heaven.
- Another firing incident occurred near Ringui village later in the evening.
The organisation described these incidents as part of a broader pattern of intimidation directed against Kuki-Zo civilians.
While these allegations require independent verification, they point to a deteriorating security situation in areas bordering Tangkhul and Kuki habitations.
Questions Over the Security Response
One of the more serious concerns raised by Kuki organisations relates to law enforcement.
Kuki civil society groups, including the Kuki-Zo Council and Kuki Inpi Manipur, have repeatedly pointed out that despite dozens of attacks on Kuki villages during the past two months, resulting in around 14 civilian deaths, no major crackdown has reportedly been launched against suspected NSCN (I-M) cadres or Tangkhul militant networks.
They argue that despite repeated demands for search operations in suspected militant strongholds, security operations have largely remained focused on Kuki-dominated areas.
This perceived imbalance has fuelled allegations among Kuki organisations that Naga militant networks are receiving preferential treatment from security agencies—an allegation the authorities have neither accepted nor publicly addressed.
The Kuki CSO Working Committee also alleged what it described as an emerging political understanding between sections of the Meitei and Tangkhul Naga leadership against Kuki-Zo interests. It claimed this was reflected both in the narrative surrounding recent incidents and in the security response. These remain allegations made by the organisation and have not been substantiated by official evidence.
Investigation Must Follow Evidence, Not Political Narratives
The NSCN (I-M) has categorically denied any involvement in Monday’s deadly ambush on the Assam Rifles convoy, distancing itself from reports that the attack was carried out by the Eastern Flank, a breakaway faction of the Naga Army.
In a statement, the outfit asserted that the alleged attackers had “no connection whatsoever with the NSCN/GPRN” and further claimed that “there exists no Eastern Flank in the Naga Army of the NSCN/GPRN.”
Rejecting any suggestion of complicity, the outfit maintained that it had neither any role in nor prior knowledge of the attack.
“The NSCN/GPRN categorically states that it was neither involved in nor had any knowledge of the said incident. The organisation remains firmly committed to the Ceasefire Agreement with the Government of India and continues to uphold its responsibilities under the agreed ground rules.”
Reiterating its commitment to the ongoing Indo-Naga political negotiations, the outfit asserted that it would never undertake any action capable of derailing the peace process and urged all stakeholders to exercise restraint.
🚨🇮🇳 BREAKING
Indian Army Assam Rifles convoy ambushed by Manipur freedom fighters in Manipur, Two Personnel Killed.
Two #AssamRifles personnel were killed and several others injured after suspected militants ambushed a patrol in #Manipur‘s #Ukhrul district, triggering a…
— TPF Media (@editor_pakfront) July 6, 2026
However, the organisation’s categorical assertion that “there exists no Eastern Flank in the Naga Army” appears inconsistent with developments reported barely three months ago.
On March 28, 2026, four cadres belonging to the Myanmar-based Eastern Flank, described in police investigations and media reports as a breakaway faction of the Naga Army, were killed in a suspected fratricidal ambush near Hongbei village in Manipur’s Kamjong district. Six Eastern Flank cadres travelling in a vehicle were intercepted by a rival armed group, leaving Major Sochipem Phungshok, Sergeant Major Zairei Vasah, Corporal Bahnlei Ahlahpya and Sergeant Thansomi Vashi dead, while two others escaped.
The Eastern Flank publicly accused NSCN (I-M) cadres of carrying out the killings, although the parent organisation denied ordering the attack.
The developments that followed make the NSCN (I-M)’s present position even more difficult to reconcile. The killings sparked widespread outrage in Ukhrul, where an angry mob torched the NSCN (I-M)’s Wung Tangkhul Region Secretariat, blaming the outfit for the attack.
More significantly, the NSCN (I-M) itself subsequently announced the expulsion of two senior Eastern Flank commanders and ordered an internal inquiry into the allegations surrounding the killings. If the organisation officially expelled leaders belonging to the Eastern Flank and initiated disciplinary proceedings relating to that faction, its present assertion that no Eastern Flank exists appears internally inconsistent.
As with many insurgency-related incidents, denials by militant organisations neither establish innocence nor foreclose the possibility of involvement. Equally, suspicion arising from geography or historical patterns cannot substitute for hard evidence. The responsibility now rests with investigators to determine who planned and executed the ambush through forensic examination, intelligence intercepts, ballistic evidence, communications analysis and operational leads.
Nevertheless, the location of the attack, the operational sophistication required to execute such a carefully planned ambush, the history of militant activity in the Ukhrul-Kamjong belt and the documented presence of the Eastern Flank breakaway faction make it imperative that investigators thoroughly examine the role of Naga militant networks, including any splinter groups, rather than prematurely attributing responsibility elsewhere.
The killing of two Assam Rifles personnel demands a professional, impartial and evidence-driven investigation. In a state already fractured by ethnic conflict, allowing political narratives to overshadow facts would only deepen mistrust among communities while potentially enabling the actual perpetrators to escape accountability.
