This is Part One of a two-part interview with Seilen Haokip, spokesperson for the Kuki National Organisation. In this segment, he addresses questions over accountability, strategic intent, and future aspirations of the SoO framework. He defends Kuki armed groups’ role in SoO talks and outlines the case for Union Territory status to quell voices of skepticism arising from the Kuki-zo community.
BY Navin Upadhyay
July 19, 2025: As the political temperature rises in the Kuki Zo inhabited hill districts, the community is undergoing an internal reckoning. While armed group under the Suspension of Operations (SoO) agreement with the Indian government have led peace talks since 2008, a section of the community bear apprehension they are drifting away from the people’s collective aspirations—particularly in the wake of the May 2023 ethnic violence and the demand for Union Territory (UT) status.
In an exclusive and candid conversation with this publication, Seilen Haokip, spokesperson for the Kuki National Organisation (KNO)—one of the two umbrella bodies of SoO signatories—responded to the criticism and clarified the group’s political roadmap.
On Accusations That SoO Groups Are Self-Serving
A key criticism within the Kuki-Zo public is that SoO groups are more focused on extending their ceasefire arrangements with the Centre than pushing for the community’s larger political aspirations.
Haokip pushed back against this perception, arguing that the SoO group’s objectives have always aligned with the people’s political future. He asserted that it was wrong to insinuate that KNO and UPF were preoccupied with extension of the SoO agreement, and claimed that if it were left to them, they would not press for renewal of the agreement.
“The SoO group’s broader interest is only one: to actualise the demand for a Union Territory with a Legislative Assembly through dialogue with the Government. Regarding SoO extension, we’ve already informed the MHA that we do not need it since our demand has shifted from a Territorial Council to Union Territory status. However, the MHA has said SoO is a legal agreement and therefore necessary to carry forward the political dialogue to its logical conclusion.”
On the Perceived Disconnect Between SoO Groups and the People
Many in the Kuki-Zo community feel alienated from the decision-making process, often citing a lack of transparency from the armed groups representing them in negotiations with the Centre.
Haokip acknowledged this disconnect but attributed it to the nature of the tripartite agreement and the confidentiality required.
Kuki-Zo Council Postpones Mega Meet Amid Skepticism, Division#ManipurCrisis #KukiZoVoices #JusticeBeforePeace#PostponedPeace #KukiZoCouncil #EthnicViolence2023 #PeaceProcess#CeasefireDebate #TuibongTalks https://t.co/9NDlkuK0zw
— POWER CORRIDORS (@power_corridors) July 18, 2025
“Since the agreement was signed, the proceedings of meetings weren’t made public due to the complexity of the tripartite arrangement. However, since we have submitted the demand for UT to the MHA on September 1, 2023, and that Kuki Zo have been ethnically cleansed from Manipur, the state is no longer of any political consequence for us. We believe progress in talks can now be made more public via media and meetings, and transparent communication would bridge the gap between the people and the SoO groups.”
On Whether the Talks Are Time-Bound or Open-Ended
Frustration has grown over the seemingly endless nature of the dialogue process. With 17 years having passed since the SoO began, many demand clarity on whether there is any roadmap or deadline.
Haokip admitted that no fixed timeline has been offered by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) but insisted the Centre’s actions reflect its commitment.
READ: Sharda University student dies by suicide, 2 professors arrested
“No, the MHA has not offered any time-bound resolution to our demands. But Government’s commitment to a negotiated settlement with UPF and KNO is evident—even in the face of the bizarre opposition from the Manipur government and Meitei civil society groups, the legal sanctity SoO is being honoured.”
He added that discussions will become more substantive once technical changes to the SoO agreement is settled. “After the technicality of SoO ground rules is completed, engagement on substantive issues of the particular demand will ensue.”
On What the SoO Has Achieved So Far
Some Kuki-Zo critics have questioned the very efficacy of the SoO framework, pointing out that even the original demand for a Hill Council was never met.
Haokip, claimed that significant progress had been made—though much of it was normally not made public.
“Contrary to popular belief, which stems from the lack of communication mentioned earlier, there was tangible progress and we were moving toward achieving our then objective of a Territorial Council. However, all hell broke loose on May 3, 2023— and the rest is history. Besides, the then Chief Minister, N.Biren Singh, and the majoritarian Manipur government were unreceptive to the settlement.”
On Reports of SoO Camps Being Closed or Reduced
On recent media coverage and speculation about whether SoO camps are being shut down or consolidated and concerns that this could impact cadre security or escalate tensions in local areas, Haokip clarified that the reorganisation was strategic—not a sign of rollback.
“Closure of designated camps is a misnomer. The correct term is consolidation, aimed at minimising chances of violence based on camp location. It’s also due to the fact that previous locations were chosen before May 3, 2023, under very different security contexts.”
When asked why the Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA) has reportedly opposed the move, Haokip refrained from commenting directly but referenced public information. “This question is better answered by ZRA. From what is in the media, their position seems to be: a) their camps are far from Meitei settlements, and b) they have neighbourhood concerns.”
READ: Meghalaya Horror: Schoolgirl Hacked to Death, Killer on the Run
When asked to elaborate on those concerns, Haokip said: “; in ideological terms, which is most important, we totally converge on our political demand; personally, why there should be other concerns is beyond me.”
The Roadmap for Union Territory Status
What is the constitutional and strategic basis for demanding a Union Territory with Legislative Assembly status? Haokip offered a two-pronged rationale—legal and experiential.
“The MHA’s commitment to a negotiated settlement within the Constitution is concrete evidence. There are two specific reasons UT status is our only option: First, under Article 3 of the Constitution, UT is the only viable constitutional route. Second, the alternative—return to status quo—is impossible, because Kuki-Zo people have been ethnically cleansed from Manipur by violent, state-enabled forces. Even our earlier demand for a Territorial Council within the state was razed to ashes by this violence.”
A Message to the Kuki-Zo Youth
In conclusion, Haokip had a message for the youth of the Kuki-Zo community, many of whom are disillusioned by the lack of political progress and persistent insecurity.
“My humble message to the Kuki-Zo people, especially the younger generation, is to support the MHA and SoO political dialogue and persevere—those of SoO have been at it for seventeen long years, since 2008. As the proverbial saying goes, ‘Rome wasn’t built in a day.’ Realising our demand for UT with a Legislative Assembly for a secure future depends on a concerted effort from everyone in the community.”
