Talk:Kabaw Valley

Zo

Thangjohn added the sentence It was traditionally the homeland of the Thadou-Kuki people (Known as Chin/Zo in Burma) before other ethnic groups began settling there. I removed that sentence, as in reading the sources I found no support for the Zo being the first settlers in the Kabaw Valley. It is generally accepted that the Zo moved south from southern China into the area where they are now. If anyone feels strongly about the Zo being the first settlers in the Kabaw Valley, please do not re-add such a statement without a citation to a reliable source. --Bejnar (talk) 00:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kabaw Valley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050519230755/http://mission.itu.ch/MISSIONS/Myanmar/Burma/bur_history.pdf to http://mission.itu.ch/MISSIONS/Myanmar/Burma/bur_history.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

History

I removed a huge pile of WP:POV junk that was masquerading as "History". Here is a link to the sources that mention "Kabaw valley" on archive.org. These are all completely free to read, download and search. Please use solid WP:HISTRS for writing about history. Any unsourced content, and WP:POV claims, will be ruthlessly deleted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Added back history content with sources from archive.orgꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 07:55, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Proposed content

History

Kabaw valley, historically, was the border region between Awa ( in present Burma ) and the Muneepoor( Earlier known as Kangleipak or Meitrabak).King Kiyamba (1467–1508), son of King Khomba, was known as the "Conqueror of Kabaw Valley", as he along with his friend, Chaopha Khe Khomba, the king of Pong Kingdom of Pong (Shan Kingdom) of present Myanmar completed the conquest of Kubo valley in year 1475 The valley is within the territory of Manipur as late as 1852 It also need to be reminded that according to Treaty of Yandabo, Ningthee turel Ningthee River was no doubt the natural boundary between Manipur and Burma..There was also an agreement between British and Manipur government in 1834 that the valley on lease to Burma if under any circumstance revert to Manipur,the monthly allowance shall cease.

References

Lease?

Luwanglinux Can you tell me where the sources says the Kubow Vally was given on "lease" (in the last sentence)? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3 It was actually a choice of word not to indulge myself in copyright text problem ,many historical records mentioned the valley was handed over to burma in 1834 in lieu of monthly payment made to Manipur as I have mentioned in the historical section.If the valley was never considered Manipur territory there would not be needing of such payment right?.ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 18:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Please make sure you indent posts and sign them when you finish. See HELP:TALK.

"Lease" has a specific legal and formal meaning. You cannot use it unless it is used by a reliable source. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

James Johnstone

You have cited a reprint of the James Johnstone's book rather than the original. (And you spuriously added "Cornell University Library" as "others". "Others" is meant for the authors of the book, not a library.) The original can be found here. We see that the full title is My Experiences with in Manipur and Naga Hills. And, that it was published in 1893. The sentence you quoted is not in the main book. It is in the "introductory memoir", written by somebody else.

All said and done, it says that Kabaw Valley was placed in Manipur in maps published in Calcutta in 1852. It does not say that the valley was in Manipur in 1852. So, your statement is not actually in the source. Can you find a more accurate statement? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

I choose own word so that I may not be in conflict with copyright problem ,if you prefer you can add the original quote from James Johnstoneꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 18:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

My question is what is an accurate statement? When did Kabaw Valley come under the control of Burma? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:36, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: Kabaw valley come under control of Burma in 1834 as mentioned in article sources from Alexander Meckanzie's work *Sir Robert Reid (1942). History Of Frontier Areas Bordering On Assam.Controversy centred chiefly round the Kabaw Valley in its bear- ing on the Burma-Manipur frontier, the dispute regarding which was kept up till modern times, though it may now be regarded as closed.Mackenzie deals with this matter at pages 175 and following of his book. The important dates arc as follows. In 1834 an agreement was reached with the then Government of Burma by which the boun- dary between Burma and Manipur was placed at the eastern foot of the 92 THE MANIPITR STATE mountains on the west of the plain of the Kabaw Valley, in other words the valley was ceded lo Burma. Manipur was granted com- pensation at the rate of Rs.500 a month on account of the loss of terri- tory. This agreement received the sanction of the Government of India.ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 20:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Ok, then two questions arise:

• If Kabaw Valley came under the control of Burma in 1834, why did you add to the lead that Jawaharlal Nehru government "handed it" to Burma in 1952?
• Manipur was granted compensation by whom? Did Burma pay it? Why did it pay? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes the burmese paid compensation to Manipur regularly and through India after 1949.Jawaharlal Nehru stopped the compensation payment thats why I added it,you can find it from the sources I mentionedꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ)

You have not yet provided a source for the claim that the Burmese paid compensation. (I also note that your addition to the lead makes no mention of compensation, and say something quite different.) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Is this not a reliable sources I quoted word similar to this sourceꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ)

No, Sudhakar Bhat is not a scholarly source. Nevertheless, it says that the British government undertook pay compensation, a fact you never mentioned either in the content or during the discussion. You even claimed that Burma "leased" the territory!

Now, if Burma agreed to pay compensation after the Transfer of Power, we need to know how that was done. What agreement enabled such payments? Bhat is too weak for this issue. And, Brown does not address it at all. So, at the moment, all you can say is that the British paid compensation to Manipur. It was an arrangement between the British and Manipur. Burma was not a party to it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:06, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

References

Clarification not provided

I add a tag "Clarification needed" and asked whether Kabaw Valley was in Manipur's possession for all the 400 years from the first acquisitin. You have not yet answerd it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:08, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

The kabaw valley was considered Manipur's possesion until Treaty of Yandabo,and its a fact..what clarification do you need?,there had been many war but the valley was considered as Myanmar's only after 1834ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ)

Such claims need WP:RS. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

this is the WP:RS,presently Ningthee river(as mentioned in historical contents) is also in Myanmarꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ)

Saying that it was a "natural frontier" in somebody's opinion doesn't establish contiuous possession. You are repeatedly writing one thing while the sources say something else. This is called WP:SYNTHESIS or, more plainly, source misrepresentation. If you persist with it, you will end up at ARBIPA sanctions enforcement. So you really need to raise your game. I am sure you are clever enough to figure it out.

Here is a scholarly source:

For eight years the matter formed a subject of controversy between the Governments of India and Burma. The authorities in Calcutta supported the claim of Gambhir Singh until, in 1832, Major Burney submitted a confidential report in favour of the Burmese claim. In his letter dated July 5, 1832, he pointed out that the disputed valley had been in possession of the Burmese Kings since 1370 A.D.,[3] and that for 12 years prior to the outbreak of the late war the Burmese had enjoyed uninterrupted possession. Lord William Bentinck thereupon decided to return the valley to Burma. The Supreme Government wrote to the Resident at Ava on March 16, 1833, “.... the Supreme Government still adheres to the opinion that the Ningthee formed the proper boundary between Ava and Manipur; but that in consideration for His Majesty’s (i.e., Burmese King’s) feelings and wishes, and in the spirit of amity and good will subsisting between the two countries, the Supreme Government consents to the restoration of the Kubo valley to Ava, and to the establishment of the boundary line at the foot of the Yoomadoung hills”. The transfer took place on January 9, 1834. Gambhir Singh accepted the decision of the British Government, ‘but neither he nor his descendants ever willingly acquiesced in the cession’ of what they considered to be their ancestral territory. In order to compensate Manipur for this loss the Governor-General agreed to give the Raja a monthly stipend of Rs. 500. This stipend is still enjoyed by the Raja of Manipur.[1] Gambhir Singh died in 1834.

which completely blows up all your theories. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 02:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Here is also another scholarly source which stated exactly in favour that the it was recognised as burmese after 1833.Claim can be made by anybody you deleted the history section written by other editor(not me)[1] which stated history behind your claim.My point is about in legal document and agreement or treaty,are you saying content and quote of Treaty of Yandabo is a hoax!? Marjit the one claimed by Burmese is a Manipur King,there is high doubt if he really gave the valley to Burma and it is one sided too,a disputed land need to be consulted from both side. THE TREATY OP YANDABO 117 left to Major Burney for decision was the dispute between Burma and Manipur for the possession of the Kale-Kabaw valley. During the war Gambhir Sing had been paid by the British government to maintain troops in Manipur, and had enjoyed the services of two British ofl&cers. On the conclusion of peace he was informed that he must carry on the government at his own expense and without assistance. He had, at the end of the war, received the Kale-Kabaw valley as part of his kingdom, but the Burmans were able to prove to Major Burney that Mar jit had ceded the valley to Burma in 1813. The government of India allowed the justice of the Burmese claim, and the Kale- Kabaw valley was recognised as Burmese territory in 1833.

References

Questions

What was the protracted dispute (in the above sections) all about? I am planning to rewrite this article and trying to reconstruct a timeline over here. TrangaBellam (talk) 22:05, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

For one, I cannot understand why Burma was paying the compensation (for a few years) after 1947, as claimed by multiple local academics and politicians. The 1834 contract (linked in my chronology) was between Manipur and British Government; Burma was not even a party. So, when did they arrive on the scene? TrangaBellam (talk) 22:11, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

When did the compensation stop? Are relevant records even disclosed? Many are blaming Nehru but obviously, without any evidence apart from hearsay. Kautilya3, any ideas? TrangaBellam (talk) 08:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

An article by one Indramani (quasi-credible, works at the State-Archive; presented on this topic at Manipur University) writes,

On 25th Nov. 1952, Shri L. Jugeshore Singh a member of Parliament from Manipur asked Dr. Katju, Minister of State for Home affairs and States about steps taken by the Government of India for the reversion of the Kabaw Valley. He also asked if the Govenment of India was still paying the compensatory to the Government of Manipur.

Mr. Katju replied that in 1834 the British Government decided to restore the Kabaw Valley to the King of Burma. As compensation for the loss of territory the British undertook to pay to the Ruler of Manipur a sum of Rs. 500 sicca per month which worked to Rs. 6270 per annum.

He further told that when Burma was separated this compensation became liability of the Government of Burma. After the transfer of power the amount was given to the Government of India who in their turn passed on the amount to the Manipur State. On the merger of Manipur State with the Indian union the assets of Manipur State Darbar became the assets of the Government of India. The amount which the Government of Burma were continuing to pay was therefore credited annually to central revenue.

Shri L.J. Singh also asked if the Maharaja of Manipur requested the Government of India for reversion of the Kabow Valley to Manipur after the India Independence Act, 1947 was passed. Dr. Katju replied that he did make some representations but the Government of India thought that his case was very weak.

This should have taken place over the house-floor and (thus) noted in the proceedings. I will try to verify this. (Another point is that this sum should have been 12*500 = 6000 sicca per annum. The additional 270 is not clear. Sometime in the 1850s, 6370 sicca were noted to be paid but again, without any explanation.)TrangaBellam (talk) 11:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Indeed true (p.760, q.645). Katju also adds The Kabow Val­ley is now an integral part of Bunna and the question of asking the Burma Government to transfer the territory to India does not arise, which isn't exactly surprising. TrangaBellam (talk) 12:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

It seems that the 12-point-Agreement (signed on 1st July 1947 between Manipur and Assam Governor on behalf of the Dominion of India) concerned with specifics of future payments as to Kabaw. Also, the rumor of Nehru having done away with compensation stems from a book Kanglasha Amasung Matam gee Manipur by Moirangthem Irabot. The April 7-13, 1985 issue of the Illustrated Weekly of India contains something relevant. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:35, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

The 12-Point-Agreement merely noted that the compensation was a to-discuss issue with Union. TrangaBellam (talk) 14:01, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

The Poppy is Also a Flower, Kalyan Mukherjee, Illustrated Weekly of India, April 7-13, 1985, p. 16 notes, For India, Tamu is not prohibited area. As early as 1953, the Nehru-U Nu Accord met Indo-Burma's claims on that 100-square-kms rice-rich Kabo valley, halfway: 20 kilometres on either side were declared a freeway. Tamu, which is situated in the Kabo valley and is as dear to the Manipuris as it is to the Burmese, is totally accessible. It takes less than two hours on foot from Moreh. What is this accord? TrangaBellam (talk) 16:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

TrangaBellam, it is called the Free Movement Regime (FMR) [2]. In the current state of the arrangement, the border people of the two sides are allowed to travel up to 16 km on the other side of the border, passing through three designated crossing points, There is an Agreement on Land Border Crossing signed on 11 May 2018. (It is a revision of the previous arrangements existing since independence.) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

• On another note, BJP will be taking back Kabaw upon coming to power, it seems. Somebody even filed a PIL in local Hight Court (against Nehru - ?) to get back the valley. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:35, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

The best I know is the source:

• Banerjee, A. C. (1946) [1943], The Eastern Frontier of British India, 1784–1826 (Second ed.), Calcutta: A. Mukherjee, pp. 491–493 – via archive.org

In 1946, the stipend/compensation was still being paid (by the British Government). It is news to me that Burma was paying it. I was given to understand by Manipuri sources that independent India stopped the practice, probably not reliable. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

• Have read this source. Do you know what kind of primary sources might record this annual payment from Burma to India (c. 1947-52)? I wonder why this (apparently peculiar) transaction is yet to catch the fancy of India's many frontier-historians. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

A pro-Manipuri source is:

• Johnstone, James (1896). My Experiences in Manipur and the Naga Hills. London: Simpson Low, Marston and Company. pp. 85–87 – via archive.org.

But it is pure opinion and completely unusable for us. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:34, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

• Read this, too. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

• K3, check out this recent article — Ningthouja, Malem (2021), Yamahata, Chosein; Seekins, Donald M.; Takeda, Makiko (eds.), "Disputed Pillars at the Margin of History: Manipur-Myanmar Boundary and India's Strategic Silence", Social Transformations in India, Myanmar, and Thailand: Volume I : Social, Political and Ecological Perspectives, Singapore: Springer, pp. 377–396, doi:10.1007/978-981-15-9616-2_21, ISBN 978-981-15-9616-2. TrangaBellam (talk) 14:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)