In less than a week, as many as three ceasefire agreements have been extended in the Northeast. Technically, these are not called ceasefires; they are dubbed Suspension of Operations (SoO) agreements. Without going into the semantical or technical differences between the two, we know there's one thing that ought to be at the core of these agreements — to bring about peace and stability.
On December 29, came an official statement saying that the SoO Agreement with the Dima Halam Daogah (Nunisa) (DHD-N) had been extended for another period of six months, up to June 30. Tripartite talks on the demands of DHD(N) are continuing. On December 31, came another announcement saying that the SoO Agreement with the pro-talks faction of the National Democratic Front of Boroland (NDFB) had been extended likewise. And that tripartite talks are in progress. Today (January 3), there has been another release saying that the tripartite SoO Agreement with the Achik National Volunteers’ Council (ANVC) has been extended for a further period of nine months w.e.f. January 1.
Prima facie, all that's good news. But what these perfunctory press releases fail to tell us is where these so-called negotiations are headed. Ceasefire agreements and talks mean nothing unless they are result-oriented. Many militant organisations in the Northeast, one by one, inked truce pacts with the Indian and respective state governments after the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isak-Muivah) put a halt to its insurrectionist activities in 1997. Since then all that we have been hearing on all fronts is about talks going on. What talks, pray, can someone tell us?
If anything, the motive of the Indian government seems to be one of diabolically converting these SoO Agreements into wars of attrition. All might be fair in war, but such machinations come with a price — and it is the people who have to pay the price for political chicanery.
It is time that these protracted Suspension of Operations (SoO) Agreements ended in political settlements.
