ULFA Peace Accord-Explained Pointwise

Recently, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), the Assam government and the pro-talks faction of the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) signed a memorandum of settlement.

What are the provisions in the ULFA Peace Accord?

1. Development Measures- The peace agreement encompasses a comprehensive package for the all-round development of Assam. It includes provisions for various developmental projects and a commitment to resolving long-standing issues. The government has pledged investment of ₹1.5 lakh crore, staggered through the years.

2. Political Inclusion- The agreement addresses the issue of political insecurity among indigenous people, reserving 97 out of 126 seats for them in the recent delimitation exercise. It ensures the continuation of this principle in future delimitation processes, aiming to address political insecurities.

3. Non-Violence- ULFA has agreed to renounce violence, disarm, disband the armed organization, vacate their occupied camps, and participate in the peaceful democratic process established by law. This commitment aims to ensure the integrity of the country and marks a shift towards non-violent engagement.

A time-bound program will be made by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, to fulfil the demands of ULFA and a committee will also be formed for its monitoring.

Note- The agreement was signed with the pro-talks faction of ULFA under Arabinda Rajkhowa while the other faction led by Paresh Baruah (known as ULFA-I) has not joined the peace process.

What is ULFA?

The United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) is an armed militant organization operating in the Northeast Indian state of Assam. It seeks to establish an independent, sovereign nation state of Assam for the indigenous Assamese people through an armed struggle in the Assam conflict. The Government of India banned the organization in 1990 citing it as a terrorist organization.

It emerged from the All Assam Students Union anti-immigrant agitation that began in 1979 demanding a sovereign State for the Assamese people.

1. Objectives- The founders of ULFA wanted to establish a sovereign Assamese nation through an armed struggle against the Indian state.

2. Approach- During the initial years, it projected itself to help needy people. Later, they followed a violent approach marked by kidnappings and extortion, executions and bomb blasts.

3. Early Leadership- A group of radical thinkers, led by Bhimakanta Buragohain, Arabinda Rajkhowa, Anup Chetia, Pradip Gogoi, Bhadreshwar Gohain and Paresh Baruah were the main leaders.

4. International Presence- It had bases in 5 neighbouring countries – Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, Nepal and Myanmar – which allowed for a strategic encirclement of the Northeast.

5. Government’s Response- In 1990, the Centre launched Operation Bajrang to tackle growing violence, leading to the arrest of over 1,200 ULFA insurgents. Assam was declared a ‘disturbed area’, President’s rule was imposed, and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act was invoked.

The Rajkhowa faction of the ULFA signed a ceasefire agreement with the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government only in 2011, and has since been in negotiations with the Centre for a peace deal.

What led to the rise of insurgency in Assam and the ULFA?

Insurgency in Assam emerged due to a combination of historical, socio-political, and economic factors. These include:

1. Historical Context- Assam, with its distinct identity and history, has faced perceived neglect and marginalization from the central government. This sense of historical injustice fuelled resentment and provided a basis for separatist movements like ULFA.

2. Perceived Cultural Imperialism- The influx of migrants from other parts of India into Assam (for e.g. Bengali-speaking people during and post the Bangladesh Liberation War), altering the demographic balance, led to concerns about cultural assimilation and the erosion of the indigenous Assamese identity.

3. Economic Grievances- Assam’s economy faced challenges, including underdevelopment, unemployment, and a lack of industrialization. Many saw the region’s resources, particularly oil and tea, being exploited without equitable benefits for locals.

4. Demand for Autonomy- These groups demanded greater autonomy and control over Assam’s resources, seeking to protect the interests of the indigenous population and assert Assamese identity.

5. State Repression and Human Rights Violations- Heavy-handed approaches by security forces, including misuse of AFSPA, alleged human rights violations and extrajudicial killings, further alienated the population and fueled resentment towards the government.

6. External Support- Insurgent groups reportedly received support, including training and refuge, from external entities, which bolstered its capabilities and prolonged the conflict.

7. Strong Sense of Identity- The Assamese community possesses a distinctive culture and language, fostering a strong sense of identity.

Why was the ULFA Peace Accord required?

The Indian government faces several formidable challenges in dealing with insurgent groups in the North-Eastern region, which make signing peace deals with insurgent groups extremely essential. These challenges include:

1. Diverse Ethnocultural Landscape- The North-East is a mosaic of diverse ethnicities, languages, and cultures. Each community often harbors its own historical grievances and aspirations for autonomy, which complicates efforts to find a common resolution acceptable to all.

2. Geographical Complexity- The region’s challenging terrain, dense forests, and porous international borders provide insurgent groups with hiding spots and routes for cross-border movements, making it difficult for security forces to contain them.

3. Historical Grievances- Long-standing historical grievances related to identity, land rights, and autonomy have fuelled insurgencies. Addressing these grievances requires delicately navigating complex historical narratives and reconciling conflicting claims.

4. Socio-economic Development Deficit- The North-East lags behind in terms of development indicators, including infrastructure, education, healthcare, and employment opportunities. This lack of socio-economic progress contributes to feelings of marginalization, making certain populations susceptible to recruitment by insurgent groups.

5. External Support and Influence- Insurgent groups often receive support, including sanctuary or supplies, from external entities across borders. Managing these external factors and diplomatic relationships adds complexity to resolving internal conflicts.

6. Multiple Insurgent Groups- The presence of multiple insurgent groups with varying ideologies, objectives, and territorial influences makes negotiations and peace-building efforts challenging, as achieving consensus among disparate groups becomes a hurdle.

7. Security Concerns vs. Human Rights- Balancing security measures to counter insurgencies while upholding human rights and avoiding collateral damage remains a persistent challenge for the government.

What are the upcoming challenges in the ULFA peace Accord?

A peace deal is a good start, however, it might not be enough to fully curb insurgency in the North-East due to several reasons:

1. Lax Implementation- The actual implementation of the agreed-upon terms is often challenging due to logistical, political, and social complexities. Failure to implement key provisions undermines trust and can reignite conflicts.

2. Deep-rooted Grievances- Insurgencies in the North-East stem from deep-seated historical grievances related to identity, autonomy, land rights, and socio-economic disparities. A peace deal might not comprehensively address all these issues, leaving underlying causes unattended.

3. Fragmented Insurgent Groups- Multiple insurgent groups operate in the region, each with its own objectives, ideologies, and territorial influences. A peace deal might involve only a subset of these groups, leaving others dissatisfied and perpetuating conflict.
For instance, the other ULFA faction, known as ULFA-I led by Paresh Baruah, has not joined the peace process.

4. Socio-economic Disparities- Insurgencies often thrive in areas with socio-economic disparities. If a peace deal doesn’t address the lack of development and opportunities in these regions, it might not dissuade new recruits from joining insurgent groups.

5. External Factors- Insurgent groups often have connections across borders, receiving support or sanctuary from neighbouring countries. A peace deal might not address external factors, allowing for continued sustenance and recruitment of insurgents.
For instance, ULFA still has camps in Myanmar, and previously had camps in both Bangladesh and Bhutan.

6. Changing Dynamics of the Region- The landscape of insurgency is dynamic, with evolving leadership, strategies, and external influences. A static peace deal might not adapt to these changing dynamics, rendering it ineffective in the long term.
For instance, ULFA reportedly has links to other insurgent outfits in the Northeast and Myanmar, as well as Islamic terror outfits like Harkat-ul-Jihad-e-Islami, and Al-Qaeda.

To effectively curb insurgency in the North-East, a peace deal must be accompanied by comprehensive efforts addressing socio-economic development, historical grievances, inclusive governance, security measures, and sustained engagement with all stakeholders.

What Should be the way forward for ULFA Peace Accord?

Addressing insurgency in India’s North-East requires a multifaceted approach that combines political, social, economic, and security measures. Here are some steps the government might consider as the way forward to curb insurgency and bring peace to the North-East and Assam:

1. Dialogue and Negotiation- Engage in sustained dialogues with insurgent groups to address their grievances and seek peaceful resolutions. Previous successful peace talks, like those with the NSCN-IM (National Socialist Council of Nagaland – Isak-Muivah), could serve as models.

2. Development Initiatives- Implement targeted development projects to address socio-economic disparities in the region. Investments in infrastructure, education, healthcare, and job creation can help alleviate grievances and reduce the appeal of insurgency. Promoting trade-induced industrialisation can create new employment opportunities, stimulate growth, and strengthen regional integration.

3. Inclusive Governance- Ensure inclusive governance by involving local communities in decision-making processes. Empowerment of local bodies and ensuring equitable representation can foster a sense of belonging and reduce alienation.

4. Security Measures- Maintain law and order through effective security measures while respecting human rights. Coordinated efforts among security forces to tackle insurgent activities and cross-border smuggling can help stabilize the region.

5. Regional Cooperation- Collaborate with neighboring countries, as many insurgent groups have cross-border connections. Strengthening diplomatic ties and intelligence-sharing can help address the root causes of insurgency that extend beyond national borders.

6. Rehabilitation and Reintegration- Provide rehabilitation and reintegration programs for former insurgents to facilitate their return to mainstream society. Skill development and psychological support can aid their transition.

7. Addressing Root Causes- Address underlying issues such as historical grievances, ethnic tensions, and identity politics that fuel insurgency. Promoting cultural diversity and celebrating local heritage can foster a sense of unity. There is also a need to ensure greater transparency in AFSPA.

Implementing these measures comprehensively and with a long-term perspective could contribute significantly to reducing and eventually resolving insurgencies in India’s North-East.