By Our Reporter
SHILLONG, Nov 17: The proscribed Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council said its chairman and general secretary cannot be part of the peace talks unless all pending cases against them are withdrawn or a framework agreement for a ceasefire is signed.
In an emailed statement on Friday, HNLC general secretary cum publicity secretary Sainkupar Nongtraw said the initial round of official talks commenced under the guidance of the outfit’s former vice-chairman.
“However, the government insists on the participation of the chairman and the general secretary. We have clearly stated that unless all pending cases against us are withdrawn or a framework agreement for a ceasefire is signed, the HNLC chairman or general secretary cannot participate in the discussions,” he said.
He said the outfit has entrusted its newly appointed vice-chairman, Teimiki Laloo with overseeing the process and evaluating its progress.
Nongtraw said the outfit has actively sought a political dialogue with the Centre in an effort to usher in lasting peace.
He added the HNLC firmly believes that a political solution is essential for sustainable peace.
“Therefore, it is crucial that peace talks are not contingent upon predetermined terms. If conditions are to be imposed, they should be agreed upon by both parties rather than dictated by one side alone,” he stated.
Nongtraw further observed that peace talks are intended to facilitate a solution through negotiations and diplomatic efforts.
“However, the government of India seems to perceive these talks as a form of surrender or disarmament,” he said.
Moreover, he pointed out, it is important to note that several armed groups in the Northeast have already surrendered and disbanded their organisations. Despite this, they have not been granted a permanent political solution.
According to him, this lack of resolution has led to the emergence of new groups, exacerbating the situation. In India, the NSCN was established following the signing of the Shillong Accord of 1975, and the ULFA emerged during the Assam Agitation (1979-85) as a response to the grievances of the Assamese people.
“When the Assam Accord of 1985 failed to fulfil their aspirations, the ULFA gained significant strength and became a formidable force in their battle against the Indian government. If the government truly desires lasting peace, they should approach the situation with the same level of seriousness as they did with the Mizo Accord of 1986,” he said.
“If we look beyond India, we can observe the case of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, which signed the Oslo I Accord in 1993 and Oslo II Accord in 1995. In spite of their tireless efforts, the attainment of a temporary resolution to the conflict remained elusive, as Hamas emerged and retaliated in response,” Nongtraw said.
The HNLC reiterated that the outfit desires a lasting peace that encompasses freedom and justice while acknowledging and respecting the concerns and aspirations of the Hynniewtrep people as a unified entity.
“We firmly oppose any notion of temporary peace that could jeopardise our national existence and right to self-determination,” he added.