Peace Agreements by Nina Caspersen

Author:Nina Caspersen [Caspersen, Nina]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9780745689807
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Published: 2017-01-10T00:00:00+00:00

Implications: Stability Now, Justice Later?

The focus in these peace agreements is clearly on stability, and this is seen as best achieved through the creation of group-based institutions that tend to empower the leaders in control of the armed groupings.

Lack of rights for ‘Others’ has however resulted in tensions and violence in a number of cases. In the Chittagong Hill Tracts, there have been recurrent episodes of violence between the tribal communities and the Bengali settlers; with the latter complaining about being second-class citizens and the former insisting that there was an unwritten understanding about the withdrawal of the settlers (Mohsin, 2003, pp. 51, 73). In Bodoland, the rights of non-tribal communities have also proved explosive. The area under the control of the Bodoland Territorial Council, following the 2003 agreement, is not homogeneous and non-Bodo communities feel under-represented (Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, 2012). In 2012, these tensions turned to extreme violence leaving forty-two people dead and 150,000 displaced. The catalyst was the alleged removal of a signboard from a mosque, which the Bodoland Territorial Council claimed was an illegal structure occupying forest land (Samrat, 2012). Like many other settlements, the 1996 agreement for Mindanao was also an exclusive settlement, which left indigenous groups, Christian settlers and some of the traditional Muslim clans feeling unrepresented. They saw their interests threatened and needs unmet and this contributed to the growing unrest and violence in the region (Lara Jr & Champain, 2009). Even the more succesful agreement for Aceh has been troubled by lack of inclusiveness: the marginalization of certain ethnic groups, in particular those residing in the central highlands, has led to localized violence (Lara Jr & Champain, 2009). If these groups are relatively small, such tensions may not directly threaten the peace agreement, but it does mean that groups that could potentially have supported the agreement are now more likely to oppose it. For a fragile peace agreement this weakening of the peace constituency could prove fatal.

However, rights for minorities within autonomous entities do present a genuine dilemma and potentially difficult trade-off. Such rights could undermine the protections that have been negotiated for the main ethnic group: the territorial autonomy would be constrained and the share in power reduced. This is particularly problematic when these groups are seen as representatives of the dominant group. In the case of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, the Bengali settlers complain of their second-class status, but the tribal community sees them as a major cause of their plight, and complain that their ‘ethnic’ autonomy does not go far enough. Promised powers have not been devolved, the over-representation of the tribal community on the District Council has been weakened, and the acquisition of tribal land continues to be a problem (Amnesty International, 2013a; Mikkelsen, 2015, pp. 316–17; Mohsin, 2003, p. 71). If the ‘Others’ were small, non-dominant groups, the effect would perhaps be minimal, but the conflict parties, especially the numerically weaker one, are likely to fear that it could water down the principles of ethnic

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.