logo-productions-du-vendredi

Ceasefire Agreement With Nscn

The agreements stipulate that « the ceasefire shall be subject to compliance with the ceasefire rules agreed upon and signed by mutual agreement between the two parties » and that the basic rules of the ceasefire shall be subject to reciprocal review and modification involving both parties. » New Delhi: On August 3, 2015, under the supervision of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) signed a Framework Agreement (FA) in New Delhi with the Nagalim Nationalist Socialist Council (Isak-Muivah) to find a political solution to the painful Naga issue. Meanwhile, when contacted, Chauhan confirmed that the truce extension agreement had been reached with the three groups for a period of six months. He said that due to the « unprecedented situation » of the global COVID-19 pandemic, the agreement, which is signed annually in New Delhi in April, was signed between the parties here in Kohima. The text of the 1997 ceasefire agreement is ambiguous. It does not explicitly set geographical restrictions and is aware of them, according to reports from these years. A 2001 frontline article stated that while Th. Muivah was signing on the dot line as secretary general of the NSCN (I-M), the government of the Indian interlocutor chosen to bring the agreement to a Naga peace agreement was then chairman of the R.N. Ravi Joint Intelligence Committee. Ravi later became governor of the state.

In 2015, Prime Minister Narendra Modi`s government signed a « framework agreement » with the NSCN (IM). As part of the deal, the group abandoned its demand for secession for nearly six decades and agreed to reach an agreement within the limits of the Indian Constitution. According to almost all reports, both sides are closer than ever to a solution. When the NSCN (IM) questioned the arrests by referring to the ceasefire agreement – it signed a ceasefire agreement with the Centre in 1997 – with Indian security forces, the Manipur government quickly rejected the Naga group`s claim. The ceasefire, she stressed, did not extend to Manipur. But as such an agreement threatened to jeopardize the peace process itself – with the NSCN (IM) claiming that its cadres were being attacked and killed by security forces in other areas – the upcoming dispensation, led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee, changed its tone. Swaraj Kaushal, then the Center`s interlocutor for peace talks, reportedly made a statement in 1998 against Gujral: in the meantime, the National Socialist Council of Nagaland/K-Khango has also reached a new ceasefire agreement with the Union government for a period of one year from Monday, the statement said. With regard to the NSCN (K-Khango), which concluded a new agreement with the Centre last April, the six-month extension, until 17 October, has been carried out. The band was represented by Shellen Konyak and Kaino Chishi. This proposal is explained by the « unbridled looting of more than half a dozen organized armed gangs that run their so-called `governments` in the ass », call into question the legitimacy of the Land government without resistance from the legal and regulatory machine of the state and « create a crisis of confidence in the system ». The insurgents had the obvious impression that it applied to all areas where they operated.

The Indian government was ready to agree on this understanding without saying so explicitly. As proof, the NSCN (IM) cited an agreement between the holding and the center, signed in Bangkok on June 14, 2001, which stipulates that the ceasefire is « without territorial borders. »