Gogoing for peace

When Ulfa first offered to talk peace with the central government in 2004, its motivation was clear. The recent operations by Bhutan to evict militants from its soil had been a success, and the organisation was clearly in need of space to recoup. In those months it finally climbed down from some long-held preconditions for talks 8212; that they be held in a third country or with third country mediation. Ever since then, Ulfa has given every possible proof that its purpose is to stall counter-insurgency operations, and not clear the middle ground for talks to begin. It has gone to the extent of refusing to even designate its leaders who could begin political talks, instead setting up another group altogether, supposedly to set the stage for eventual talks with the Centre. Meanwhile, there has been no evidence of good faith, with the public peace and economic installations being sporadically targeted.

It is against this background that Assam Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi has appealed to Ulfa to come to the negotiation table. Ulfa has done nothing in the long months since counter-insurgency were begun to show any sincerity to pursue the cause of peace and conflict resolution. Instead, it has issued statements in the last month calling for immigrants from other parts of India to be 8220;driven out8221;. Its top leader, Arabinda Rajkhowa, has of late been raising the rhetoric against the Centre. If these are signals of an organisation ripe for peace talks, then Gogoi knows something about conflict resolution that the rest of us do not.

Off and on, top officials in New Delhi have been playing along with Gogoi8217;s argument that negotiations with Ulfa are a worthy enterprise. This is unfortunate. It has fogged the air with contradictory signals. After the government8217;s initial dalliance with Ulfa, in 2005 the Armed Forces were compelled to recommence counter-insurgency operations. Statements like Gogoi8217;s, which are sometimes echoed in New Delhi, give the impression that talks may be a more efficient option. But Ulfa8217;s every response, rhetorical and operational, only makes clearer its disdain for peace and normalcy.