Content of Accord and Durability of Peace A Comparative Study of Nagaland and Chittagong Hill Tracts

Signing a peace agreement is a daunting job for the belligerents since they have to compromise many demands in a negotiated settlement; it is even more problematic to hold the rebel groups under the banner of a peace accord. Scholars have emphasized the importance of third party presence, peacekeeping of the United Nations, restructuring of security services, economic development, etc., in maintaining the stability of the settlement. However, we do not have a clear idea about how the content and quality of the peace treaty contribute to the durability of the peace. This article examines how the peace accord's content, provisions, and incentives hold the disputing parties within the agreed framework. This article uses the Nagaland and Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) agreement as cases to investigate the research aim through a structured-focused comparison with content analysis of official documents. The findings suggest that the Naga rebels returned to the battlefield within five years after signing the Nagaland accord because it did not provide any incentive to the insurgents and the Naga community. On the contrary, despite some tensions and controversy, the CHT agreement has survived because of its liberal content that incorporated power-sharing with rebel leaders.