The ritual of surrender in recent years has been at a frenetic pace and with a condition that the cadres must lay down arms in case of mass surrender or bring at least one weapon in case of individual surrender. But in most cases, the groups display only a section of their arms and stack away the rest. One such stashed arms inventory of the militant group ULFA was unearthed recently. That may have belonged to its 28th Battalion which surrendered a couple of years ago.
Till peace talks are substantively resolved, these armed groups remain armed. In case of ULFA, they are allowed limited arms in their designated camps and the rest are supposed to be kept in lockers with a set of keys with the government as well as their representatives. This culture started in early nineties and created a community of surrendered armed rebels. The government often used them but their abuse of amnesty was even greater. The Naga outfit NSCN (IM) in peace talks with the Government of India, however, has been able to retain all its arms and maintain their several camps with a running administration within and outside their limits flouting all ground rules with impunity.
The immediate concern is the impact of this parallel armed and legitimate group, which carries out extortion and uses their arms and ammunition in subverting normal life. The examples and the list of such subversions range from extortions, abductions, intimidation, drug trafficking and even arms running. The entire region had long been militarized and now with gangs of men openly brandishing arms to seek their own end, the region tells a story of dysfunction.
I am citing these examples to illustrate why all arms in post-conflict situation must be deposited. According to the United Nations Mission in Nepal, which left Nepal in January, the Maoists had 19,602 PLA cadres but accounted for 3,500 arms only that were deposited in containers. The Maoists had looted several automatic arms that are not found in this collection of weapons. Where did they disappear? Like other guerilla groups, have they buried it elsewhere? There is no mechanism of ensuring that all arms are deposited. There is enough skepticism to believe that all arms have not been declared. If that is the case, then the Maoists in Nepal must surrender the remaining arms for the people to start taking them seriously as an entity that can manage the affairs of the nation. Their cadre list is doubtful and so is their list of arms deposited. There are larger concerns too.
The impact of small arms in Nepal is catastrophic for such a small nation. There are scores of groups or gangs using illicit arms. The responsibility of this culture of violence has to be claimed by the Maoists who must in every respect come clean.
Eight million light weapons are produced each year around the world; 2000 people are killed by arms everyday; 12 billion bullets are produced each year but there is currently no global agreement regulating the conventional arms and ammunition trade. The international community and the United Nations have so far failed to convince all states to agree by the principles of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). This Treaty is probably the only means of controlling the ‘arms bazaar’ that threatens to fuel much more intense armed conflict than one witnessed in the last quarter of a century.
With France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States allegedly involved in transfers of arms to places where there is substantial risk, there has never been a greater need for strong global arms controls. China, a significant arms exporter and one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, came out strongly against the inclusion of small arms and light weapons in the ATT, arguing that any expansion of scope beyond the seven categories in the UN Conventional Arms Register (UNCAR) should be viewed with extreme caution. This is disturbing, given the proliferation of Chinese made weapons across the world.
In the United Nations in 2001, India had critiqued the illicit arms trade and the threat that it posed for South Asia but thereafter it has argued the need for a consensus and has stayed away from taking a stand against the trade. It has been closely watching Pakistan and China’s position on the Treaty. This is no way of aspiring to be a regional leader. A region maimed by excessive conflicts often spilling across borders need regional adherence to non-proliferation. Nepal is a case in point. The impact of small arms in Nepal is catastrophic for such a small nation. There are scores of groups or gangs using illicit arms. The responsibility of this culture of violence has to be claimed by the Maoists who must in every respect come clean.
There are reams and reams of analytical copy on why arms trade must be controlled and nations and governments must be seized of the necessity of this control. If some nations are responsible for exporting arms against the laid down principles, then there are others who are playing with those arms.
The writer is North-East Region Bureau Chief of NDTV, a leading Indian television news channel. On a sabbatical now, he is Senior Fellow at Institute of Defence Studies Analysis in New Delhi
kishalayb@gmail.com
Related story
Pakistan remains Beijing's top arms importer; 61% made-in-China...
