Peace on Paper Only? The Struggle for Indigenous Rights in the CHT

Yesterday, December 2nd, marked 28 years since the signing of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) Peace Accord. In 1997, this treaty was hailed as a landmark achievement, promising to end decades of guerrilla warfare and grant substantial autonomy and rights to the indigenous Jumma peoples of southeastern Bangladesh.

Twenty-eight years is a long time. It is long enough for a generation to be born, grow up, and have children of their own in what was supposed to be a post-conflict era.

Yet, as we look at the CHT today, we must ask an uncomfortable question: Has peace truly been achieved, or does it merely exist on the paper it was written on?

The Promise of 1997

The CHT Accord was supposed to be a turning point. Signed between the government of Bangladesh and the Parbatya Chattagram Jana Samhati Samiti (PCJSS), the political representative of the indigenous groups, it laid out a roadmap for peace.

The promises were explicit:

1. Recognition of the distinct ethnic and cultural identity of the Jumma tribes.
2. A withdrawal of temporary military camps from the region.
3. Resolution of complex land disputes arising from state-sponsored settlement programs.
4. Regional autonomy through strengthened local government councils.

For a brief moment, there was genuine hope that the hills would see an end to bloodshed and cultural erasure.

The Reality of 2025

Fast forward to today, and that hope has curdled into frustration and renewed resistance. While major armed conflict has largely ceased, a "negative peace" prevails. The region remains heavily militarized, and the core pillars of the Accord remain unimplemented.

The visible frustration of the new generation was evident on the streets just this week in the lead-up to the anniversary.

Photo: Activists in Dhaka prepare a banner marking the anniversary of the CHT Accord. The red English text demands implementation, while the Bengali slogan on the right explicitly calls to "Free the hills from military rule."

The image above captures the current mood perfectly. The demand isn't for a new treaty; the demand is simply for the government to do what it promised three decades ago.

The central grievances remain unchanged:

1. Militarization: As the banner in the photo highlights, the presence of security forces in the CHT remains disproportionately high. For the indigenous communities, this does not feel like protection; it feels like occupation.

2. Land Grabbing: The most explosive issue is land. Indigenous communal land ownership systems are rarely recognized, leading to dispossession by powerful interests and continued friction with bengali muslim settlers.

3. The Development Paradox: From a sociological perspective, what we see in the CHT is "maldevelopment." Roads and infrastructure are built, often to facilitate military movement or tourism, while the indigenous population remains marginalized, fearing that "development" is just another word for displacement.

A Generational Struggle

What is striking about the current movement is the youth. The people painting the banners today likely weren't born when the Accord was signed. They have inherited a frozen conflict. They are educated, connected, and increasingly vocal about their rights, not just as citizens of Bangladesh, but as indigenous peoples with a distinct history. Their art, their protests, and their online activism are keeping an issue alive that many in the mainstream media would prefer to forget. Peace cannot just be the absence of war. It must be the presence of justice, dignity, and recognized rights.

Until the stipulations of the 1997 Accord move from the page to the reality of the ground in Rangamati, Khagrachari, and Bandarban, the struggle for the CHT is far from over.