The signing of CoHA (Cessation of Hostilities Agreement) between RI and GAM on December 12th 2002 is the utmost achievement since the Humanitarian Pause, in the effort of ceasing and bringing the hostilities in Aceh to an end. The Agreement consisted of 9 points of agreement and 4 major issues, which are security, humanitarian assistance, reconstruction and civilian reformation. There is a reduction of acts of violence and armed conflict in the beginning of CoHA implementation. This has proven the fact that the mediation launched in term of the settlement of Aceh dispute is the right thing to do. But it is not a guarantee for CoHA to be applied easily and in a long term in Aceh. There’s still possibility of the repetition of the Humanitarian Pause failure in CoHA. The signs of the failure emerged in the end of January 2003. The violations of the Agreement and the acts of violence that continually happened during January – April 2003 has become a threat to CoHA, that CoHA will end up just like the Humanitarian Pause. The emerge of rejection in doing the obligation to hold a demilitarization from both parties is also the sign of CoHA’s breakdown.
The flunk of Humanitarian Pause in mid 2000 is a valuable experience to RI, GAM and the civilians in Aceh. The content of the Agreement seems unable to put the root of Aceh conflict into perspective and that means the Agreement is unable to reduce the number of armed conflict and acts of violence towards the people. The lack of stability between the political will of RI and the capacity to do so, makes the Humanitarian Pause ran ineffectively.
We have to admit that CoHA still have its weaknesses. The failure of putting the root of Aceh conflict into perspective and the lack of stability between the political will of RI and its application, is a proof of CoHA limitedness. The Agreement did not attach the issue of the protection of human rights . Whereas in fact, the root of Aceh conflict is the increase of violations of human rights committed by both sides.
The effectiveness of JSC and HDC which questioned by both parties, make them pay no attention to the implementation of the Agreement. The mediation did not give any solution in reducing the anxiety of both parties. The ineffective monitoring role caused by the lack of personal capacity, both quality and quantity, has made this institution loose its legitimacy in penalizing the violator of the Agreement.
Why can’t we remain the Agreement on ceasing the hostilities? This briefing paper intend to answer the question by explaining the result of implementation and barriers of both parties. This briefing paper also intend to elucidate the role of the third party in helping the CoHA implementation process.
To read more, please download this briefing paper