The Thimpu peace talks fail. Allegations of ceasefire violations are made by the Tamil delegation.

Sources
An Analysis of Thimpu Talks (1985) and the PA-LTTE Talks (1994-95) – Some Lessons on Processes of Negotiations in Armed Conflict, Kethesh Loganathan (2001); Sri Lanka, Lost Opportunities: Past Attempts at a Negotiated Settlement, Kethesh Loganathan.

Quotations

“We do not seek to terminate the talks at Thimpu. But our participation at these talks has now been rendered impossible by the conduct of the Sri Lankan State which has acted in violation of the ceasefire agreements which constituted the fundamental basis for the Thimpu Talks.” Joint Statement by the Tamil Delegation on 17th August 1985, Thimpu, Bhutan.

Extracts from ‘An Analysis of Thimpu Talks (1985) and the PA-LTTE Talks (1994-95)’
“The only instrument that came anywhere close to the norms of confidence-building measures in the run-up to the Thimpu Peace Talks was the cessation of hostilities document which was worked out by Indian government officials in consultation with the parties to the conflict. The document basically laid out a time frame and mutually reciprocal steps aimed at the phasing out of hostilities and eventual ceasefire.

The cessation of hostilities was to be phased out over a period of 8 weeks with a ceasefire coming into effect at the end of 6 weeks. The Sri Lankan security forces were to be confined to their bases at the final stage of the phased-out cessation of hostilities. The document eventually became academic when the entire process was telescoped to expedite the holding of peace talks on substantive issues.

The ceasefire was facilitated by the Government of India with a terse message from high ranking officials of the Government of India to the leaders of the Tamil politico-military organizations that if they refused to comply then “neither the Indian soil nor sea” would be made available to them. In short, the “external sanctuary” would be withdrawn. At the same time, assurances were given that if Colombo remained intransigent and failed to reciprocate or come forward to negotiate a political settlement, then the “hospitality” of India towards the Tamil politico-military organizations would continue.

The only monitoring mechanism in place were complaints made to Indian officials by the parties to the conflict as regards ceasefire violations by the “other’. In fact, when allegations and counter-allegations on ceasefire violations at the Thimpu Talks began to relegate discussions on substantive issues to the background, Indian officials prevailed on both parties to allocate a limited time at the commencement of talks on each day for trading of allegations and counter-allegations relating to ceasefire violations!

It therefore comes as no surprise that when the talks did fail and were called-off, the straw that broke the camel’s back was [the incident in Trincomalee]. The Tamil delegation pointedly referred to ceasefire violation by the security forces as the reason for their walk out. …

A desperate attempt was, in fact, made by the Indian Foreign Secretary, Romesh Bhandari, to build a rapport between the Government and the Tamil Delegation when the talks were definitely turning sour. A notable achievement of Romesh Bhandari was the holding of a reception for both delegations at Thimpu, where the spouse of one of the members of the Government delegation was heard commenting, “But, I thought they were terrorists. They are perfect gentlemen.” The niceties stopped there, and the mutual barraging continued at the negotiating table the following day. …

One lesson one can derive from the Thimpu Peace process is that while there was an elaborate framework for cessation of hostilities and ceasefire, the mechanism for monitoring the ceasefire was absent. What was in place was the exchange of allegations and counter-allegations which was more aimed at convincing the mediator, the Government of India, that the “other” was the perpetrator. Secondly, there was hardly any confidence building measures to speak of aimed at building mutual trust and confidence between the protagonists.”

Related events
8 July 1985
April 1985
August 1983
January 1984