UNPO recently submitted input to the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (EMRIP) for its study on “the rights of Indigenous Peoples in conflict and post-conflict situations”. UNPO highlighted how denial of self-determination fuels prolonged instability and militarisation, and emphasises the essential role of Indigenous peoples as equal partners in peace processes and conflict resolution.
For Indigenous peoples, the right to self-determination is not an abstract legal principle; it is deeply intertwined with ongoing conflict dynamics and has immediate human, political and environmental consequences. UNPO’s submission demonstrates that aspirations for self-determination are frequently mischaracterised as inherently conflictual. Instead it is the denial of self-determination that is a primary driver of protracted conflict, perpetuating cycles of resistance and repression rather than facilitating sustainable peace. Upholding self-determination therefore directly addresses the root causes of instability: exclusion, denial of identity, militarisation and the systematic stripping of political agency.
In its submission, UNPO highlighted examples from the Crimean Tatars, Acheh, and Nagalim, illustrating the severe repercussions when self-determination is denied or manipulated.
The experience of the Crimean Tatars illustrates how self-determination narratives can be manipulated for political ends. Indigenous to the Crimean Peninsula, Crimean Tatars have faced repeated cycles of repression, most recently following Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. Russia justified its intervention by claiming to enable the “free expression of the will” of Crimea’s population. In reality, the process unfolded under militarised conditions incompatible with democratic decision-making, while systematically excluding the Crimean Tatars. This manipulation of self-determination as a means of colonial expansion contravenes the basic principles underpinning the right itself.
The Acheh, an Indigenous group from the northern tip of Sumatra, illustrates how unresolved colonial legacies fuel ongoing conflict. Historically independent, Acheh was incorporated into Indonesia without genuine consultation. Despite the 2005 Peace Agreement, state commitments to disarmament, justice and autonomy remain largely unfulfilled. Labels such as “separatism” obscure the reality: Acheh’s challenges stem from denied self-determination and incomplete decolonisation. More recently, the humanitarian crisis triggered by Cyclone Senyar in November 2025 has been compounded by the Indonesian government’s refusal to declare the floods a national disaster and its restrictions on foreign humanitarian assistance, further fueling tensions and risking escalation.
The Indigenous Naga people, encompassing over 60 tribes across Northeast India and Northwestern Myanmar, have consistently asserted their right to self-determination. The 2015 Framework Agreement was seen as a hopeful step, yet its implementation remains incomplete. The Indian government’s failure to implement the Agreement has enabled continued militarisation and enforcement of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), which grants sweeping powers to the military and has been widely condemned for enabling extrajudicial killings and intimidation. These coercive measures are compounded by the weaponisation of borders and administrative fragmentation, which arbitrarily carve Naga ancestral lands and obstruct transnational solidarity, thereby undermining the Nagas’ right to self-determination.
UNPO’s submission emphasises that conflict resolution cannot be understood in isolation from the historical injustices of colonialism that continue to shape global politics. Borders drawn without the consent of Indigenous peoples created fragile states vulnerable to unrest. Addressing these legacies is not only about justice for the past, but also about preventing conflicts from spreading in today’s volatile international order.
Indigenous peoples are systematically excluded from conflict and post-conflict decision-making, including peace negotiations, conflict resolution and transitional justice efforts. When frameworks are developed without their participation, they lack the legitimacy, durability, cultural sensitivity, and contextual grounding needed for sustainable peace. The experiences of UNPO members are indicative of a consistent pattern: when peoples are systematically excluded from decision-making processes affecting their lands and futures, the consequences extend beyond immediate harm to encompass the erosion of cultural identity, destruction of traditional livelihoods, forced displacement, and perpetuation of historical exclusion.
Conversely, recognising Indigenous peoples as meaningful stakeholders allows self-determination to serve as a foundation for diverse, democratic, and peaceful societies. Peace agreements gain legitimacy and sustainability when reflecting Indigenous peoples’ self-determined choices. Their participation challenges zero-sum logics and reveals the layered identities and relationships that make long-term coexistence possible.
While the submission focuses on specific UNPO members, the challenges described are shared by many others, including the peoples of West Papua, the Uyghur people, the Hmong, the Niger Delta, the Chittagong Hill Tracts, and Kabylia.
The UNPO made the following recommendations, urging the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to encourage States and international actors to:
- Recognise and integrate Indigenous peoples as parties to peace processes. Ensuring their representatives are engaged on equal footing as distinct rights-holders and negotiating parties in peace processes.
- Re-affirm self-determination as the fundamental principle for both conflict prevention and sustainable peacebuilding.
- Reject the instrumentalisation of self-determination to justify territorial acquisition or occupation. Call on States and international actors to distinguish between genuine self-determination processes and its misuse as a pretext for unlawful intervention, annexation, or repression.
- Promote accountability for violations linked to denial of self-determination. Encourage independent monitoring and reporting on militarisation, impunity, and restrictions on Indigenous political participation and cultural expression in conflict-affected contexts.
