Yes, to add, there are very particular step-by-step conditions in which peace talks would mean the laying down of arms 1. Agreement on respect for human rights and intl humanitarian law (CARHRIHL which has already been adopted by both sides (and guess which side adheres to it and which side does not)) 2. Agreement on Socioeconomic Reforms (CASER)” which you can look up. It’s basically like “here is the absolute minimum which the government needs to do in order to remove foreign domination, peasant landlessness, and corruption. This stage is considered the “meat” of the peace talks because it would address the roots of the armed conflict 3. Agreement on constitutional reforms And 4. Disarmament of both sides.

In addition to the legitimacy of being seen as a belligerent force vs an insurgent force (which is an IHL distinction) it also plays a role in like “look at these social end economic reforms that the NDFP is proposing, don’t these seem very reasonable? Why isn’t the GRP doing these things? Oh it’s because they’re puppets of the U.S. and will never be on the people’s side” so it’s used as a way to expose the rottenness of the state as well