EelamNation never ever give up her Armed Struggle until her FREEDOM is FULLY achieved
"LTTE must lay down arms, prior to negotiation" – President emphasises Wednesday, 25 June 2008 President Mahinda Rajapaksa reiterated that the LTTE terrorists should lay down arms if they expect to negotiate with the Government for a political
solution to the crisis.
"The Government would not hesitate to work with the LTTE if the Tigers were ready to lay down arms," President said. President made these remarks at a discussion held with the religious dignitaries at the President's House yesterday (24). The President assured that he was not at all prepared to compromise the security of the country and the safety of the people and was not ready to
hand over the country to a terrorist organisation. The regilious dignitaries present at the meeting, while commending the efforts made by the Government to bring about a sustainable solution to the
crisis in the country, requested him to include religious and political leaders too in the All Party Representative Committee (APRC). The religious dignitaries have informed the President that certain groups were propagating "baseless allegations locally and internationally against the
government to distort the image of the country".
Indian trio’s mysterious tryst or twist
My dear Mahinda aiya,Ayubowan, vanakkam and assalamu alaikkum as the country continues to shake, rattle and roll with the increasing confusion of crisis within crisis and
contradictions within contradictions.
The latest issue hit by this crisis of conflict within conflict was the sudden and largely secretive visit of India’s heavyweight delegation comprising the
powerful National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan, Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and Defence Secretary Vijaya Singh. Mr. Narayanan
was the former head of India’s much feared Research and Analysis Wing and is known to be playing a key role in working out the geopolitical
strategies for India to strengthen its defector role as the regional superpower.
The visit of the high level Indian delegation was unexpected and unannounced with reports indicating that even opposition UNP leader Ranil
Wickremesinghe came to know about it only after the delegation arrived.
Officially little or nothing was announced about the purpose of the visit and the extensive talks held here. Spin doctors of state propaganda units
suggested that the visit was a routine one connected with security arrangements for next month’s South Asian Summit which India’s Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh is scheduled to attend. The main opposition UNP and the now anti government fire brand JVP were among the parties which over
the weekend demanded that the government should tell the truth about why the top level Indian delegation suddenly came here. What was discussed
or what was demanded?
The JVP especially expressed concern it feared a repeat of June 1987 when the then Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi came here while the country
was clamped under a curfew and virtually forced Sri Lanka to sign the so-called Indo Lanka peace accord including the 13th Ammendment to the
Constitution.
According to most observers and analysts the three top Indian officials came here mainly to reiterate India’s view that the regional superpower or big
brother saw no military solution to the ethnic conflict. Reports say the Indian team was briefed by the all powerful Defence Secretary Gotabhaya
Rajapaksa and the heads of the security forces.
The analysts believe the Indian team also expressed grave concern over the catastrophic situation facing the Tamil people and called on the
government to act fast in working out a political solution including the extensive devolution of power within a united Sri Lanka. Last week Foreign
Minister Rohitha Bogollagama was reported to have said India should stop meddling in Sri lanka’s internal affairs. He later denied the reports but it is
an open secret that ties between India and Sri Lanka are strained and New Delhi is set to take tough action in view of upcoming general election
there. Tamil Nadu factor is known to be important for all parties in any Indian general election and Premier Singh like most politicians must be having
one eye on the polls and the other on India’s regional geopolitical strategies as he works a policy towards Sri Lanka. India is also known to be
concerned about Sri Lanka’s growing political, economic and military ties with China and Pakistan.
The coming days and weeks will reveal more of what happened or what was said at the talks between Sri Lankan leaders and the Indian delegation.
Besides a meeting with President Mahinda Rajapaksa, the Indian officials met TNA leader R. Sampanthan and CWC leader S. Thondaman.
Obliviously their talks with these two leaders did not focus on next month’s summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Corporation
(SAARC).
If the Indian officials asked for or demanded an end to the escalation of the military offensive in the North, there was little or no sign of it over the
weekend. Reports indicated that heavy fighting took place on Sunday and the casualty toll was high with Army Commander Sarath Fonseka himself
visiting the troops in the Vanni again on Saturday. As usual different media and state organs are telling different stories and giving different
interpretation to the visit of the Indian team and to the state of Indo Sri Lanka relations.
If the focus of the talks, as government spokesmen say was on next month’s SAARC summit, some reports asked whether India wanted a
postponement or a change of venue because of the serious security situation and the bomb blasts in and around Colombo. Adding confusion to
confusion, Indian media reports said the thrust of the talks was for India to supply more military equipment to Sri Lanka because New Delhi feared Sri
Lanka might turn into something like the Myanmar Junta if it continued to receive military equipment on a large scale from China and Pakistan.
This 15th SAARC summit was originally scheduled to be held in the Maldives but that country had some difficulties in hosting the summit and Sri
Lanka asked for the honour of hosting it with the added privilege of the President of Sri Lanka being also the Chairman of the grouping of eight
nations.
The Sunday Times newspapers front page lead was on the government’s move to table a motion in parliament seeking a staggering Rs. 2.3 billion
more to host the SAARC summit. Last week we commented on people being forced to eat polls at a time when the prices of ‘pol’ were soaring
beyond coconut trees along with prices of almost every other item.Next month Provincial Council polls in the North Central and Sabaragamuwa
provinces will cost hundreds of millions of rupees at a time when millions of people are struggling to find their daily bread. Going beyond what that
infamous French queen baked herself in, the policy here appears to be to stuff ballot papers not only into ballot boxes but into the hungry bellies of
people.
An email doing the international rounds speaks of how many million loaves of bread could be produced and how many millions could be fed on the
money spent in hosting the SAARC summit here while the country is reportedly plunged into an economic breakdown.
Sadly and tragically, the people do not appear to be having a credible alternative. The main opposition UNP is plagued and paralyzed with division
within division.
A committee appointed to probe a growing demand for a change in leadership was due to meet yesterday with front liners like Johnston Fernando
and Lakshman Seneviratne joining the group of those seeking the removal of Ranil Wickremesinghe from the leadership.
They want Mr. Wickremesinghe to play a role similar to what Sonia Ghandhi is playing in the congress party with party chairman Rukman Senanayake
being proposed as UNP leader.
The only plus point for the UNP appears to be the appointment of former Army Commander Janaka Perera as Chief Ministerial candidate for the
North Central Province besides being the party’s defence spokesman.The JVP also, though being in a striking and fiery mood against the government,
has been hit by further splits with the Anjaan Umma drama creating more problems to the party and dissident leader Wimal Weerawansa claiming he
will reveal shocking secrets about party leaders in a book to be launched tomorrow.
Overall it appears that a neo colonial divide and rule policy of splitting parties and creating divisions within divisions is backfiring on its creators just as
it did on an empire which boasted that the sun would never set on it but now finds itself largely as a lap dog of one of the most unpopular leaders of
the United States.
Yours sincerely,
Koththa-malli
My dear Mahinda aiya,Ayubowan, vanakkam and assalamu alaikkum as the country continues to shake, rattle and roll with the increasing confusion of crisis within crisis and
contradictions within contradictions.
The latest issue hit by this crisis of conflict within conflict was the sudden and largely secretive visit of India’s heavyweight delegation comprising the
powerful National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan, Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and Defence Secretary Vijaya Singh. Mr. Narayanan
was the former head of India’s much feared Research and Analysis Wing and is known to be playing a key role in working out the geopolitical
strategies for India to strengthen its defector role as the regional superpower.
The visit of the high level Indian delegation was unexpected and unannounced with reports indicating that even opposition UNP leader Ranil
Wickremesinghe came to know about it only after the delegation arrived.
Officially little or nothing was announced about the purpose of the visit and the extensive talks held here. Spin doctors of state propaganda units
suggested that the visit was a routine one connected with security arrangements for next month’s South Asian Summit which India’s Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh is scheduled to attend. The main opposition UNP and the now anti government fire brand JVP were among the parties which over
the weekend demanded that the government should tell the truth about why the top level Indian delegation suddenly came here. What was discussed
or what was demanded?
The JVP especially expressed concern it feared a repeat of June 1987 when the then Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi came here while the country
was clamped under a curfew and virtually forced Sri Lanka to sign the so-called Indo Lanka peace accord including the 13th Ammendment to the
Constitution.
According to most observers and analysts the three top Indian officials came here mainly to reiterate India’s view that the regional superpower or big
brother saw no military solution to the ethnic conflict. Reports say the Indian team was briefed by the all powerful Defence Secretary Gotabhaya
Rajapaksa and the heads of the security forces.
The analysts believe the Indian team also expressed grave concern over the catastrophic situation facing the Tamil people and called on the
government to act fast in working out a political solution including the extensive devolution of power within a united Sri Lanka. Last week Foreign
Minister Rohitha Bogollagama was reported to have said India should stop meddling in Sri lanka’s internal affairs. He later denied the reports but it is
an open secret that ties between India and Sri Lanka are strained and New Delhi is set to take tough action in view of upcoming general election
there. Tamil Nadu factor is known to be important for all parties in any Indian general election and Premier Singh like most politicians must be having
one eye on the polls and the other on India’s regional geopolitical strategies as he works a policy towards Sri Lanka. India is also known to be
concerned about Sri Lanka’s growing political, economic and military ties with China and Pakistan.
The coming days and weeks will reveal more of what happened or what was said at the talks between Sri Lankan leaders and the Indian delegation.
Besides a meeting with President Mahinda Rajapaksa, the Indian officials met TNA leader R. Sampanthan and CWC leader S. Thondaman.
Obliviously their talks with these two leaders did not focus on next month’s summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Corporation
(SAARC).
If the Indian officials asked for or demanded an end to the escalation of the military offensive in the North, there was little or no sign of it over the
weekend. Reports indicated that heavy fighting took place on Sunday and the casualty toll was high with Army Commander Sarath Fonseka himself
visiting the troops in the Vanni again on Saturday. As usual different media and state organs are telling different stories and giving different
interpretation to the visit of the Indian team and to the state of Indo Sri Lanka relations.
If the focus of the talks, as government spokesmen say was on next month’s SAARC summit, some reports asked whether India wanted a
postponement or a change of venue because of the serious security situation and the bomb blasts in and around Colombo. Adding confusion to
confusion, Indian media reports said the thrust of the talks was for India to supply more military equipment to Sri Lanka because New Delhi feared Sri
Lanka might turn into something like the Myanmar Junta if it continued to receive military equipment on a large scale from China and Pakistan.
This 15th SAARC summit was originally scheduled to be held in the Maldives but that country had some difficulties in hosting the summit and Sri
Lanka asked for the honour of hosting it with the added privilege of the President of Sri Lanka being also the Chairman of the grouping of eight
nations.
The Sunday Times newspapers front page lead was on the government’s move to table a motion in parliament seeking a staggering Rs. 2.3 billion
more to host the SAARC summit. Last week we commented on people being forced to eat polls at a time when the prices of ‘pol’ were soaring
beyond coconut trees along with prices of almost every other item.Next month Provincial Council polls in the North Central and Sabaragamuwa
provinces will cost hundreds of millions of rupees at a time when millions of people are struggling to find their daily bread. Going beyond what that
infamous French queen baked herself in, the policy here appears to be to stuff ballot papers not only into ballot boxes but into the hungry bellies of
people.
An email doing the international rounds speaks of how many million loaves of bread could be produced and how many millions could be fed on the
money spent in hosting the SAARC summit here while the country is reportedly plunged into an economic breakdown.
Sadly and tragically, the people do not appear to be having a credible alternative. The main opposition UNP is plagued and paralyzed with division
within division.
A committee appointed to probe a growing demand for a change in leadership was due to meet yesterday with front liners like Johnston Fernando
and Lakshman Seneviratne joining the group of those seeking the removal of Ranil Wickremesinghe from the leadership.
They want Mr. Wickremesinghe to play a role similar to what Sonia Ghandhi is playing in the congress party with party chairman Rukman Senanayake
being proposed as UNP leader.
The only plus point for the UNP appears to be the appointment of former Army Commander Janaka Perera as Chief Ministerial candidate for the
North Central Province besides being the party’s defence spokesman.The JVP also, though being in a striking and fiery mood against the government,
has been hit by further splits with the Anjaan Umma drama creating more problems to the party and dissident leader Wimal Weerawansa claiming he
will reveal shocking secrets about party leaders in a book to be launched tomorrow.
Overall it appears that a neo colonial divide and rule policy of splitting parties and creating divisions within divisions is backfiring on its creators just as
it did on an empire which boasted that the sun would never set on it but now finds itself largely as a lap dog of one of the most unpopular leaders of
the United States.
Yours sincerely,
Koththa-malli
Time for Tamil Nadu to Act
[TamilNet, Tuesday, 24 June 2008, 20:04 GMT]The negative approaches of the International Community towards the Tamil cause in Sri Lanka and towards the Tamil diaspora are allegedly more due
to the Indian attitude than due to pressure from the Colombo government. How to expect the IC to back the masses facing genocide, when their
brethren in India are not voicing for them? Voicing is not merely holding rallies and making speeches. They will not be counted in an international
forum. What about the Tamil Nadu Assembly passing a resolution, upholding the right to self determination of the Eezham Tamils, and announcing a
policy of supporting it, confining to the purview of the Indian constitution and laws, opines columnist Chivanadi.
Opiniion Columnist ChivanadiA group of Indian officials and intelligence big wigs, described as a high power delegation, has recently visited Sri Lanka. Many government and
opposition politicians in Sri Lanka thought it necessary to visit them with their submissions. Given the circumstances the media gave much importance
to the delegation which otherwise should have gone unnoticed.
What is the exact role being played by these gentlemen of the delegation in Sri Lankan and Tamil affairs, what was the real purpose of their visit and
what actually transpired in the talks may not be known to us for the time being. But, that is not important.
What has to be borne in mind not only by the Tamils of Sri Lanka, India and the diaspora, but also by the Sinhalese is the repeated demonstration of
the present Indian establishment of its inability or unwillingness to go beyond shadowy bureaucratic levels in dealing with the Sri Lankan crisis.
Perhaps the Indian establishment can’t help it, as its coalition structure and the nature of the ruling Congress Party do not permit the emergence of
statesmen or visionary politicians to deal with the Indian outlook in a manner prestigious and magnificent to the size and gravity of India.
It now seems that as long as the Congress Party is in power in India, ideological or political approaches towards the struggle of Eezham Tamils and
towards the plight of the island of Sri Lanka may not be expected. The BJP may be much better in this regard as there are parallel politicians and
enough room for the role of politics in it.
The nature and structure of the Congress establishment is such that the political part of the government has become a dummy, especially when it
comes to the question of Eezham Tamils.
Bureaucrats have been chosen and are assigned with a specific agenda, close to the heart of the establishment, in the pursuit of which they are not
accountable to the people of India and need not be answerable even to the parliament. In a way it is a shadow military operation and a military option
aiming at dismembering the Tamil National question as well as controlling the entire island.
Occasional sympathetic gestures and lip services about safeguarding Tamil rights in Sri Lanka coming from Indian politicians are not with any political
farsightedness or with a principled programme, but are aimed at electoral politics inside India.
Unfortunately, the Tamil Nadu situation is not any better. Elections being around the corner, the formula of DMK - Congress alliance, united by
mutual dynastic considerations on one hand, and the need for BJP to ally with Ms. Jayalalitha on the other hand, as the profiles stand now, may not
bring in any break through in the Indian approach towards the suffering Tamils of Sri Lanka.
As had been pointed out in the earlier columns, if the Tamil Nadu political parties have any sympathy for their brethren in Sri Lanka, they have to use
the next elections to get a mandate from the people of Tamil Nadu, demonstrating the political will that what foreign policy should be pursued by the
Indian government regarding the Tamil question in Sri Lanka.
Neither the issues between the LTTE and the Indian establishment nor the formulas of political alliances should be a hindrance in Tamil Nadu political
parties recognizing the Tamil National question in Sri Lanka.
The Tamil National question in Sri Lanka is a wider ideological issue of a people facing genocide and it involves the prestige of 70 million Tamils living
all around the world.
The negligence and negative approaches shown by the International Community towards the Tamil cause in Sri Lanka and towards the Tamil diaspora
are allegedly more due to the Indian attitude than due to pressure from the Colombo government. How to expect the IC to back the rights of the
masses facing genocide in Sri Lanka, when their brethren in India are not voicing for them?
Voicing is not merely holding rallies and making speeches. They will not be counted in an international forum.
The Eezham struggle has now come to the stage of dealing with the International System. As a government, Colombo is in a better position to tilt the
balance in its favour. The Tamils, even though a global community, don’t have a government of them to handle the situation. The Tamil Nadu state is
the only legitimate body.
Of all the states in India, Tamil Nadu has a unique status having a global diaspora. It has special perspectives and responsibilities in this regard.
What about the Tamil Nadu Assembly passing a resolution, upholding the right to self determination of the Eezham Tamils, and announcing a policy of
supporting it, confining to the purview of the Indian constitution and laws.
Like the Vaddukkoaddai declaration of 1976, overwhelmingly mandated by the Eezham Tamils for their self-determination, such a declaration from
the Tamil Nadu assembly will provide legitimacy to Tamil National question in any international forum and is of immense help to safeguard Tamil rights
in any negotiations.
There seem to be a hesitation in high profiled politicians in Tamil Nadu to openly proclaim the nationhood of the Eezham Tamils, either to please the
Delhi establishment or due to fear of being identified as serving the LTTE agenda. There are also some who harp on the Indian modeled federal
structure.
The Indian model will not work in Sri Lanka. Right from the beginnings of British supremacy, India had a federal structure such as Presidencies and
then as Provinces. Each part of British India had parallel developments in capital accumulation and in the formation of political, social and cultural
institutions. As a result, there are always social formations, having enough capital and vested with interests in their respective states in India. The
multiplicity of the social formations is a healthy balance in the Indian model.
The British rule and the post-colonial developments in Sri Lanka were such that capital accumulation, whatever small, was only Colombo-centric. The
regional economy, autonomy and capital accumulation enjoyed until the Dutch times by Tamil regions in Sri Lanka were lost under the British. For
instance, the last occasion Jaffna saw an inward population movement was under the Dutch. It attracted large number of people from today’s Kerala
and Tamil Nadu to settle in Jaffna due to its economy. From the times of the British, there was only an outward population movement, because there
was no regional development there. The post independent phase has worsened the situation.
With such a background, any Indian modeled federal structure will still make the states depending heavily on the centre, which in the context of the
unbalanced social formations in Sri Lanka, will not work.
This has already been witnessed by the failure of the provincial administrations created by the Indo- Sri Lanka Accord of 1987. At that time it was
only the Tamils who asked for a homeland. But the accord created 8 units, Tamils getting one and the remaining 7 for Sinhala provinces that never
asked for it. More than twenty years of experience show how the model could not make any headway, even in the Sinhala provinces.
The reality is that Sri Lanka today is deeply divided beyond reconciliation. Even anyone who harbour a desire to see a united Sri Lanka has to now
think of first separating the warring parties than allowing the oppressors to achieve the 'unity' through genocide.
Engineering and abetting a genocidal war in Sri Lanka has to be stopped immediately.
Secession of the sufferers who are graduated as a nation is a time-tested international remedy.
Those who cast doubts on the viability of Eezham often talk of the practicality and mechanism of secession. They cite the case of the Muslims and
Tamils living in the Sinhala areas.
A principled secession based on the right to self-determination is only a first step. Proper political thought, agenda and development in both sides of
the island can sort out many practical problems and eventually may bring in reconciliation. The desired unity may come sooner than one expects. The
case of Malaysia and Singapore and the successful model of ASEAN need to be cited here.
The security of India on its southern front rests on the prosperity and goodwill of the people across the Palk Strait.
to the Indian attitude than due to pressure from the Colombo government. How to expect the IC to back the masses facing genocide, when their
brethren in India are not voicing for them? Voicing is not merely holding rallies and making speeches. They will not be counted in an international
forum. What about the Tamil Nadu Assembly passing a resolution, upholding the right to self determination of the Eezham Tamils, and announcing a
policy of supporting it, confining to the purview of the Indian constitution and laws, opines columnist Chivanadi.
Opiniion Columnist ChivanadiA group of Indian officials and intelligence big wigs, described as a high power delegation, has recently visited Sri Lanka. Many government and
opposition politicians in Sri Lanka thought it necessary to visit them with their submissions. Given the circumstances the media gave much importance
to the delegation which otherwise should have gone unnoticed.
What is the exact role being played by these gentlemen of the delegation in Sri Lankan and Tamil affairs, what was the real purpose of their visit and
what actually transpired in the talks may not be known to us for the time being. But, that is not important.
What has to be borne in mind not only by the Tamils of Sri Lanka, India and the diaspora, but also by the Sinhalese is the repeated demonstration of
the present Indian establishment of its inability or unwillingness to go beyond shadowy bureaucratic levels in dealing with the Sri Lankan crisis.
Perhaps the Indian establishment can’t help it, as its coalition structure and the nature of the ruling Congress Party do not permit the emergence of
statesmen or visionary politicians to deal with the Indian outlook in a manner prestigious and magnificent to the size and gravity of India.
It now seems that as long as the Congress Party is in power in India, ideological or political approaches towards the struggle of Eezham Tamils and
towards the plight of the island of Sri Lanka may not be expected. The BJP may be much better in this regard as there are parallel politicians and
enough room for the role of politics in it.
The nature and structure of the Congress establishment is such that the political part of the government has become a dummy, especially when it
comes to the question of Eezham Tamils.
Bureaucrats have been chosen and are assigned with a specific agenda, close to the heart of the establishment, in the pursuit of which they are not
accountable to the people of India and need not be answerable even to the parliament. In a way it is a shadow military operation and a military option
aiming at dismembering the Tamil National question as well as controlling the entire island.
Occasional sympathetic gestures and lip services about safeguarding Tamil rights in Sri Lanka coming from Indian politicians are not with any political
farsightedness or with a principled programme, but are aimed at electoral politics inside India.
Unfortunately, the Tamil Nadu situation is not any better. Elections being around the corner, the formula of DMK - Congress alliance, united by
mutual dynastic considerations on one hand, and the need for BJP to ally with Ms. Jayalalitha on the other hand, as the profiles stand now, may not
bring in any break through in the Indian approach towards the suffering Tamils of Sri Lanka.
As had been pointed out in the earlier columns, if the Tamil Nadu political parties have any sympathy for their brethren in Sri Lanka, they have to use
the next elections to get a mandate from the people of Tamil Nadu, demonstrating the political will that what foreign policy should be pursued by the
Indian government regarding the Tamil question in Sri Lanka.
Neither the issues between the LTTE and the Indian establishment nor the formulas of political alliances should be a hindrance in Tamil Nadu political
parties recognizing the Tamil National question in Sri Lanka.
The Tamil National question in Sri Lanka is a wider ideological issue of a people facing genocide and it involves the prestige of 70 million Tamils living
all around the world.
The negligence and negative approaches shown by the International Community towards the Tamil cause in Sri Lanka and towards the Tamil diaspora
are allegedly more due to the Indian attitude than due to pressure from the Colombo government. How to expect the IC to back the rights of the
masses facing genocide in Sri Lanka, when their brethren in India are not voicing for them?
Voicing is not merely holding rallies and making speeches. They will not be counted in an international forum.
The Eezham struggle has now come to the stage of dealing with the International System. As a government, Colombo is in a better position to tilt the
balance in its favour. The Tamils, even though a global community, don’t have a government of them to handle the situation. The Tamil Nadu state is
the only legitimate body.
Of all the states in India, Tamil Nadu has a unique status having a global diaspora. It has special perspectives and responsibilities in this regard.
What about the Tamil Nadu Assembly passing a resolution, upholding the right to self determination of the Eezham Tamils, and announcing a policy of
supporting it, confining to the purview of the Indian constitution and laws.
Like the Vaddukkoaddai declaration of 1976, overwhelmingly mandated by the Eezham Tamils for their self-determination, such a declaration from
the Tamil Nadu assembly will provide legitimacy to Tamil National question in any international forum and is of immense help to safeguard Tamil rights
in any negotiations.
There seem to be a hesitation in high profiled politicians in Tamil Nadu to openly proclaim the nationhood of the Eezham Tamils, either to please the
Delhi establishment or due to fear of being identified as serving the LTTE agenda. There are also some who harp on the Indian modeled federal
structure.
The Indian model will not work in Sri Lanka. Right from the beginnings of British supremacy, India had a federal structure such as Presidencies and
then as Provinces. Each part of British India had parallel developments in capital accumulation and in the formation of political, social and cultural
institutions. As a result, there are always social formations, having enough capital and vested with interests in their respective states in India. The
multiplicity of the social formations is a healthy balance in the Indian model.
The British rule and the post-colonial developments in Sri Lanka were such that capital accumulation, whatever small, was only Colombo-centric. The
regional economy, autonomy and capital accumulation enjoyed until the Dutch times by Tamil regions in Sri Lanka were lost under the British. For
instance, the last occasion Jaffna saw an inward population movement was under the Dutch. It attracted large number of people from today’s Kerala
and Tamil Nadu to settle in Jaffna due to its economy. From the times of the British, there was only an outward population movement, because there
was no regional development there. The post independent phase has worsened the situation.
With such a background, any Indian modeled federal structure will still make the states depending heavily on the centre, which in the context of the
unbalanced social formations in Sri Lanka, will not work.
This has already been witnessed by the failure of the provincial administrations created by the Indo- Sri Lanka Accord of 1987. At that time it was
only the Tamils who asked for a homeland. But the accord created 8 units, Tamils getting one and the remaining 7 for Sinhala provinces that never
asked for it. More than twenty years of experience show how the model could not make any headway, even in the Sinhala provinces.
The reality is that Sri Lanka today is deeply divided beyond reconciliation. Even anyone who harbour a desire to see a united Sri Lanka has to now
think of first separating the warring parties than allowing the oppressors to achieve the 'unity' through genocide.
Engineering and abetting a genocidal war in Sri Lanka has to be stopped immediately.
Secession of the sufferers who are graduated as a nation is a time-tested international remedy.
Those who cast doubts on the viability of Eezham often talk of the practicality and mechanism of secession. They cite the case of the Muslims and
Tamils living in the Sinhala areas.
A principled secession based on the right to self-determination is only a first step. Proper political thought, agenda and development in both sides of
the island can sort out many practical problems and eventually may bring in reconciliation. The desired unity may come sooner than one expects. The
case of Malaysia and Singapore and the successful model of ASEAN need to be cited here.
The security of India on its southern front rests on the prosperity and goodwill of the people across the Palk Strait.
India seeks refuge in Sri Lanka
6/23/2008 2:51:36 PM
Threatened by the expanding influence of China in its backyard, India has sought to bolster the sale of miltary hardware to Sri Lanka Threatened by the expanding influence of China in its backyard, India has sought to bolster the sale of miltary hardware to Sri Lanka. India is
apparently concerned with the growing reliance of Sri Lanka on Pakistan and China for its military requirements.
Several aspects of China's military development have surprised US analysts, including the pace and scope of its strategic forces modernization.
China's military expansion is already such as to alter regional military balances.
Long-term trends in China's strategic nuclear forces modernization, land- and sea-based access denial capabilities, and emerging precision-strike
weapons have the potential to pose credible threats to modern militaries operating in the region.
China is also modernizing its long-range ballistic missile force by replacing older missiles with newer, more survivable ones. China is deploying a new
road-mobile solid-propellant intercontinental range ballistic missile (ICBM), the DF-31, and an extended-range version called the DF-31A.
"Industrial espionage in foreign research and production facilities and illegal transfers of technology are used to gain desired capabilities. Where
technology targets remain difficult to acquire, foreign investors are attracted to China via contracts that are often written to ensure Chinese oversight,
with the eventual goal of displacing foreigners from the companies brought into China," noted the Indian Defense department.
Indiatimes
apparently concerned with the growing reliance of Sri Lanka on Pakistan and China for its military requirements.
Several aspects of China's military development have surprised US analysts, including the pace and scope of its strategic forces modernization.
China's military expansion is already such as to alter regional military balances.
Long-term trends in China's strategic nuclear forces modernization, land- and sea-based access denial capabilities, and emerging precision-strike
weapons have the potential to pose credible threats to modern militaries operating in the region.
China is also modernizing its long-range ballistic missile force by replacing older missiles with newer, more survivable ones. China is deploying a new
road-mobile solid-propellant intercontinental range ballistic missile (ICBM), the DF-31, and an extended-range version called the DF-31A.
"Industrial espionage in foreign research and production facilities and illegal transfers of technology are used to gain desired capabilities. Where
technology targets remain difficult to acquire, foreign investors are attracted to China via contracts that are often written to ensure Chinese oversight,
with the eventual goal of displacing foreigners from the companies brought into China," noted the Indian Defense department.
Indiatimes
Sri Lankan opposition wants details of Indian delegation's visit
Indo Asian News ServiceMon, Jun 23 01:02 PM
Colombo, June 23 (IANS) Sri Lanka's opposition parties have urged the ruling coalition to disclose the reasons behind the 'sudden visit' to Colombo
by a high-powered Indian delegation led by National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan, a media report said Monday.
The demand from the opposition parties has come as both the Indian and Sri Lankan governments remain tight-lipped on the visit, while implying that
the officials came here for a routine consultative meeting ahead of the upcoming South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (Saarc) summit in
Colombo.
John Amaratunga, a leader of the main opposition United National Party (UNP), claimed there was a 'crucial aspect' to the two-day previously
unannounced visit, pointing out that it had came at a time when the country was 'at crossroads in economic and war fronts', the Daily Mirror reported.
'Today, India is concerned about what is happening in Sri Lanka. The ongoing military campaign will have serious implications (for) Tamil Nadu (and)
the Indian government. So we are eager to know the true position of the visit,' said Amaratunga.
The Indian delegation, which included foreign secretary Shivshankar Menon and defence secretary Vijay Singh, arrived here Friday. The team called
on President Mahinda Rajapaksa Saturday and met other officials, including defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa and the army and navy
commanders, separately.
Before returning to New Delhi Saturday evening, the delegation also held talks with R. Sampanthan, the parliamentary group leader of the Tamil
National Alliance (TNA), which supports the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
The team also met Minister of Social Services Douglas Devananda, who is the leader of the anti-LTTE Eelam People's Democratic Party (EPDP).
The Indians, however, did not meet UNP leader and former prime minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, who is reportedly facing an internal party crisis.
Meanwhile, the radical Marxist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) has claimed that the visit by the Indian delegation was 'similar to what happened
during the Vadamaradchchi operation in 1987' and demanded the government divulge the details of all discussions held.
JVP's parliamentary group leader Anurakumara Dissanayake said India intervened to halt the Vadamaradchchi military operation against the LTTE in
1987 and later forced a peace accord on the Sri Lankan government.
'It is the responsibility of the government to disclose the details of the visit as conflicting reports have appeared in the media,' said Dissanayake.
======================================================
Deepening Political Crisis in Sri Lanka by R. Swaminathan
Colombo, June 23 (IANS) Sri Lanka's opposition parties have urged the ruling coalition to disclose the reasons behind the 'sudden visit' to Colombo
by a high-powered Indian delegation led by National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan, a media report said Monday.
The demand from the opposition parties has come as both the Indian and Sri Lankan governments remain tight-lipped on the visit, while implying that
the officials came here for a routine consultative meeting ahead of the upcoming South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (Saarc) summit in
Colombo.
John Amaratunga, a leader of the main opposition United National Party (UNP), claimed there was a 'crucial aspect' to the two-day previously
unannounced visit, pointing out that it had came at a time when the country was 'at crossroads in economic and war fronts', the Daily Mirror reported.
'Today, India is concerned about what is happening in Sri Lanka. The ongoing military campaign will have serious implications (for) Tamil Nadu (and)
the Indian government. So we are eager to know the true position of the visit,' said Amaratunga.
The Indian delegation, which included foreign secretary Shivshankar Menon and defence secretary Vijay Singh, arrived here Friday. The team called
on President Mahinda Rajapaksa Saturday and met other officials, including defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa and the army and navy
commanders, separately.
Before returning to New Delhi Saturday evening, the delegation also held talks with R. Sampanthan, the parliamentary group leader of the Tamil
National Alliance (TNA), which supports the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
The team also met Minister of Social Services Douglas Devananda, who is the leader of the anti-LTTE Eelam People's Democratic Party (EPDP).
The Indians, however, did not meet UNP leader and former prime minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, who is reportedly facing an internal party crisis.
Meanwhile, the radical Marxist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) has claimed that the visit by the Indian delegation was 'similar to what happened
during the Vadamaradchchi operation in 1987' and demanded the government divulge the details of all discussions held.
JVP's parliamentary group leader Anurakumara Dissanayake said India intervened to halt the Vadamaradchchi military operation against the LTTE in
1987 and later forced a peace accord on the Sri Lankan government.
'It is the responsibility of the government to disclose the details of the visit as conflicting reports have appeared in the media,' said Dissanayake.
======================================================
Deepening Political Crisis in Sri Lanka by R. Swaminathan
(Courtesy: The Indian Centre for South Asian Studies, Chennai)
The theme of this seminar, "Deepening Political Crisis in Sri Lanka", may be an under-statement. The current situation in Sri Lanka is in reality more
than just a political crisis. It is a military crisis (that has already caused nearly 70,000 deaths), a crisis of governance (with fairness and equity), a crisis
of confidence between the different ethnic groups – all of which threaten the very existence a united and integrated Sri Lanka. What started as
apparent linguistic chauvinism (and the reaction to it) has taken on most of the aspects of an ethnic civil war.
The India Factor
India, with its growing influence in international affairs, should reasonably be expected to make her overall national interest the primary and supreme
consideration in formulating foreign and security policies. Domestic politics and partisan interests would continue to provide major inputs during the
stage of consultations, but are unlikely to become reasons for casting doubts on the credibility of the evolved national foreign policy. It is not difficult to
perceive that India’s long-term strategic and regional interests require a special relationship with Sri Lanka, going well beyond the immediate Tamil
ethnic issue – considering the increasing interest of USA, China, Pakistan and Iran in Sri Lanka.
The regional political parties in Tamil Nadu often find it difficult to adopt moderate positions on Sri Lanka related issues, lest they surrender ground to
the more radical amongst them. Even considering their present disproportionate influence in decision-making by the Central Government, I do not
think that the mainstream politicians in Tamil Nadu would attempt to make the Central Government agree to intervene physically in the crisis in Sri
Lanka; or that they would succeed if they made the attempt.
India and Sri Lanka are physically separated by a narrow strip of sea, but the peoples of the two countries are bound together by bonds of
geographic proximity, historical ties, religious and cultural affinities and similarities etc. State level relations tend to fluctuate from time to time,
influenced by domestic political compulsions, international situation, economic needs etc. Stable state level relations are possible only when they
closely reflect the reality of people-to-people ties.
A major irritant in Indo-Sri Lankan relations relates to Kachchativu. The issue is really less about ownership and sovereignty over a small island than
about fishing rights around it. Despite the Maritime Boundary Agreements, Indian fishermen have continued to fish in areas (including those in Sri
Lankan territorial waters) where they have traditionally been carrying on their vocation. It is unfortunate that all the concerned entities seem to find it
convenient to let the situation simmer and be available (whenever required) as a stick to beat the other entities with. The issue needs to be defused
with a sense of urgency. The fishing communities on both sides of Palk Bay had jointly exploited (with hardly any outside intervention) the local marine
resources for centuries. An effort needs to be made to restore to those communities the right and responsibility to work out friendly, cooperative and
sustainable fishing in these waters that are the common heritage of India and Sri Lanka.
India cannot easily shrug off her moral responsibility to support the aspiration of the Tamils to be "equal" citizens of Sri Lanka. However, India has
consistently been opposed to the carving out of a separate sovereign state of Tamil Eelam. Such an entity is unlikely to function as a classical "buffer
state", but is more likely to have the potential of becoming a focus for pan-Tamil parochialism and nationalism. That this is not a hypothetical fear is
shown by a recent appeal by LTTE political wing leader B Nadesan, made directly to the people of Tamil Nadu, "to rise in solidarity with our cause".
He said that the "Tamils in Tamil Nadu should not remain silent spectators as we suffer. … Eelam Tamils could record Himalayan victories if they had
an upsurge in Tamil Nadu in their support, as well as the backing of the estimated 80 million Tamils living in the world." If LTTE could make such an
open call for the Tamils of Tamil Nadu to revolt against the Indian State and the elected governments in Tamil Nadu and at the Centre, when it is still
on the defensive and is in need of support, what could one expect from it if and when it becomes the power-holder in the sovereign state of Tamil
Eelam?
A week later (on 16 June 2008), in what could be termed a damage-control exercise, KV Balakumaran assured the Australian Tamil Broadcasting
Corporation that the demand for Tamil Eelam is not against India’s interest. LTTE sought only ‘credible alternate proposals’ to resolve the 25-year-
old ethnic conflict. "We believe firmly, our strong cultural ties to our brothers and sisters in India will help their policy makers to select a just and fair
path towards our people. …. We will uphold Indian welfare as our own. There was a time when India looked after our welfare as her own. India will
change its current policy towards us one day." He added, "We cannot wait for India’s change of mind to continue with our liberation. One fact should
be clear; no one should doubt our friendship, and strong ties to India."
LTTE
LTTE was one of the many parallel Tamil movements that came up in protest against SLG’s decisions that were seen as being discriminatory against
the Tamils. Over a period of time, mainly through the free use of the weapons of violence and assassination, LTTE has eliminated or marginalized most
other Tamil movements. LTTE has arguably been the most effective champion of the Tamil cause, but its other face of a dreaded terrorist organization
does not elicit the same extent of willing support from the Tamils. However, the reality of LTTE cannot be ignored when attempting any solution to the
ethnic problem in Sri Lanka, though it may still be very difficult for India officially to deal with an LTTE led by those involved in the assassination of
Rajiv Gandhi.
LTTE’s alternating tirades against and appeals to the international community to rethink their approach of supporting the SLG, as well as the repeated
appeals for support from Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora, seem to display elements of frustration and desperation at the present situation. I feel that the
stage has come when LTTE should undertake a serious exercise of introspection, taking into account all the realities, and decide whether or not to
pursue the goal of an independent Eelam, through violent means.
Way Forward
When Mahinda Rajapakse won the Presidential election in November 2005, with the support of Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and Jathika Hela
Urumaya (JHU), it could be anticipated that his government would move away from Chandrika’s federal formula and towards an attempted military
solution. Historical evidence shows that ethnic or ideological insurrections or revolutionary movements suffer from their own versions of revolutionary
(battle) fatigue. Some time after the CFA stabilized to a certain extent, LTTE showed signs of having reached that critical stage. Though the LTTE
was initially nudged back to the negotiating table at Geneva, the repeated provocative attacks by the Tigers on the security forces and the retaliatory
attacks by SLG on Tamil areas led to a situation where the Cease-Fire Agreement (CFA) died and was formally revoked. The intensified military
offensives by SLG have probably done more to re-motivate and re-invigorate the fighting cadres of LTTE than any exhortation by Pirabhakaran could
have achieved. Though LTTE has repeatedly shown great resilience and capacity to rebound, it seems that its best days are behind it.
It would appear that the capabilities of the Sea Tigers have been severely crippled, at least for the present. Though advances on the ground have been
claimed, aerial bombardment of one’s own territory (not under foreign occupation), with resultant casualties amongst innocent civilians, does not show
SLG as being in total control of the situation. Some of the counter-attacks (particularly the recent claymore mine attacks on soft targets) by LTTE
have highlighted the weaknesses of the government. It seems that the military offensives cannot be carried to their logical conclusion. I doubt the ability
of the Sri Lankan Security Forces totally to eradicate the presence or influence of militant LTTE cadres from the areas presently controlled by them,
much less from all of Sri Lanka. There will always be bitter remnants, which will continue to destabilize society.
The continued military offensive by SLG ignores the lessons of history. Any movement by an ethnic minority, essentially based on legitimate grievances
of discrimination and perceived suppression, cannot be eradicated totally by military means alone. Military measures should be accompanied by
sincere and sympathetic efforts to address the legitimate grievances and to minimize any discrimination by the state. Ideally, the solution should be
totally indigenous and arrived at by consensus. Less ideally, it can be achieved with the help of mediators or intermediaries from outside. It should be
realized that any solution imposed only by military force or majoritarian fiat would neither be effective nor durable.
On its part, the LTTE has clearly demonstrated that it is not prepared to work within the existing (or a slightly modified) system. Along with the LTTE,
the legitimate and democratically elected SLG has done little to help in resolving the "Tamil problem". If anything, the Mahinda government has been
equally responsible for escalating an intractable problem into one that is becoming near-impossible to solve. One suspects that there is an absence of
any serious desire for a settlement.
It has been reported that the JVP is planning to mount a legal challenge (in the Supreme Court) to the dissolution of the North-Central and
Sabaragamuva Provincial Councils. It seems to me that this would be an indirect challenge to ‘unitary’ Constitution that empowers the President to
dissolve the Parliament and Provincial Assemblies.
It is unrealistic to expect any miracle cure to the deepening crisis. The existing crisis of confidence needs to be overcome and the first essential step
would be to take measures to convince the majority of the Tamils that their legitimate grievances and aspirations would be attended to, without their
having to resort to coercive actions. As a comprehensive agreement with the different Tamil protagonists seems unattainable, President Rajapakse and
his party should display the courage and vision to take the initial steps unilaterally and hope that the rest of the Sinhala leaders and the Tamils would
respond favorably to those gestures of reconciliation. Terminology like "unitary", "federal", "self-determination" etc. could be jettisoned as excess
baggage and pragmatic efforts made – placing the overall interests of an integrated Sri Lankan State above those of individuals, parties etc. Any such
package should give legal sanctity to Sri Lanka being a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-lingual country. It should address all major grievances of
all ethnic minorities and meet their minimum legitimate aspirations – particularly relating to equality of all citizens (under the law and in reality); inclusive
economic development; and constitutionally sanctioned, significant participation in their own governance.
Such an action would strengthen and embolden the presently silent moderates amongst the Tamils. It may be noted in this context that V.
Anandasangaree, President of TULF, issued a press release on 8 June 2008, inter alia reiterating that the SLG should come out with a reasonable
proposal acceptable to the International Community, not out of fear of the LTTE , but to enable the International Community to step in and to tell the
LTTE to stop all their brutal killings of innocent civilians. He described the present situation as one in which a group that claims to be waging a war
against the Government for the liberation of the Tamils is fighting against another group of ultra-nationalists claiming to be great patriots trying to save
the country from the former. Neither group realizes that a patriot is not one who merely loves his country but also its people as well. The ultra-
nationalists should appreciate that the [moderate] Tamil Leadership openly opposes separation, defying the LTTE at grave risk to their lives. They
have declared that they will be satisfied with a reasonable and an acceptable solution within a United Sri Lanka. Whatever be the solution that is
arrived at should be the last and final one that will strongly unite all sections of the people of Sri Lanka to a common identity as Sri Lankans, to live in
peace and amity, enjoying all rights equally with others. Could such views be supported by the Sinhala leadership of different hues and could they
summon the necessary sagacity, maturity, tolerance and pragmatism to do so? Let us hope so.
(This note was prepared by R. Swaminathan, IPS (Retd), Former Special Secretary, DG (Security), Govt. of India and now Vice-President of the
Chennai Centre of China Studies, Chennai, India, to form the basis of his valedictory address on 19 June 2008 at a two-day, bi-national seminar on
"Deepening Political Crisis in Sri Lanka", organized by the Indian Centre for South Asian Studies, Chennai.)
than just a political crisis. It is a military crisis (that has already caused nearly 70,000 deaths), a crisis of governance (with fairness and equity), a crisis
of confidence between the different ethnic groups – all of which threaten the very existence a united and integrated Sri Lanka. What started as
apparent linguistic chauvinism (and the reaction to it) has taken on most of the aspects of an ethnic civil war.
The India Factor
India, with its growing influence in international affairs, should reasonably be expected to make her overall national interest the primary and supreme
consideration in formulating foreign and security policies. Domestic politics and partisan interests would continue to provide major inputs during the
stage of consultations, but are unlikely to become reasons for casting doubts on the credibility of the evolved national foreign policy. It is not difficult to
perceive that India’s long-term strategic and regional interests require a special relationship with Sri Lanka, going well beyond the immediate Tamil
ethnic issue – considering the increasing interest of USA, China, Pakistan and Iran in Sri Lanka.
The regional political parties in Tamil Nadu often find it difficult to adopt moderate positions on Sri Lanka related issues, lest they surrender ground to
the more radical amongst them. Even considering their present disproportionate influence in decision-making by the Central Government, I do not
think that the mainstream politicians in Tamil Nadu would attempt to make the Central Government agree to intervene physically in the crisis in Sri
Lanka; or that they would succeed if they made the attempt.
India and Sri Lanka are physically separated by a narrow strip of sea, but the peoples of the two countries are bound together by bonds of
geographic proximity, historical ties, religious and cultural affinities and similarities etc. State level relations tend to fluctuate from time to time,
influenced by domestic political compulsions, international situation, economic needs etc. Stable state level relations are possible only when they
closely reflect the reality of people-to-people ties.
A major irritant in Indo-Sri Lankan relations relates to Kachchativu. The issue is really less about ownership and sovereignty over a small island than
about fishing rights around it. Despite the Maritime Boundary Agreements, Indian fishermen have continued to fish in areas (including those in Sri
Lankan territorial waters) where they have traditionally been carrying on their vocation. It is unfortunate that all the concerned entities seem to find it
convenient to let the situation simmer and be available (whenever required) as a stick to beat the other entities with. The issue needs to be defused
with a sense of urgency. The fishing communities on both sides of Palk Bay had jointly exploited (with hardly any outside intervention) the local marine
resources for centuries. An effort needs to be made to restore to those communities the right and responsibility to work out friendly, cooperative and
sustainable fishing in these waters that are the common heritage of India and Sri Lanka.
India cannot easily shrug off her moral responsibility to support the aspiration of the Tamils to be "equal" citizens of Sri Lanka. However, India has
consistently been opposed to the carving out of a separate sovereign state of Tamil Eelam. Such an entity is unlikely to function as a classical "buffer
state", but is more likely to have the potential of becoming a focus for pan-Tamil parochialism and nationalism. That this is not a hypothetical fear is
shown by a recent appeal by LTTE political wing leader B Nadesan, made directly to the people of Tamil Nadu, "to rise in solidarity with our cause".
He said that the "Tamils in Tamil Nadu should not remain silent spectators as we suffer. … Eelam Tamils could record Himalayan victories if they had
an upsurge in Tamil Nadu in their support, as well as the backing of the estimated 80 million Tamils living in the world." If LTTE could make such an
open call for the Tamils of Tamil Nadu to revolt against the Indian State and the elected governments in Tamil Nadu and at the Centre, when it is still
on the defensive and is in need of support, what could one expect from it if and when it becomes the power-holder in the sovereign state of Tamil
Eelam?
A week later (on 16 June 2008), in what could be termed a damage-control exercise, KV Balakumaran assured the Australian Tamil Broadcasting
Corporation that the demand for Tamil Eelam is not against India’s interest. LTTE sought only ‘credible alternate proposals’ to resolve the 25-year-
old ethnic conflict. "We believe firmly, our strong cultural ties to our brothers and sisters in India will help their policy makers to select a just and fair
path towards our people. …. We will uphold Indian welfare as our own. There was a time when India looked after our welfare as her own. India will
change its current policy towards us one day." He added, "We cannot wait for India’s change of mind to continue with our liberation. One fact should
be clear; no one should doubt our friendship, and strong ties to India."
LTTE
LTTE was one of the many parallel Tamil movements that came up in protest against SLG’s decisions that were seen as being discriminatory against
the Tamils. Over a period of time, mainly through the free use of the weapons of violence and assassination, LTTE has eliminated or marginalized most
other Tamil movements. LTTE has arguably been the most effective champion of the Tamil cause, but its other face of a dreaded terrorist organization
does not elicit the same extent of willing support from the Tamils. However, the reality of LTTE cannot be ignored when attempting any solution to the
ethnic problem in Sri Lanka, though it may still be very difficult for India officially to deal with an LTTE led by those involved in the assassination of
Rajiv Gandhi.
LTTE’s alternating tirades against and appeals to the international community to rethink their approach of supporting the SLG, as well as the repeated
appeals for support from Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora, seem to display elements of frustration and desperation at the present situation. I feel that the
stage has come when LTTE should undertake a serious exercise of introspection, taking into account all the realities, and decide whether or not to
pursue the goal of an independent Eelam, through violent means.
Way Forward
When Mahinda Rajapakse won the Presidential election in November 2005, with the support of Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and Jathika Hela
Urumaya (JHU), it could be anticipated that his government would move away from Chandrika’s federal formula and towards an attempted military
solution. Historical evidence shows that ethnic or ideological insurrections or revolutionary movements suffer from their own versions of revolutionary
(battle) fatigue. Some time after the CFA stabilized to a certain extent, LTTE showed signs of having reached that critical stage. Though the LTTE
was initially nudged back to the negotiating table at Geneva, the repeated provocative attacks by the Tigers on the security forces and the retaliatory
attacks by SLG on Tamil areas led to a situation where the Cease-Fire Agreement (CFA) died and was formally revoked. The intensified military
offensives by SLG have probably done more to re-motivate and re-invigorate the fighting cadres of LTTE than any exhortation by Pirabhakaran could
have achieved. Though LTTE has repeatedly shown great resilience and capacity to rebound, it seems that its best days are behind it.
It would appear that the capabilities of the Sea Tigers have been severely crippled, at least for the present. Though advances on the ground have been
claimed, aerial bombardment of one’s own territory (not under foreign occupation), with resultant casualties amongst innocent civilians, does not show
SLG as being in total control of the situation. Some of the counter-attacks (particularly the recent claymore mine attacks on soft targets) by LTTE
have highlighted the weaknesses of the government. It seems that the military offensives cannot be carried to their logical conclusion. I doubt the ability
of the Sri Lankan Security Forces totally to eradicate the presence or influence of militant LTTE cadres from the areas presently controlled by them,
much less from all of Sri Lanka. There will always be bitter remnants, which will continue to destabilize society.
The continued military offensive by SLG ignores the lessons of history. Any movement by an ethnic minority, essentially based on legitimate grievances
of discrimination and perceived suppression, cannot be eradicated totally by military means alone. Military measures should be accompanied by
sincere and sympathetic efforts to address the legitimate grievances and to minimize any discrimination by the state. Ideally, the solution should be
totally indigenous and arrived at by consensus. Less ideally, it can be achieved with the help of mediators or intermediaries from outside. It should be
realized that any solution imposed only by military force or majoritarian fiat would neither be effective nor durable.
On its part, the LTTE has clearly demonstrated that it is not prepared to work within the existing (or a slightly modified) system. Along with the LTTE,
the legitimate and democratically elected SLG has done little to help in resolving the "Tamil problem". If anything, the Mahinda government has been
equally responsible for escalating an intractable problem into one that is becoming near-impossible to solve. One suspects that there is an absence of
any serious desire for a settlement.
It has been reported that the JVP is planning to mount a legal challenge (in the Supreme Court) to the dissolution of the North-Central and
Sabaragamuva Provincial Councils. It seems to me that this would be an indirect challenge to ‘unitary’ Constitution that empowers the President to
dissolve the Parliament and Provincial Assemblies.
It is unrealistic to expect any miracle cure to the deepening crisis. The existing crisis of confidence needs to be overcome and the first essential step
would be to take measures to convince the majority of the Tamils that their legitimate grievances and aspirations would be attended to, without their
having to resort to coercive actions. As a comprehensive agreement with the different Tamil protagonists seems unattainable, President Rajapakse and
his party should display the courage and vision to take the initial steps unilaterally and hope that the rest of the Sinhala leaders and the Tamils would
respond favorably to those gestures of reconciliation. Terminology like "unitary", "federal", "self-determination" etc. could be jettisoned as excess
baggage and pragmatic efforts made – placing the overall interests of an integrated Sri Lankan State above those of individuals, parties etc. Any such
package should give legal sanctity to Sri Lanka being a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-lingual country. It should address all major grievances of
all ethnic minorities and meet their minimum legitimate aspirations – particularly relating to equality of all citizens (under the law and in reality); inclusive
economic development; and constitutionally sanctioned, significant participation in their own governance.
Such an action would strengthen and embolden the presently silent moderates amongst the Tamils. It may be noted in this context that V.
Anandasangaree, President of TULF, issued a press release on 8 June 2008, inter alia reiterating that the SLG should come out with a reasonable
proposal acceptable to the International Community, not out of fear of the LTTE , but to enable the International Community to step in and to tell the
LTTE to stop all their brutal killings of innocent civilians. He described the present situation as one in which a group that claims to be waging a war
against the Government for the liberation of the Tamils is fighting against another group of ultra-nationalists claiming to be great patriots trying to save
the country from the former. Neither group realizes that a patriot is not one who merely loves his country but also its people as well. The ultra-
nationalists should appreciate that the [moderate] Tamil Leadership openly opposes separation, defying the LTTE at grave risk to their lives. They
have declared that they will be satisfied with a reasonable and an acceptable solution within a United Sri Lanka. Whatever be the solution that is
arrived at should be the last and final one that will strongly unite all sections of the people of Sri Lanka to a common identity as Sri Lankans, to live in
peace and amity, enjoying all rights equally with others. Could such views be supported by the Sinhala leadership of different hues and could they
summon the necessary sagacity, maturity, tolerance and pragmatism to do so? Let us hope so.
(This note was prepared by R. Swaminathan, IPS (Retd), Former Special Secretary, DG (Security), Govt. of India and now Vice-President of the
Chennai Centre of China Studies, Chennai, India, to form the basis of his valedictory address on 19 June 2008 at a two-day, bi-national seminar on
"Deepening Political Crisis in Sri Lanka", organized by the Indian Centre for South Asian Studies, Chennai.)
No comments:
Post a Comment