RSF writes to media minister over BBC pullout
The Paris based international media rights group Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF) has written to Media and Information Minister Mr. Anura Priyadarshana Yapa expressing dismay at an announcement by the BBC that it has decided to stop supplying news to the SLBC.
BBC programmes censored
Interview in Sinhala with opposition politician Mangala Samaraweera
Interview with defence correspondent Iqbal Athas
Reports about the military offensive
An interview about the murder of newspaper editor Lasantha Wickrematunga
“We are dismayed to learn that the BBC World Service felt obliged today to stop supplying news programmes in English, Sinhalese and Tamil to Sri Lankan state broadcaster SLBC for local FM retransmission because the SLBC, for which you are responsible, was constantly and illegally censoring them despite being bound by a commercial contract allowing millions of Sri Lankans to listen to the BBC’s programmes in the three languages every day,” Jean-François Julliard, Secretary-General of RSF said in the letter, according to a press statement.
The British public broadcaster has for 11 years been offering Sri Lankan listeners quality news programming that is in stark contrast to the SLBC’s often very official programme content.
As a result of the SLBC censoring parts of these programmes for the past several months, the BBC World Service issued a statement in London this week saying: “We have no choice but to suspend broadcasts until such time as SLBC can guarantee our programming is transmitted without interference.”
The BBC said it had noted 17 instances of interference to BBC Tamil and eight instances of interference to BBC Sinhala broadcasts between late November and early January. Sometimes whole segments of current affairs were not broadcast on SLBC.
RSF said some of the censored segments included an interview in Sinhala with opposition politician Mangala Samaraweera last December, a report on civilian victims in the north in early January, an interview with defence correspondent Iqbal Athas on January 2, reports about the military offensive and relations with India on January 5 and a BBC interview about the murder of newspaper editor Lasantha Wickrematunga.
RSF said that since August 2008, the SLBC had been following its retransmission of the BBC’s programmes with its own programme given an- official take on what the BBC’s journalists reported.
Sri Lankans will still be able to listen to the BBC on the short wave, on the Internet, and via a Sri Lankan commercial FM station but the suspension of retransmission by the SLBC means the number of listeners will be reduced.
“We must therefore again lament the fact that the hostility of certain government sectors to the free flow of information is depriving your country’s population of a source of independent current affairs coverage. The media and information minister has a duty to guarantee press freedom at a time when fighting is raging in the north and Tamil civilians are the victims of both a military offensive and acts of terrorism by Tamil Tiger rebels. Extremists in both camps will undoubtedly be delighted by the BBC’s decision as it gives them even more scope to incite hatred and spread the wildest rumors,” RSF said.RSF urged the Minister to give a clear undertaking that BBC World Service programmes will no longer be subjected to illegal censorship.
dailymirror.lk
Thursday, February 12, 2009
SRILANKA: THE EMERGENCE OF POLICE/ MILITARY STATE!!!
The emergence of a police state
Open threats by Sri Lankan Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapakse this week against foreign journalists and diplomats in Colombo are another chilling reminder of the abuse of basic democratic rights on the island. Under the guise of fighting a "war on terror", the regime is rapidly establishing the basis for a military/police state directed above all against the working class.
Rajapakse, the brother of Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse, was reacting to growing media coverage of the brutal war being waged by the Sri Lankan army against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Reports, images and videos of the death and destruction caused by the army�s indiscriminate shelling have leaked out through the government's tight media controls, provoking outrage and protests internationally.
As far as Rajapakse is concerned, anything that threatens the web of lies concocted to justify the communal war is tantamount to sabotage and treason. In comments over the weekend, he lashed out at foreign ambassadors, news agencies and international aid agencies for acting irresponsibly and warned of "dire consequences" if they undermined the war. "They will be chased away [if they try] to give a second wind to the LTTE terrorists at a time [when] the security forces, at heavy cost, are dealing them the final death blow," he said.
Rajapakse singled out CNN, Al-Jazeera and especially the BBC, and accused them of sensationalising the hardships confronting civilians trapped by the fighting. He repeated the government's claim that the LTTE was holding civilians against their will as human shields and demanded that the "international community" pressure the LTTE to release them. He criticised BBC journalist Chris Morris for failing to echo the government line, warning: "If he does not act responsibly and attempts to create panic, I will have to chase him out of the country."
In an interview with the BBC this week, Rajapakse categorically declared that people fell into "only two groups -the people who fight terrorism and the terrorists". Asked if he regarded dissent or criticism in time of war as treason, Rajapakse snapped back: "Yes, we are fighting to save our country." The comments underline the reactionary rationale behind the government's repeated threats and denunciations of journalists, opposition politicians, striking workers, protesting students and farmers over the past two and half years, no matter how limited their criticisms of the government.
The Sri Lankan conflict is not a war for democracy against terrorism. Its roots lie in the anti-Tamil communalism exploited by successive Colombo governments to split and divide the working class. After coming to power in early 2006, President Rajapakse rejected any compromise, flagrantly breached the prevailing 2002 ceasefire and, with the backing of the US and other major powers, restarted a ruthless war aimed at consolidating the untrammelled domination of the island�s Sinhala elites.
His brother's hysterical threats against foreign diplomats and journalists reflect broader fears in Colombo ruling circles that the military defeat of the LTTE will be followed by a wave of political unrest and social struggles. The government has mortgaged the Sri Lankan state to the hilt to finance massive military spending and imposed the full burden of the war onto the working class. Now, confronting the impact of an unprecedented global economic crisis for which it has no answers, the regime has no alternative but to use police state measures to stamp out opposition, particularly by workers.
The threats to expel foreign journalists, diplomats and aid officials are just a pale reflection of the measures employed against domestic critics and opponents. The media in particular has been targetted. Last month, the studios and offices of the MTV/Sirasa television station were ransacked and torched by a gang of armed, pro-government thugs. Two days later, Lasantha Wickrematunge, the editor of the Sunday Leader, was killed in broad daylight by a highly organised hit squad as he drove to work in Colombo. Since President Rajapakse took office> at least nine journalists have been killed and 27 assaulted. Others have been arbitrarily detained without trial. After Wickrematunge�s murder, a dozen well-known journalists and media activists fled the country.
The Tamil minority as a whole is treated by the government and security forces as the enemy. Harassment, persecution and arbitrary arrest are part of daily life. A network of police and military roadblocks and checkpoints function throughout the country. Police dragnet operations through the Tamil areas of cities and towns are common. In one particularly appalling case in mid-2007, the police and military rounded up more than 350 Tamil men, women and children living in Colombo and dumped them by bus in the war zones of the North and East. Gotabaya Rajapakse defended this blatant abuse of democratic rights on the grounds of "national security," even suggesting that it was quite benevolent because those picked up had not been jailed indefinitely without charge.
More sinister are the murky activities of death squads that have carried out hundreds of abductions, "disappearances" and murders over the past 30 months, including of prominent politicians. At the very least, these killings are carried out with the complicity of the security forces, and it is more than likely that military personnel are actively involved. In a country in which road blocks and identity checks are routine, these squads are able to freely come and go, usually in the dead of night. Only a handful of cases have resulted in an arrest.
These gross abuses are not simply isolated instances but reflect the workings of the huge military/police apparatus spawned by 25 years of civil war and the militarisation of society as a whole. Last month, plans were announced for military registration, on top of the present system of national identity cards, providing the defence apparatus with a vast data base on all citizens. Even though the LTTE has been virtually destroyed as a regular military force, the government plans to boost the size of the army-already one of the largest per capita in the world-from 150,000 to 200,000. In addition, the navy and air force each have around 30,000 personnel and the home guard another 35,000. All this is in a country with a population of around 20 million.
The most ominous signs of the emerging police state are to be found in the political physiognomy of the present government, which, even by Sri Lankan standards, is unparalleled in its contempt for democratic rights. While the political and media establishment in Colombo routinely describe the country as a "democracy," parliamentary institutions have undergone a profound degeneration. The key political decisions are not made in parliament or even in cabinet but by the military/politico cabal surrounding President Rajapakse, which is limited to his brothers, trusted aides, a handful of ministers and the country's military and police chiefs.
The very fact that Gotabaya Rajapakse, an unelected bureaucrat, is able to make his outrageous threats against diplomats and journalists, unchallenged by the media and opposition parties, testifies to the enormous power that has been concentrated in the presidential camarilla. His brother, President Rajapakse, is exploiting to the full the extraordinary executive powers contained in the country�s anti-democratic constitution. He holds the key posts of defence minister and finance minister and increasingly rules by decree. In addition, he has wide powers under the island�s anti-terrorism laws and long-standing emergency measures to detain individuals, search premises, seize property, ban strikes and impose censorship.
President Rajapakse and his coterie operate with complete contempt for the law, the constitution and the courts. He has failed to act on the constitutional amendment requiring the establishment of a constitutional council and other bodies to supervise the appointment of top officials and judges, as that would undermine the functioning of his own network of cronies. He not only ignored a Supreme Court decision in December to lower petrol prices, but issued a thinly veiled threat that the homes of the judges might be stoned. All the planks of a police state are in place. All that is missing is the pretext, which, having destroyed the military capabilities of the LTTE, is likely to come in the form of "an emergency" caused by the rapid deepening of the country's economic crisis and an eruption of working people against the imposition of new burdens.
Such is the state of affairs in Sri Lanka on February 4, 2009 as the political establishment in Colombo celebrates 61 years of independence from British colonial rule. The entire history of these decades has confirmed again and again the basic proposition of Leon Trotsky's theory of Permanent Revolution-the organic incapacity of the bourgeoisie in countries of a belated capitalist development such as Sri Lanka to meet the democratic aspirations and elementary social needs of ordinary working people. As he crows today over the government's victories in the "war on terrorism", President Rajapakse is poised to launch a new onslaught to defend the interests of the venal Sri Lankan elites-this time against the working class, Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim alike.
These very real dangers highlight the profound significance of the struggle waged by the Socialist Equality Party in Sri Lanka. Since its founding as the Revolutionary Communist League in 1968, it has opposed all forms of nationalism and communalism, including the LTTE's Tamil separatism, and fought in difficult circumstances to unite all workers against the war, the widespread abuse of democratic rights and attacks on living standards. Its program of a Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and Eelam, as part of the Union of Socialist Republics in South Asia, offers the only viable road forward for the working class in Sri Lanka and throughout the subcontinent, where ethnic and communal conflicts have created disaster after disaster for working people.
By Peter Symonds
Nitharsanam.com
Thursday, February 5, 2009
SL-SINHALA OPPOSITION LEADER WILL FIGHT AGAINST SUPPRESSION AND FREEDOM!!!
At a meeting in Kundasale
Ranil pledges to rise against suppression of human rights and freedom of speech
by Cyril Wimalasurendre
KANDY - United National Party and Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, at a 61st Independence Day meeting in Kundasale, pledged to rise against any suppression of human rights and freedom of speech.
The freedom of the press was lost during the present administration. Media institutions are attacked and media men are harassed, he said, at the meeting, at Kolongahwatte playground, yesterday.
The National Independence obtained by leaders of the calibre of D. S. Senanayake, S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike, N. M. Perera, Philip Gunawardena, G. G. Ponnambalam, Sir John Kotalawala, T. B. Jaya, S. A. Wickremasinghe, to name a few has now been robbed by the government. The sovereignty granted to the people by the Constitution is lost, he lamented.
Those leaders who pioneered independence restored democratic rights of the people. Those rights are now withdrawn, Ranil Wickremesinghe said.
He pledged that the UNP would lead the campaign if the government continue to suppress the freedom of the people.
He said, the people are anxiously waiting to enjoy the defeat of terrorism and live in a free state. But they are deprived of this privilege since the government is gradually withdrawing the freedom that they should enjoy.
We must decide whether we forego our right of franchise or lose if. We all must unitedly, rise to safeguard these rights.
The UNP, the SLMC the JVP must unitedly rise up discarding differences to safeguard the rights and the sovereignty assured by the Constitution.
SLMC leader Rauf Hakeem accused the government of violating the Constitution with the war as an excuse.
"We are ready to face any challenges against the people’s freedom," Hakeem said.
Dr. Wickremabahu Karunaratne, said that freedom of the people were hampered under the present administration.
General Secretary UNP, Tissa Attanayake, Party representatives, Siritunge Jayasuriya, Dharmasiri Lankapeli and several others were present.
Ranil Wickremesinghe paid homage to the sacred Tooth Relic earlier in the day.
www island.lk
Ranil pledges to rise against suppression of human rights and freedom of speech
by Cyril Wimalasurendre
KANDY - United National Party and Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, at a 61st Independence Day meeting in Kundasale, pledged to rise against any suppression of human rights and freedom of speech.
The freedom of the press was lost during the present administration. Media institutions are attacked and media men are harassed, he said, at the meeting, at Kolongahwatte playground, yesterday.
The National Independence obtained by leaders of the calibre of D. S. Senanayake, S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike, N. M. Perera, Philip Gunawardena, G. G. Ponnambalam, Sir John Kotalawala, T. B. Jaya, S. A. Wickremasinghe, to name a few has now been robbed by the government. The sovereignty granted to the people by the Constitution is lost, he lamented.
Those leaders who pioneered independence restored democratic rights of the people. Those rights are now withdrawn, Ranil Wickremesinghe said.
He pledged that the UNP would lead the campaign if the government continue to suppress the freedom of the people.
He said, the people are anxiously waiting to enjoy the defeat of terrorism and live in a free state. But they are deprived of this privilege since the government is gradually withdrawing the freedom that they should enjoy.
We must decide whether we forego our right of franchise or lose if. We all must unitedly, rise to safeguard these rights.
The UNP, the SLMC the JVP must unitedly rise up discarding differences to safeguard the rights and the sovereignty assured by the Constitution.
SLMC leader Rauf Hakeem accused the government of violating the Constitution with the war as an excuse.
"We are ready to face any challenges against the people’s freedom," Hakeem said.
Dr. Wickremabahu Karunaratne, said that freedom of the people were hampered under the present administration.
General Secretary UNP, Tissa Attanayake, Party representatives, Siritunge Jayasuriya, Dharmasiri Lankapeli and several others were present.
Ranil Wickremesinghe paid homage to the sacred Tooth Relic earlier in the day.
www island.lk
TAMILS ARE NOT FREE OF COLONIAL BONDAGE!!!
Sixty-One Years of Independence and the Tamils of Sri Lanka
February 4th, 2009
By D.B.S. Jeyaraj
Sri Lanka celebrates sixty-one years of Independence from Britain today. The country known then as Ceylon, obtained full freedom on February 4th 1948.
For any people free of colonial bondage this would be a day of joy and happiness.
But that is not so for the Tamils of Sri Lanka right now.
Even as I sit penning my thoughts, two lines from an old Tamil film song keep throbbing. They are from the song “Unnaikkandu Naan Vaada” sung by AM Rajah in “Kalyanapparisu”.
“Oorengum Nadakkum, Aanantham Namakku, Kaanaatha Thooramada, Kaanaatha Thooramadaa”. (the festive joy in the village is at an unseeing distance, for us an unseeing distance)
In Colombo , President Mahinda Rajapakse addressed the nation in a restricted ceremony held amidst tight security. In the North and East, the lion flag was raised proudly in military installations.
Rajapakse spoke eloquently of concepts like “nation” and “motherland” and also emphasised that all communities of the Island-Sinhala,Tamil, Muslim, Burgher, Malay and others-were children of one single mother.
Elsewhere in the northern mainland known as the Wanni hundreds of thousands of civilians whose mother tongue was “Thamizh” fell victim to a cruel and horrible war unleashed on a tragically trapped people.
Embassies, High Commissions and Consulates of Sri Lanka abroad remained closed on account of Independence day. But this did not deter the thousands of Tamils who engaged in protest demonstrations outside those premises.
Triumphalist euphoria on the one hand and embittered hostility on the other! The distance between the two solitudes is widening.
Militarily the Island is being unified but whether the Country is uniting politically remains an unanswered question.
The Tamil people whether in Sri Lanka or abroad are generally in a sullen. Morose and gloomy mood . The future seems bleak and dreary.
This despondency is not one which envelopes sympathisers and supporters of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) alone.It is prevalent more widely, regardless of political affiliation.
I would have expected President Rajapakse to have delivered a truly inspiring address that could have reached out to the estranged Tamil people in a meaningful and constructive manner.
Alas! That is something seemingly beyond the mindset of “apey Mahinda” who after all is one of the “Panashaye daruwo” (children of fifty-six).There is an apt saying in Tamil “Sattiyil iruppathu than ahappaiyil varum” (the ladle can scoop only what is there in the pot)
What is so sad about this situation is the now forgotten pioneering role played by Tamils in the quest for Independence.
From Sir Ponnambalam Arunachalam’s famous lecture on “our political needs” which laid the foundation for the national congress to the activities of the Jaffna Youth Congress, Tamil efforts have been commendable.
It was the Jaffna Youth Congress which called first for “poorana Swaraj” or complete self-rule from the British and rejected the limited reforms proposed by the Donoughmore commission, It was in Jaffna that the “nandhi” (crouched bull) was hoisted defiantly instead of the Union Jack.; it was Jaffna that boycotted the visit of the then Prince of Wales.
So praiseworthy was the impact of the Youth Congress that Philip Gunewardena , the “father of Marxism” wrote glowingly in the “Searchlight” that Jaffna has given the lead and asked the Sinhalese to follow. Prof. Wiswa Warnapala reviewing the book written by Santhaseelan Kadirgamar on the Youth Congress expressed his admiration openly.
What then went wrong? Which was the serpent that entered this idyllic garden of Eden?
A number of reasons could be stated and as is the case in matters of this type the blame cannot be laid at one door alone.
Fundamentally the crisis is due to the pathetic inability of “independent” Ceylon to re-define and re- structure nationhood after getting freedom.
More specifically what went wrong was the notion entertained by dominant sections of the majority community that this country belonged to them alone and that other ethnicities were of second-class status.
President Rajapakse spoke of all being children of one mother but what do younger siblings do when the elder and biggest child thinks that it alone has an exclusive right to the mother and what is more relegates the others to inferior status?
Notwithstanding all the pious platitudes uttered by President Rajapakse there is little sign of this majoritarian mindset changing.
Look at the Army commander Sarath Fonseka saying that Sri Lanka belongs to the Sinhala majority and that the minorities must not make undue demands. Look at Cabinet minister Champika Ranawaka saying that the Sinhalese are organic to Sri Lanka and that Tamils and Muslims are mere visitors.
President Rajapakse, if he was indeed serious about Sri Lanka being an inclusive nation, should have reprimanded his military chief and environment minister and made them see the error of their assertion.
This would have alleviated the hurt felt to a very great extent, but he did not do it. In fact none from the Government did so. This glaring omission was very illuminating.
What this shows is that the powers that be are either unwilling or unable to appreciate the concerns, insecurity and sense of injustice felt by the minority communities.
The dominant ideology seems to be one of equating the majority ethnicity alone as the nation.This hegemonistic definition of nation and attempts by the Tamils to resist such imposition and counter it with a different definition have led to this situation.
Sri Lanka is a modern state with an ancient civilisation, but the attempt to define Sri Lanka as a modern nation state has led to conflict and strife.
Power is concentrated with the majority ethnicity leaving other ethnicities out in the cold. It is a case of ‘Maha Jathiyata Kiri, Sulu Jathiwalata Kekiri.’ (cream for the majority, bitterfruit for the minorities)
The idea of a single Sri Lankan nation has been under severe threat. In reality, we are a divided nation today and military conquest by itself is no answer.
If we are to resolve these divisions and create a strong nation on the basis of equitable power-sharing, the structure of the state needs to be radically transformed. There is no consensus on that so far.
Meanwhile, political differences have assumed proportions of a cruel, destructive war. The war is only a consequence resulting from political causes.
The conflict cannot be resolved by military means alone and requires a settlement that would address those underlying causes. This political solution cannot be dictated or imposed upon through military might alone.
In terms of political independence, we are yet a young nation at 61. The idea of Ceylon was a colonial construct. The British unified the country into a single administration.
Sri Lanka was not the only one in this respect. Most countries ruled by the British were their creations in a modern sense.
Ethnic conflict and strife erupted in many countries after the British left. From the Indian sub-continent to Fiji Islands and from Nigeria to Malaysia, there are many instances of this.
Sri Lanka too can be classified as an example of post-independence conflict within pre-independence boundaries.
Some ex-colonies have reduced and managed ethnic tensions by evolving new forms of power sharing. They have reinvented themselves as ‘new’ nations on the basis of equality and forged a strong sense of common identity.
Ultimately, the unity and integrity of a nation does not depend on its military strength or structures of governance but on the will of its people. The nation state is essentially a state of mind.
The tragedy of independent Sri Lanka has been majoritarian hegemony. Majority rule is a democratic principle. Here it has been interpreted as the majority of the numerically largest ethnicity.
The years after independence have seen the Sri Lankan Tamils resisting this injustice and imposition-At first through non-violent struggle and later through an armed struggle.
The Tamils first thought of themselves as a founding people of Sri Lanka on par with the Sinhalese. They later shed this majority concept and perceived themselves as the principal yet all-island minority.
Tamils did not demand a separate state or even federalism from the British. What they wanted then was a scheme of balanced representation where the Sinhala majority weightage could be ‘balanced’ through enhanced representation for the minority communities.
This failed, and in a pragmatic approach, the dominant Tamil leadership opted for responsive cooperation after independence.
The Tamil Congress joined the UNP Government. New forces emerged. As Sinhala hegemony assumed great stridency, Newton’s Third Law came into play. Tamil nationalism also grew. Both reinforced each other.
Under the Ilankai Thamil Arasu Katchi (Federal Party), the Tamils began perceiving themselves as a territorial minority. The Northern and Eastern Provinces were referred to as their traditional homelands.
Initially there was non-violent agitation for a federal form of government. Compromises were made and pacts signed. These were observed in the breach by the prime ministers of the day. Satyagraha campaigns were suppressed through military force.
This led to the cry for Tamil Eelam. Secessionism brought forth violence and an armed struggle began. In the 1977 general elections, Tamils voted overwhelmingly for the TULF contesting on a separatist platform.
Instead of redressing Tamil grievances and trying to accommodate legitimate aspirations, the Sinhala-dominated state came down heavily. It was thought that might could eradicate right.
This was not to be so and with the passage of time the LTTE established control over a substantial portion of the north and east. The territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country was endangered and eroded.
The Tamil struggle for equality too underwent change. It lost its moral high ground and deteriorated drastically. Militarism ruled and authoritarianism reigned.
The LTTE’s ‘Tigerism’ became a mirror image of Sinhala hegemonism. Fascism was in the air.
Currently the Rajapaksa regime has embarked on a military campaign to defeat the LTTE while paying lip service to the political solution concept.
The country at large is being assailed with propaganda that the LTTE is on the verge of defeat. Any contrary opinion is dismissed as anti-national and anti-patriotic.
It is a moot point as to whether the LTTE can be totally defeated or completely destroyed through a military campaign alone.
The important point is to note that the eradication of the LTTE will not automatically result in the problem being resolved. The LTTE is only a virulent symptom of the malady. Getting rid of the LTTE-even if possible-is no durable remedy.
What is required now is the creation of a just, egalitarian and plural society. There must be equitable power-sharing based on principles of the federal idea.
Broadly, three schools of thought have been clashing. The ideas at conflict are hegemonism, secessionism and pluralism.
The Sinhala hardliners want Sinhala-Buddhist domination. They see this country as theirs alone. Others are excluded in this ‘Chinthana.’
The Tamil hardliners want a separate state for the north-east known as Tamil Eelam. Just as Sinhala hawks say Sri Lanka is for the Sinhalese, these Tamil hawks say Tamil Eelam is for the Tamils.
A state for the dominant ethnicity within, excludes by definition, other ethnicities living within these real or imaginary borders. Both these ideas have brought about disunity, violence and destruction. The nation bleeds and the country diminishes.
The third idea is that of establishing an egalitarian and plural society where all children of this country can live together in amity and fraternity. It incorporates a vision where no one will claim superior rights on the basis of belonging to the majority race/religion or claim exclusive rights to their historic habitat.
Power will not be confined to Colombo but shared with the periphery. All people regardless of race, religion, caste or creed will have their say and a role to play.
Sri Lanka will belong to its people from Paruthithurai to Devinuwara and Mannar to Mullaitheevu. At present this ‘vision’ seems unrealistically impossible and Utopian!
In spite of the adverse politico-military environment, this is the vision that I share. ‘Visionaries’ of this nature are an endangered species. They are under attack by hawks on either side of the ethnic divide. They are dubbed derisively as ‘jokers’ and ‘traitors.’
It is this vision that will ultimately salvage Sri Lanka. Hegemonic and secessionist dreams are turning into nightmares.
The call for the third option between the hegemonistic one state and secessionist two-state schools of thought is a voice of sanity and sensibility. It is presently inaudible amidst the raucous battle-cries.
I, however, firmly believe that it will be heard and heard effectively one day. Sri Lanka will then be alive with the sound of concord.
In the clash of ideas, it is the superior one that will triumph. Dialogue and discussion, not bloodshed and destruction, will prove to be final arbiters of our destiny.
The current situation is depressing but there is certainly a light at the end of the dark tunnel.
However estranged and alienated the Tamil people may feel at present, there is no denying the fact that we are an integral part of the Sri Lankan nation. Our destiny is inter-twined with those of others living on the Island.
The future lies not in pursuing unrealistic separatist goals but in struggling together with people seeking justice and peace to forge a brave, new, inclusive nation.
At the same time it is up to right-thinking members of the majority community to extend their hand of friendship in a spirit of fraternal amity towards like-minded “others”.
When India gained freedom at midnight, Jawarhalal Nehru spoke of its “tryst with destiny.” India’s southern neighbour has been awaiting its true destiny for 61 years.
The Sri Lankan state needs to be restructured and the Sri Lankan nation reinvented for its inevitable tryst with destiny.
Sri Lanka at 61 faces the unfinished yet challenging task of building a NEW nation!
Let me conclude with a poem that is one of my favourites. It is from the “Gitanjali” by Rabindranath Tagore.
“Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic wars;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought and action-
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake”.
Entry Filed under: Nature
Comments
1. J. Sinnathamby | February 5th, 2009 at 12:25 am
Dear Mr.DBS Jeyaraj
Thanks a lot for this thought provoking and inspiring article.
As Tagore said “Where words come out from the depth of truth” your writing has a simple honesty about them that is most endearing and authentic.
Do not be disheartened but know that there are many , many Tamils who think like you. You speak for us all.
Like you I too hope and pray that the almighty will lead our country and our people towards Tagore’s dream
“Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake�.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2. DR. N. SATCHI | February 5th, 2009 at 12:57 am
YOU ARE NOT ALONE IN THIS IDEA. IF I KNOW THE COMMUNITY THEY ARE ALSO NOT AVERSE TO THIS IDEA. NEARLY 80 PERCENT OF THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT THE LTTE AS MOST TAMILS DO. IT IS THE MUTUAL SUSPISION WHICH IS THE REAL IMPEDIMENT.
THE SINHALA LEADERSHIP HAS ALWAYS LED DOWN THE SRI LANKAN NATION.
THEY MUST ACCEPT THAT IT IS DURING THEIR WATCH THAT ONES A PROSPEROUS COUNTRY IS LAID TO THIS LEVEL OF BARBARISIM. THE LTTE IS BLAMED. WHAT ABOUT THE JVP AND THE NUMBER OF SINHALA YOUTHS WHO DISSAPPEARED.
THERE IS SOMETHING FUNDERMENTALLY WRONG WITH SRI LANKA AND THAT IS - THE CLERGY.
MORDERN SOCIETY DO NOT REQUIRE THEIR INTERFEARENCE AND TODAY THIS INFLUENCE PREVAIL ONLY IN EXTREEMIST SOCIETIES.
HAVE A GOOD DAY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Shan Nalliah Gandhiyist Norway | February 5th, 2009 at 5:30 am
Thanks for your great article!
1915-2009 Tamils have following conclusions!
1.Sinhalese wrong mentality,empty talks/false smiles and inhuman, non-buddhist methods(killings, violence,lies.denials,disrespect,intimidations,harassments and brutality) were reasons for sad state today!
2.Sinhalese never learn from past,they forget quickly.
3.Sinhalese never listen to moderates!or wise/reasonable people or IC!
4.Sinhalese never care about World opinion or advice or reputation!
5. Sinhalese never change from Dutu Gemunu period!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy:dbsjeyaraj.com
February 4th, 2009
By D.B.S. Jeyaraj
Sri Lanka celebrates sixty-one years of Independence from Britain today. The country known then as Ceylon, obtained full freedom on February 4th 1948.
For any people free of colonial bondage this would be a day of joy and happiness.
But that is not so for the Tamils of Sri Lanka right now.
Even as I sit penning my thoughts, two lines from an old Tamil film song keep throbbing. They are from the song “Unnaikkandu Naan Vaada” sung by AM Rajah in “Kalyanapparisu”.
“Oorengum Nadakkum, Aanantham Namakku, Kaanaatha Thooramada, Kaanaatha Thooramadaa”. (the festive joy in the village is at an unseeing distance, for us an unseeing distance)
In Colombo , President Mahinda Rajapakse addressed the nation in a restricted ceremony held amidst tight security. In the North and East, the lion flag was raised proudly in military installations.
Rajapakse spoke eloquently of concepts like “nation” and “motherland” and also emphasised that all communities of the Island-Sinhala,Tamil, Muslim, Burgher, Malay and others-were children of one single mother.
Elsewhere in the northern mainland known as the Wanni hundreds of thousands of civilians whose mother tongue was “Thamizh” fell victim to a cruel and horrible war unleashed on a tragically trapped people.
Embassies, High Commissions and Consulates of Sri Lanka abroad remained closed on account of Independence day. But this did not deter the thousands of Tamils who engaged in protest demonstrations outside those premises.
Triumphalist euphoria on the one hand and embittered hostility on the other! The distance between the two solitudes is widening.
Militarily the Island is being unified but whether the Country is uniting politically remains an unanswered question.
The Tamil people whether in Sri Lanka or abroad are generally in a sullen. Morose and gloomy mood . The future seems bleak and dreary.
This despondency is not one which envelopes sympathisers and supporters of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) alone.It is prevalent more widely, regardless of political affiliation.
I would have expected President Rajapakse to have delivered a truly inspiring address that could have reached out to the estranged Tamil people in a meaningful and constructive manner.
Alas! That is something seemingly beyond the mindset of “apey Mahinda” who after all is one of the “Panashaye daruwo” (children of fifty-six).There is an apt saying in Tamil “Sattiyil iruppathu than ahappaiyil varum” (the ladle can scoop only what is there in the pot)
What is so sad about this situation is the now forgotten pioneering role played by Tamils in the quest for Independence.
From Sir Ponnambalam Arunachalam’s famous lecture on “our political needs” which laid the foundation for the national congress to the activities of the Jaffna Youth Congress, Tamil efforts have been commendable.
It was the Jaffna Youth Congress which called first for “poorana Swaraj” or complete self-rule from the British and rejected the limited reforms proposed by the Donoughmore commission, It was in Jaffna that the “nandhi” (crouched bull) was hoisted defiantly instead of the Union Jack.; it was Jaffna that boycotted the visit of the then Prince of Wales.
So praiseworthy was the impact of the Youth Congress that Philip Gunewardena , the “father of Marxism” wrote glowingly in the “Searchlight” that Jaffna has given the lead and asked the Sinhalese to follow. Prof. Wiswa Warnapala reviewing the book written by Santhaseelan Kadirgamar on the Youth Congress expressed his admiration openly.
What then went wrong? Which was the serpent that entered this idyllic garden of Eden?
A number of reasons could be stated and as is the case in matters of this type the blame cannot be laid at one door alone.
Fundamentally the crisis is due to the pathetic inability of “independent” Ceylon to re-define and re- structure nationhood after getting freedom.
More specifically what went wrong was the notion entertained by dominant sections of the majority community that this country belonged to them alone and that other ethnicities were of second-class status.
President Rajapakse spoke of all being children of one mother but what do younger siblings do when the elder and biggest child thinks that it alone has an exclusive right to the mother and what is more relegates the others to inferior status?
Notwithstanding all the pious platitudes uttered by President Rajapakse there is little sign of this majoritarian mindset changing.
Look at the Army commander Sarath Fonseka saying that Sri Lanka belongs to the Sinhala majority and that the minorities must not make undue demands. Look at Cabinet minister Champika Ranawaka saying that the Sinhalese are organic to Sri Lanka and that Tamils and Muslims are mere visitors.
President Rajapakse, if he was indeed serious about Sri Lanka being an inclusive nation, should have reprimanded his military chief and environment minister and made them see the error of their assertion.
This would have alleviated the hurt felt to a very great extent, but he did not do it. In fact none from the Government did so. This glaring omission was very illuminating.
What this shows is that the powers that be are either unwilling or unable to appreciate the concerns, insecurity and sense of injustice felt by the minority communities.
The dominant ideology seems to be one of equating the majority ethnicity alone as the nation.This hegemonistic definition of nation and attempts by the Tamils to resist such imposition and counter it with a different definition have led to this situation.
Sri Lanka is a modern state with an ancient civilisation, but the attempt to define Sri Lanka as a modern nation state has led to conflict and strife.
Power is concentrated with the majority ethnicity leaving other ethnicities out in the cold. It is a case of ‘Maha Jathiyata Kiri, Sulu Jathiwalata Kekiri.’ (cream for the majority, bitterfruit for the minorities)
The idea of a single Sri Lankan nation has been under severe threat. In reality, we are a divided nation today and military conquest by itself is no answer.
If we are to resolve these divisions and create a strong nation on the basis of equitable power-sharing, the structure of the state needs to be radically transformed. There is no consensus on that so far.
Meanwhile, political differences have assumed proportions of a cruel, destructive war. The war is only a consequence resulting from political causes.
The conflict cannot be resolved by military means alone and requires a settlement that would address those underlying causes. This political solution cannot be dictated or imposed upon through military might alone.
In terms of political independence, we are yet a young nation at 61. The idea of Ceylon was a colonial construct. The British unified the country into a single administration.
Sri Lanka was not the only one in this respect. Most countries ruled by the British were their creations in a modern sense.
Ethnic conflict and strife erupted in many countries after the British left. From the Indian sub-continent to Fiji Islands and from Nigeria to Malaysia, there are many instances of this.
Sri Lanka too can be classified as an example of post-independence conflict within pre-independence boundaries.
Some ex-colonies have reduced and managed ethnic tensions by evolving new forms of power sharing. They have reinvented themselves as ‘new’ nations on the basis of equality and forged a strong sense of common identity.
Ultimately, the unity and integrity of a nation does not depend on its military strength or structures of governance but on the will of its people. The nation state is essentially a state of mind.
The tragedy of independent Sri Lanka has been majoritarian hegemony. Majority rule is a democratic principle. Here it has been interpreted as the majority of the numerically largest ethnicity.
The years after independence have seen the Sri Lankan Tamils resisting this injustice and imposition-At first through non-violent struggle and later through an armed struggle.
The Tamils first thought of themselves as a founding people of Sri Lanka on par with the Sinhalese. They later shed this majority concept and perceived themselves as the principal yet all-island minority.
Tamils did not demand a separate state or even federalism from the British. What they wanted then was a scheme of balanced representation where the Sinhala majority weightage could be ‘balanced’ through enhanced representation for the minority communities.
This failed, and in a pragmatic approach, the dominant Tamil leadership opted for responsive cooperation after independence.
The Tamil Congress joined the UNP Government. New forces emerged. As Sinhala hegemony assumed great stridency, Newton’s Third Law came into play. Tamil nationalism also grew. Both reinforced each other.
Under the Ilankai Thamil Arasu Katchi (Federal Party), the Tamils began perceiving themselves as a territorial minority. The Northern and Eastern Provinces were referred to as their traditional homelands.
Initially there was non-violent agitation for a federal form of government. Compromises were made and pacts signed. These were observed in the breach by the prime ministers of the day. Satyagraha campaigns were suppressed through military force.
This led to the cry for Tamil Eelam. Secessionism brought forth violence and an armed struggle began. In the 1977 general elections, Tamils voted overwhelmingly for the TULF contesting on a separatist platform.
Instead of redressing Tamil grievances and trying to accommodate legitimate aspirations, the Sinhala-dominated state came down heavily. It was thought that might could eradicate right.
This was not to be so and with the passage of time the LTTE established control over a substantial portion of the north and east. The territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country was endangered and eroded.
The Tamil struggle for equality too underwent change. It lost its moral high ground and deteriorated drastically. Militarism ruled and authoritarianism reigned.
The LTTE’s ‘Tigerism’ became a mirror image of Sinhala hegemonism. Fascism was in the air.
Currently the Rajapaksa regime has embarked on a military campaign to defeat the LTTE while paying lip service to the political solution concept.
The country at large is being assailed with propaganda that the LTTE is on the verge of defeat. Any contrary opinion is dismissed as anti-national and anti-patriotic.
It is a moot point as to whether the LTTE can be totally defeated or completely destroyed through a military campaign alone.
The important point is to note that the eradication of the LTTE will not automatically result in the problem being resolved. The LTTE is only a virulent symptom of the malady. Getting rid of the LTTE-even if possible-is no durable remedy.
What is required now is the creation of a just, egalitarian and plural society. There must be equitable power-sharing based on principles of the federal idea.
Broadly, three schools of thought have been clashing. The ideas at conflict are hegemonism, secessionism and pluralism.
The Sinhala hardliners want Sinhala-Buddhist domination. They see this country as theirs alone. Others are excluded in this ‘Chinthana.’
The Tamil hardliners want a separate state for the north-east known as Tamil Eelam. Just as Sinhala hawks say Sri Lanka is for the Sinhalese, these Tamil hawks say Tamil Eelam is for the Tamils.
A state for the dominant ethnicity within, excludes by definition, other ethnicities living within these real or imaginary borders. Both these ideas have brought about disunity, violence and destruction. The nation bleeds and the country diminishes.
The third idea is that of establishing an egalitarian and plural society where all children of this country can live together in amity and fraternity. It incorporates a vision where no one will claim superior rights on the basis of belonging to the majority race/religion or claim exclusive rights to their historic habitat.
Power will not be confined to Colombo but shared with the periphery. All people regardless of race, religion, caste or creed will have their say and a role to play.
Sri Lanka will belong to its people from Paruthithurai to Devinuwara and Mannar to Mullaitheevu. At present this ‘vision’ seems unrealistically impossible and Utopian!
In spite of the adverse politico-military environment, this is the vision that I share. ‘Visionaries’ of this nature are an endangered species. They are under attack by hawks on either side of the ethnic divide. They are dubbed derisively as ‘jokers’ and ‘traitors.’
It is this vision that will ultimately salvage Sri Lanka. Hegemonic and secessionist dreams are turning into nightmares.
The call for the third option between the hegemonistic one state and secessionist two-state schools of thought is a voice of sanity and sensibility. It is presently inaudible amidst the raucous battle-cries.
I, however, firmly believe that it will be heard and heard effectively one day. Sri Lanka will then be alive with the sound of concord.
In the clash of ideas, it is the superior one that will triumph. Dialogue and discussion, not bloodshed and destruction, will prove to be final arbiters of our destiny.
The current situation is depressing but there is certainly a light at the end of the dark tunnel.
However estranged and alienated the Tamil people may feel at present, there is no denying the fact that we are an integral part of the Sri Lankan nation. Our destiny is inter-twined with those of others living on the Island.
The future lies not in pursuing unrealistic separatist goals but in struggling together with people seeking justice and peace to forge a brave, new, inclusive nation.
At the same time it is up to right-thinking members of the majority community to extend their hand of friendship in a spirit of fraternal amity towards like-minded “others”.
When India gained freedom at midnight, Jawarhalal Nehru spoke of its “tryst with destiny.” India’s southern neighbour has been awaiting its true destiny for 61 years.
The Sri Lankan state needs to be restructured and the Sri Lankan nation reinvented for its inevitable tryst with destiny.
Sri Lanka at 61 faces the unfinished yet challenging task of building a NEW nation!
Let me conclude with a poem that is one of my favourites. It is from the “Gitanjali” by Rabindranath Tagore.
“Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic wars;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought and action-
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake”.
Entry Filed under: Nature
Comments
1. J. Sinnathamby | February 5th, 2009 at 12:25 am
Dear Mr.DBS Jeyaraj
Thanks a lot for this thought provoking and inspiring article.
As Tagore said “Where words come out from the depth of truth” your writing has a simple honesty about them that is most endearing and authentic.
Do not be disheartened but know that there are many , many Tamils who think like you. You speak for us all.
Like you I too hope and pray that the almighty will lead our country and our people towards Tagore’s dream
“Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake�.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2. DR. N. SATCHI | February 5th, 2009 at 12:57 am
YOU ARE NOT ALONE IN THIS IDEA. IF I KNOW THE COMMUNITY THEY ARE ALSO NOT AVERSE TO THIS IDEA. NEARLY 80 PERCENT OF THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT THE LTTE AS MOST TAMILS DO. IT IS THE MUTUAL SUSPISION WHICH IS THE REAL IMPEDIMENT.
THE SINHALA LEADERSHIP HAS ALWAYS LED DOWN THE SRI LANKAN NATION.
THEY MUST ACCEPT THAT IT IS DURING THEIR WATCH THAT ONES A PROSPEROUS COUNTRY IS LAID TO THIS LEVEL OF BARBARISIM. THE LTTE IS BLAMED. WHAT ABOUT THE JVP AND THE NUMBER OF SINHALA YOUTHS WHO DISSAPPEARED.
THERE IS SOMETHING FUNDERMENTALLY WRONG WITH SRI LANKA AND THAT IS - THE CLERGY.
MORDERN SOCIETY DO NOT REQUIRE THEIR INTERFEARENCE AND TODAY THIS INFLUENCE PREVAIL ONLY IN EXTREEMIST SOCIETIES.
HAVE A GOOD DAY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Shan Nalliah Gandhiyist Norway | February 5th, 2009 at 5:30 am
Thanks for your great article!
1915-2009 Tamils have following conclusions!
1.Sinhalese wrong mentality,empty talks/false smiles and inhuman, non-buddhist methods(killings, violence,lies.denials,disrespect,intimidations,harassments and brutality) were reasons for sad state today!
2.Sinhalese never learn from past,they forget quickly.
3.Sinhalese never listen to moderates!or wise/reasonable people or IC!
4.Sinhalese never care about World opinion or advice or reputation!
5. Sinhalese never change from Dutu Gemunu period!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy:dbsjeyaraj.com
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
TAMILS: NO EQUAL RIGHTS TO LIFE,PROPERTY AND FREEDOM!!!
PLIGHT OF DISPLACED TAMILS SET TO CONTINUE
JEHAN PERERA
When two foes that are determined to destroy each other and to resist each other by military means are at war, one side cannot be expected to give heed to the unilateral pronouncements of the other side. This is especially the case with the LTTE, which has a long track record of putting their struggle above everything else. At the present time the existence of the LTTE as an organization is being threatened on the ground. It has lost nearly all the territory it once controlled, its armories are falling into government hands, and members of its top leadership have been seriously injured in the most recent rounds of fighting. In these straitened circumstances, it is to be expected that the LTTE will use every means at their disposal to prolong their survival. This includes using civilians as a human shield.
On the other hand, the government appears determined to pursue its strategy of defeating the LTTE completely and as soon as possible even if the cost is high to its own soldiers and to the civilian population. The government is aware that international conditions are currently favourable to its military campaign. The Congress-led government in India has been supportive of the war effort to a greater extent than any previous Indian government, due perhaps to the influence of the slain former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s widow being at the helm of affairs in that country. So far the Indian government has been able to deflate pressures from Tamil Nadu state to put a stop to the Sri Lankan government’s military campaign.
The other great influence on Sri Lanka and the world, the United States, continues to adhere to the Bush Administration’s policy of the war against terrorism. But this policy might be at its tail end with the election of President Barack Obama. Already President Obama has given an inkling of the possible shift in US foreign policy by saying that the Palestinians should be provided with a solution they accept, rather than one that is imposed on them by others. Therefore the Sri Lankan government would be aware that with elections looming in India, and President Obama making policy changes in the US, the present favourable climate to war as a solution might soon change. It is therefore in the government’s interests to accelerate the war effort to defeat the LTTE without permitting other considerations to slow it down.
Tragic scenario
In this context, it is tragic but to be expected that President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s pronouncement of a 48 hour period of safe passage to the trapped civilians of the north elapsed without any major movement of people. Only a few hundreds seem to have made, or been able to make, use of this opportunity. The rest either did not feel able to, or were prevented from leaving by the LTTE. Several humanitarian organizations, including UN agencies, working in the conflict zones have issued a statement in the grave humanitarian crisis. They have said that “The LTTE continues to prevent civilians from leaving areas under its control, denying the right to seek safety in other parts of the country…We call upon the LTTE to allow full freedom of movement to all civilians, and to allow safe passage for those wishing to leave the conflict area.”
It is reported that the LTTE has placed its artillery at the perimeters of the area that the government has designated as a safety zone. The civilians will fear to move from wherever they are in a situation where artillery duels continue. This has prompted the humanitarian organizations to call on “the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE to accord priority to ensuring the safety and security of all civilians. The humanitarian community calls on the Government and the LTTE to respect the 32 square km “safe zone”, within the Wanni, announced by the Government.” Tragically even hospitals within the safety zone have been shelled with each side blaming the other.
The likely scenario in the days and weeks ahead is a continuation of the full scale effort by the government to enter into the remaining LTTE-held territory and take it over. The price paid by Tamil civilians will be incidental to the main goal of defeating the LTTE. This will not bode well for future peace and reconciliation in Sri Lanka. The worst fears of the Tamil people that they are not considered citizens with equal rights to life, property and freedom will be borne out in the last battle to be fought unless the priorities of the government and LTTE change even at this last minute.
Humanitarian option
The trapped population is said to be anywhere between 200,000 to 400,000, with the government giving the lesser figure, and Tamil and humanitarian sources giving the higher one. Whether it is the higher figure or the lower one, it is still a very large number. They are akin to a people held hostage. The presence of these civilians in the last territory controlled by the LTTE will necessarily slow down the progress of the Sri Lankan military which will be constrained in its ability to use its superior firepower. On the other hand, by not permitting the civilians to leave, the LTTE is clearly in violation of international law. In effect, they are holding the people hostage, where the hostage-takers put forward their conditions for the release of the hostages.
In these circumstances securing the safety of the trapped civilians is a priority requires a negotiated movement of people under the auspices of internationally recognized organizations, such as the ICRC. Consequently, several local and international organizations including some foreign governments have called for the declaration of a humanitarian truce for a temporary period to facilitate the movement of the trapped civilians. Those who issue such calls do so at the risk of being labeled as LTTE supporters, a very grave danger that can lead to death threats and to being declared persona non grata in this time of heightened nationalist sentiment.
However, the option of a negotiated solution to the humanitarian crisis needs to be considered. Even in other situations of hostage taking, such as hostages being taken in passenger aircraft or schools, the first option is generally to negotiate. A humanitarian truce can lay the ground for mutual dialogue and confidence, save the lives of the internally displaced civilians and reduce the social and psychological pressures that will otherwise occur in the long run. But the difficulties in promoting this idea cannot be underestimated. The experience of the past, in which periods of negotiation and ceasefire were utilized by the LTTE to rearm and reposition itself is a lesson that most people in Sri Lanka remember with both anger and dismay. The risk of being misunderstood has to be borne by those who uphold humanitarian values as a priority.
dailymirror.lk
JEHAN PERERA
When two foes that are determined to destroy each other and to resist each other by military means are at war, one side cannot be expected to give heed to the unilateral pronouncements of the other side. This is especially the case with the LTTE, which has a long track record of putting their struggle above everything else. At the present time the existence of the LTTE as an organization is being threatened on the ground. It has lost nearly all the territory it once controlled, its armories are falling into government hands, and members of its top leadership have been seriously injured in the most recent rounds of fighting. In these straitened circumstances, it is to be expected that the LTTE will use every means at their disposal to prolong their survival. This includes using civilians as a human shield.
On the other hand, the government appears determined to pursue its strategy of defeating the LTTE completely and as soon as possible even if the cost is high to its own soldiers and to the civilian population. The government is aware that international conditions are currently favourable to its military campaign. The Congress-led government in India has been supportive of the war effort to a greater extent than any previous Indian government, due perhaps to the influence of the slain former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s widow being at the helm of affairs in that country. So far the Indian government has been able to deflate pressures from Tamil Nadu state to put a stop to the Sri Lankan government’s military campaign.
The other great influence on Sri Lanka and the world, the United States, continues to adhere to the Bush Administration’s policy of the war against terrorism. But this policy might be at its tail end with the election of President Barack Obama. Already President Obama has given an inkling of the possible shift in US foreign policy by saying that the Palestinians should be provided with a solution they accept, rather than one that is imposed on them by others. Therefore the Sri Lankan government would be aware that with elections looming in India, and President Obama making policy changes in the US, the present favourable climate to war as a solution might soon change. It is therefore in the government’s interests to accelerate the war effort to defeat the LTTE without permitting other considerations to slow it down.
Tragic scenario
In this context, it is tragic but to be expected that President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s pronouncement of a 48 hour period of safe passage to the trapped civilians of the north elapsed without any major movement of people. Only a few hundreds seem to have made, or been able to make, use of this opportunity. The rest either did not feel able to, or were prevented from leaving by the LTTE. Several humanitarian organizations, including UN agencies, working in the conflict zones have issued a statement in the grave humanitarian crisis. They have said that “The LTTE continues to prevent civilians from leaving areas under its control, denying the right to seek safety in other parts of the country…We call upon the LTTE to allow full freedom of movement to all civilians, and to allow safe passage for those wishing to leave the conflict area.”
It is reported that the LTTE has placed its artillery at the perimeters of the area that the government has designated as a safety zone. The civilians will fear to move from wherever they are in a situation where artillery duels continue. This has prompted the humanitarian organizations to call on “the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE to accord priority to ensuring the safety and security of all civilians. The humanitarian community calls on the Government and the LTTE to respect the 32 square km “safe zone”, within the Wanni, announced by the Government.” Tragically even hospitals within the safety zone have been shelled with each side blaming the other.
The likely scenario in the days and weeks ahead is a continuation of the full scale effort by the government to enter into the remaining LTTE-held territory and take it over. The price paid by Tamil civilians will be incidental to the main goal of defeating the LTTE. This will not bode well for future peace and reconciliation in Sri Lanka. The worst fears of the Tamil people that they are not considered citizens with equal rights to life, property and freedom will be borne out in the last battle to be fought unless the priorities of the government and LTTE change even at this last minute.
Humanitarian option
The trapped population is said to be anywhere between 200,000 to 400,000, with the government giving the lesser figure, and Tamil and humanitarian sources giving the higher one. Whether it is the higher figure or the lower one, it is still a very large number. They are akin to a people held hostage. The presence of these civilians in the last territory controlled by the LTTE will necessarily slow down the progress of the Sri Lankan military which will be constrained in its ability to use its superior firepower. On the other hand, by not permitting the civilians to leave, the LTTE is clearly in violation of international law. In effect, they are holding the people hostage, where the hostage-takers put forward their conditions for the release of the hostages.
In these circumstances securing the safety of the trapped civilians is a priority requires a negotiated movement of people under the auspices of internationally recognized organizations, such as the ICRC. Consequently, several local and international organizations including some foreign governments have called for the declaration of a humanitarian truce for a temporary period to facilitate the movement of the trapped civilians. Those who issue such calls do so at the risk of being labeled as LTTE supporters, a very grave danger that can lead to death threats and to being declared persona non grata in this time of heightened nationalist sentiment.
However, the option of a negotiated solution to the humanitarian crisis needs to be considered. Even in other situations of hostage taking, such as hostages being taken in passenger aircraft or schools, the first option is generally to negotiate. A humanitarian truce can lay the ground for mutual dialogue and confidence, save the lives of the internally displaced civilians and reduce the social and psychological pressures that will otherwise occur in the long run. But the difficulties in promoting this idea cannot be underestimated. The experience of the past, in which periods of negotiation and ceasefire were utilized by the LTTE to rearm and reposition itself is a lesson that most people in Sri Lanka remember with both anger and dismay. The risk of being misunderstood has to be borne by those who uphold humanitarian values as a priority.
dailymirror.lk
Monday, February 2, 2009
INDIA: EMERGING AS "MAHA BHARATH!!!
India emerging as ‘Maha Bharath’
by a Special Correspondent
Before 1947 in the period leading up to Indian independence many Indian nationalists, including intellectuals and politicians, were of the view that India was the successor to the British Raj. They were deeply disappointed that Britain had created Pakistan for the Muslims. A regular contributor to your columns former Diplomat K. Godage pointed out recently that Jawaharlal Nehru’s senior advisor one Pannikar had wanted Burma and Ceylon to be made "satellite states of India". This imperial mindset of the Indians has not left them even after 60 years. We have seen this mindset manifest itself on a number of occasions during these 60 years; first we saw the annexation of Sikim and after that, the virtual take-over of Bhutan. India never let Nepal forget that she would have to contend with India if Nepal ever got close to China. Nepal was made to pay a heavy price for cultivating a close relationship with China. It would be recalled that India closed almost all her border crossing points and hurt Nepal in many ways. Her crowning moment of course came in 1971 when she was able to break up Pakistan and create Bangladesh.
From 1980 onwards with the return of the imperious Indira Gandhi as Prime Minister, we watched helplessly as India destabilized our country and let loose a separatist movement to create a separate state in this country, not out of any love for the Tamil people in our land but in the words of Professor Sankaran Krishnan of the East West University of Hawaii, who has stated, "Mrs. Gandhi was not in the business of fighting other peoples’ struggles for them. India’s interest in Sri Lanka was not bringing justice to the Tamil people but ‘Finlandizing‘ the country". It was to pull us into their security orbit
India endeavours to assert a domineering role in South Asia; She seeks adherence of her neighbours to her own policies on regional and international issues. India seeks to create a relationship of dependence. In 1978 Sri Lanka, (President JR apparently wanted Sri Lanka to be as Independent and neutral as Switzerland) and tilted towards the west as it was President Jayewardene firm belief that the insurgency in the North should be tackled not only by military means but also by developing our economy with the assistance of the West, which had the capital, the know-how. India viewed the tilt towards the west, during the period of the Cold War as a threat to her security and intervened. She of course paid a heavy price for that adventure but she did no doubt figuratively plant her flag here and in the words of Mr. K Godage, India "circumscribed our sovereignty" through the letters exchanged between the then Indian Prime Minister and our President. It has been suggested that it was an effort to Bhutanize this country or to Finlandize the country (referring to Article 3 of the Agreement between Finland and the former Soviet Union) fortunately she did not succeed.
Considering her own security concerns, today’s India is in some ways paranoid because of Nuclear China in the north and Nuclear Pakistan in the north-west and the fact that the two countries have a very close relationship. China’s friendship with Myanmar, is also a matter of grave concern to India. She perceives of threats to her security purely in military terms, both from within and from outside the region. She also has to defend her extensive coastline. India today perceives of Pakistan as the principal threat, this has loomed large in India’s dealings with her neighbours. Domestic pressures (as in the case of Sri Lanka) have also conditioned India’s foreign policy. India’s defence perimeter does not end at her borders but at the outer boundaries of her neighbours in the region.
India is obsessed with Pakistan and vice versa. Pakistan seems to be totally focused on containing India. Meanwhile how does India see herself as we proceed into the 21st Century? India understands the importance of power in international relations and she is preparing the ground for being accepted as a powerful nation both militarily and economically worthy of a permanent seat in the UNSC. Being a nuclear power catapults her into a different orbit from ours. Though it is generally believed that investment in India’s military security will contribute to the stability of the region, we, in small countries in the region have cause to fear, for India’s strength could breed leaders who would seek to establish a greater India or a ‘Maha Barath’.
India may have her own national goals and aspirations and to pursue them she appears to have tied up with the US in the same manner as she had a special relationship with the Soviet Union during the period of the Cold War. This tie-up certainly gives her greater clout than before but she need to put her house in order first, and Kashmir and the other insurgencies and the disaffected Muslim minorities come to mind. Next she has to treat her smaller neighbours better, for India has a natural leadership role in the region and there is a responsibility that goes with it. Although we are small countries we must be treated with respect and as her partners and our independence respected. In this regard we should also guard against our own duplicitous, cunning, wily politicians who have their own agendas and dangle carrots (describing them as ‘opportunities’) before the unsuspecting public and seek to end our being separate from India by building a bridge across the Palk Strait!
Mr. Godage has stated in many of his articles that India must, with sincerity, adopt the Gujral Principles and not ask what we small countries could do for India but what India can do for us without expecting us to reciprocate. India needs to underwrite our security, our territorial integrity and sovereignty not merely through words.
India has much work to do if she is interested in playing the role of the regions leader. India has only produced three leaders, Pandit Ji, Inder Kumar Gujral and Manmohan Singh whom we would consider as statesmen all the others have been common or garden Indian politicians Many in this country suspect India’s intentions when she advocates Regional Integration —— they say ‘Regional Cooperation", we must say yes but as for Regional Integration, we must say a firm No. The emerging world order will not save us from this plight because our economies are weak. One would not be surprised if India comes along and bails us out, but there would be price to pay and what would that be? None other than our agreeing to sign the CEPA! If we sign to CEPA that would be a huge triumph for India for she would next have Nepal fall in line and the next country that would be compelled to sign up a Comprehensive Partnership Agreement would be Bangladesh. India would then not only have isolated her enemy, Pakistan but would have integrated our economies with that of the huge Indian economy. We would in actual fact have been swallowed up. If the government has no options left but to sign the CEPA as the price for the bail-out, then it is incumbent on the government to ensure absolute transparency and have the necessary safeguards built in to ensure that we do not cede our independence through this subtle mechanism.
Yes, the fear is that considering Indians sheer size, it population and its resources, Regional Integration would be a subtle way of incorporating us into India’s economy. Though we are living in an interdependent Globalized world India would take over the commanding heights of our economies and we would then become virtual colonies of the new Imperial India—the ‘Maha Barath’!
www island.lk
by a Special Correspondent
Before 1947 in the period leading up to Indian independence many Indian nationalists, including intellectuals and politicians, were of the view that India was the successor to the British Raj. They were deeply disappointed that Britain had created Pakistan for the Muslims. A regular contributor to your columns former Diplomat K. Godage pointed out recently that Jawaharlal Nehru’s senior advisor one Pannikar had wanted Burma and Ceylon to be made "satellite states of India". This imperial mindset of the Indians has not left them even after 60 years. We have seen this mindset manifest itself on a number of occasions during these 60 years; first we saw the annexation of Sikim and after that, the virtual take-over of Bhutan. India never let Nepal forget that she would have to contend with India if Nepal ever got close to China. Nepal was made to pay a heavy price for cultivating a close relationship with China. It would be recalled that India closed almost all her border crossing points and hurt Nepal in many ways. Her crowning moment of course came in 1971 when she was able to break up Pakistan and create Bangladesh.
From 1980 onwards with the return of the imperious Indira Gandhi as Prime Minister, we watched helplessly as India destabilized our country and let loose a separatist movement to create a separate state in this country, not out of any love for the Tamil people in our land but in the words of Professor Sankaran Krishnan of the East West University of Hawaii, who has stated, "Mrs. Gandhi was not in the business of fighting other peoples’ struggles for them. India’s interest in Sri Lanka was not bringing justice to the Tamil people but ‘Finlandizing‘ the country". It was to pull us into their security orbit
India endeavours to assert a domineering role in South Asia; She seeks adherence of her neighbours to her own policies on regional and international issues. India seeks to create a relationship of dependence. In 1978 Sri Lanka, (President JR apparently wanted Sri Lanka to be as Independent and neutral as Switzerland) and tilted towards the west as it was President Jayewardene firm belief that the insurgency in the North should be tackled not only by military means but also by developing our economy with the assistance of the West, which had the capital, the know-how. India viewed the tilt towards the west, during the period of the Cold War as a threat to her security and intervened. She of course paid a heavy price for that adventure but she did no doubt figuratively plant her flag here and in the words of Mr. K Godage, India "circumscribed our sovereignty" through the letters exchanged between the then Indian Prime Minister and our President. It has been suggested that it was an effort to Bhutanize this country or to Finlandize the country (referring to Article 3 of the Agreement between Finland and the former Soviet Union) fortunately she did not succeed.
Considering her own security concerns, today’s India is in some ways paranoid because of Nuclear China in the north and Nuclear Pakistan in the north-west and the fact that the two countries have a very close relationship. China’s friendship with Myanmar, is also a matter of grave concern to India. She perceives of threats to her security purely in military terms, both from within and from outside the region. She also has to defend her extensive coastline. India today perceives of Pakistan as the principal threat, this has loomed large in India’s dealings with her neighbours. Domestic pressures (as in the case of Sri Lanka) have also conditioned India’s foreign policy. India’s defence perimeter does not end at her borders but at the outer boundaries of her neighbours in the region.
India is obsessed with Pakistan and vice versa. Pakistan seems to be totally focused on containing India. Meanwhile how does India see herself as we proceed into the 21st Century? India understands the importance of power in international relations and she is preparing the ground for being accepted as a powerful nation both militarily and economically worthy of a permanent seat in the UNSC. Being a nuclear power catapults her into a different orbit from ours. Though it is generally believed that investment in India’s military security will contribute to the stability of the region, we, in small countries in the region have cause to fear, for India’s strength could breed leaders who would seek to establish a greater India or a ‘Maha Barath’.
India may have her own national goals and aspirations and to pursue them she appears to have tied up with the US in the same manner as she had a special relationship with the Soviet Union during the period of the Cold War. This tie-up certainly gives her greater clout than before but she need to put her house in order first, and Kashmir and the other insurgencies and the disaffected Muslim minorities come to mind. Next she has to treat her smaller neighbours better, for India has a natural leadership role in the region and there is a responsibility that goes with it. Although we are small countries we must be treated with respect and as her partners and our independence respected. In this regard we should also guard against our own duplicitous, cunning, wily politicians who have their own agendas and dangle carrots (describing them as ‘opportunities’) before the unsuspecting public and seek to end our being separate from India by building a bridge across the Palk Strait!
Mr. Godage has stated in many of his articles that India must, with sincerity, adopt the Gujral Principles and not ask what we small countries could do for India but what India can do for us without expecting us to reciprocate. India needs to underwrite our security, our territorial integrity and sovereignty not merely through words.
India has much work to do if she is interested in playing the role of the regions leader. India has only produced three leaders, Pandit Ji, Inder Kumar Gujral and Manmohan Singh whom we would consider as statesmen all the others have been common or garden Indian politicians Many in this country suspect India’s intentions when she advocates Regional Integration —— they say ‘Regional Cooperation", we must say yes but as for Regional Integration, we must say a firm No. The emerging world order will not save us from this plight because our economies are weak. One would not be surprised if India comes along and bails us out, but there would be price to pay and what would that be? None other than our agreeing to sign the CEPA! If we sign to CEPA that would be a huge triumph for India for she would next have Nepal fall in line and the next country that would be compelled to sign up a Comprehensive Partnership Agreement would be Bangladesh. India would then not only have isolated her enemy, Pakistan but would have integrated our economies with that of the huge Indian economy. We would in actual fact have been swallowed up. If the government has no options left but to sign the CEPA as the price for the bail-out, then it is incumbent on the government to ensure absolute transparency and have the necessary safeguards built in to ensure that we do not cede our independence through this subtle mechanism.
Yes, the fear is that considering Indians sheer size, it population and its resources, Regional Integration would be a subtle way of incorporating us into India’s economy. Though we are living in an interdependent Globalized world India would take over the commanding heights of our economies and we would then become virtual colonies of the new Imperial India—the ‘Maha Barath’!
www island.lk
LOST OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE TAMILS!!!
Lost opportunities for the Tamils
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has almost been militarily defeated. The fate of its leaders and the remaining cadres is not clear. It seems only through a miracle that the LTTE would bounce back and capture at least one or two districts in the north to wield its rule in them as they did earlier.
Even if the outfit would bounce back and roll back the advances of the security forces it would take decades for it to bring the areas that were under their control back under their rule. However, it is more likely to be wishful thinking on the part of the LTTE and its allies to anticipate another comeback by the rebels given their present setback.
The LTTE or for that matter the separatist movement did not come to being in a vacuum. Also separatism was not created in one man’s mind. It has its own origin, history and evolution. During the initial stages of the secessionist movement even the intelligentsia among the majority Sinhalese sympathized with it. The leftist movement including the JVP with some of the present JHU leaders in it justified the demand for secession with the Marxist theory of “Self determination of nations” in the early eighties of the last century.
They too reasoned the Tamil struggle to the disfranchising of Tamil estate workers in 1949, Sinhala Only Act in 1956, Standardization of university entrance in 1963 and the alleged state sponsored Sinhalese colonization in traditional Tamil areas in the north and east by various development projects under various governments. The Tamil armed groups then had the backing of Tamilnadu as well as the Indian Central Government. Indian Central government of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi provided them with money, weapons and military training in the eighties.
They drew a great amount of sympathy from the international community that they managed to get a resolution recognizing Tamil Eelam passed in the US Massachusetts House of Representatives in June 1981.
They now have lost almost all. India , the US , Canada and 25 countries in the European Union have designated the LTTE as an international terrorist organization. Australia and Malaysia are considering banning of the outfit. The organization has lost control of almost all the lands it wielded power in the north and the east. In a situation where the LTTE is now in, it is natural for anyone to recall the good old days when the outfit had ruled the roost and the opportunities that Tamils lost in the search for a real solution to the ethnic problem. Indeed the LTTE and other Tamil organizations and political parties lost too many chances for the resolution of the ethnic problem in view of a lack of political will on the part of the governments as well as the intransigence of the LTTE and other Tamil groups.
One would see five major opportunities where Tamil leaders could have won political as well as administrative powers so that they could look after their own affairs except those powers considered to be detrimental to the unity and territorial integrity of the country. First and decisive among them was the Indo Lanka Accord of 1987 which even changed the nature of the Sri Lankan state.It was a time when India under Indira Gandhi had virtually subjugated President JR Jayewardene’s government in Sri Lanka by displaying its readiness to intervene in the internal matters of Sri Lanka by military means. India sent a flotilla of ships to the Sri Lankan waters and Indian planes violated the Sri Lankan air space to remind the island neighbour about her hegemony in the region before the Accord.
After displaying her military might India forced a “political solution” down the throat of the Sri Lankan Government. Though it was far below the expectations of the Tamil armed groups the provincial council system introduced through Indo Lanka Accord shifted the nature of the Sri Lankan state from a unitary form to a basic federal form. Also it gave the opportunity for the Tamils to look after their own affairs in the Northern and Eastern provinces. Had the LTTE accepted it, Tamils could have run the amalgamated two provinces with the blessings of India .
One important aspect that was ignored throughout by the LTTE and its allies was that India would not allow anyone to establish a separate Tamil state in the northern part of Sri Lanka which might become a base for the secessionist elements in its southernmost state of Tamilnadu. Therefore the Tamils in Sri Lanka lost a major opportunity in respect of their demands in 1987.
Two other opportunities were given by Presidents Ranasinghe Premadasa and Chandrika Kumaratunga for the Tamil leaders to rule over their own community through peace talks. Even the LTTE’s ideologue Anton Balasingham at the opening of the LTTE courts complex in Kilinochchi in 2003 said they could have accepted the famous “package” offered by President Kumaratunga. But it was too late.
The golden opportunity that was offered by a Sri Lankan government to the Tamil leaders for a resolution was the Norwegian sponsored peace process under Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. It is true that the very nature of the peace process agreed upon by the two parties laid an “international safety net” and created a vast rift in the military machine of the LTTE which was a major cause for its present predicament. But the Wickremesinghe government was too amenable then for the Tamils to win over a lot except for a Tamil Eelam.
However all these are now “spilled milk”. What is worrying the ordinary Tamils might be the lost opportunities and the damaged prestige of their community with the military defeat of the LTTE. It is also a serious challenge for a government that wants not to pass the seeds of separatism on to the future generations to assimilate this hurt community into the Sri Lankan society.
dailymirror.lk
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has almost been militarily defeated. The fate of its leaders and the remaining cadres is not clear. It seems only through a miracle that the LTTE would bounce back and capture at least one or two districts in the north to wield its rule in them as they did earlier.
Even if the outfit would bounce back and roll back the advances of the security forces it would take decades for it to bring the areas that were under their control back under their rule. However, it is more likely to be wishful thinking on the part of the LTTE and its allies to anticipate another comeback by the rebels given their present setback.
The LTTE or for that matter the separatist movement did not come to being in a vacuum. Also separatism was not created in one man’s mind. It has its own origin, history and evolution. During the initial stages of the secessionist movement even the intelligentsia among the majority Sinhalese sympathized with it. The leftist movement including the JVP with some of the present JHU leaders in it justified the demand for secession with the Marxist theory of “Self determination of nations” in the early eighties of the last century.
They too reasoned the Tamil struggle to the disfranchising of Tamil estate workers in 1949, Sinhala Only Act in 1956, Standardization of university entrance in 1963 and the alleged state sponsored Sinhalese colonization in traditional Tamil areas in the north and east by various development projects under various governments. The Tamil armed groups then had the backing of Tamilnadu as well as the Indian Central Government. Indian Central government of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi provided them with money, weapons and military training in the eighties.
They drew a great amount of sympathy from the international community that they managed to get a resolution recognizing Tamil Eelam passed in the US Massachusetts House of Representatives in June 1981.
They now have lost almost all. India , the US , Canada and 25 countries in the European Union have designated the LTTE as an international terrorist organization. Australia and Malaysia are considering banning of the outfit. The organization has lost control of almost all the lands it wielded power in the north and the east. In a situation where the LTTE is now in, it is natural for anyone to recall the good old days when the outfit had ruled the roost and the opportunities that Tamils lost in the search for a real solution to the ethnic problem. Indeed the LTTE and other Tamil organizations and political parties lost too many chances for the resolution of the ethnic problem in view of a lack of political will on the part of the governments as well as the intransigence of the LTTE and other Tamil groups.
One would see five major opportunities where Tamil leaders could have won political as well as administrative powers so that they could look after their own affairs except those powers considered to be detrimental to the unity and territorial integrity of the country. First and decisive among them was the Indo Lanka Accord of 1987 which even changed the nature of the Sri Lankan state.It was a time when India under Indira Gandhi had virtually subjugated President JR Jayewardene’s government in Sri Lanka by displaying its readiness to intervene in the internal matters of Sri Lanka by military means. India sent a flotilla of ships to the Sri Lankan waters and Indian planes violated the Sri Lankan air space to remind the island neighbour about her hegemony in the region before the Accord.
After displaying her military might India forced a “political solution” down the throat of the Sri Lankan Government. Though it was far below the expectations of the Tamil armed groups the provincial council system introduced through Indo Lanka Accord shifted the nature of the Sri Lankan state from a unitary form to a basic federal form. Also it gave the opportunity for the Tamils to look after their own affairs in the Northern and Eastern provinces. Had the LTTE accepted it, Tamils could have run the amalgamated two provinces with the blessings of India .
One important aspect that was ignored throughout by the LTTE and its allies was that India would not allow anyone to establish a separate Tamil state in the northern part of Sri Lanka which might become a base for the secessionist elements in its southernmost state of Tamilnadu. Therefore the Tamils in Sri Lanka lost a major opportunity in respect of their demands in 1987.
Two other opportunities were given by Presidents Ranasinghe Premadasa and Chandrika Kumaratunga for the Tamil leaders to rule over their own community through peace talks. Even the LTTE’s ideologue Anton Balasingham at the opening of the LTTE courts complex in Kilinochchi in 2003 said they could have accepted the famous “package” offered by President Kumaratunga. But it was too late.
The golden opportunity that was offered by a Sri Lankan government to the Tamil leaders for a resolution was the Norwegian sponsored peace process under Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. It is true that the very nature of the peace process agreed upon by the two parties laid an “international safety net” and created a vast rift in the military machine of the LTTE which was a major cause for its present predicament. But the Wickremesinghe government was too amenable then for the Tamils to win over a lot except for a Tamil Eelam.
However all these are now “spilled milk”. What is worrying the ordinary Tamils might be the lost opportunities and the damaged prestige of their community with the military defeat of the LTTE. It is also a serious challenge for a government that wants not to pass the seeds of separatism on to the future generations to assimilate this hurt community into the Sri Lankan society.
dailymirror.lk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
