A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Going and coming: Sinhalese asylums seekers in Australia
Knowledgeable people would probably assume, with some confidence, that
the majority of asylum seekers coming from Sri Lanka to Australia would
be Tamils. The Tamil people comprise only 11% of the population while
the Sinhalese vastly outnumber them, making up a whopping 75% of the
total people in Sri Lanka. Their minority status unfortunately burdens
them with a number of disadvantages, least of all the fact that Tamils
are often mistreated by the Sinhalese majority. Given this
marginalisation, what is surprising is the fact that many of the recent
asylum seekers to Australia are Sinhalese. Why this is so helps reveal
some interesting features of Sinhalese culture, but it also calls into
question the Australian government's intention in stemming the flow of
asylum seekers.
Tamil mistreatment varies wildly, and of course some Tamils have been
able to occupy positions of considerable power. For the most part,
however, Sri Lankan Tamils occupy a marginal social status and have
fewer opportunities than their Sinhalese counterparts. The rivalry
between the Sinhalese and the Tamils stems originally from hundreds of
years of conflict brought on by Tamil migration from India. At one point
in Sri Lankan history the Tamils were the dominant power on the island.
Now, it is the Sinhalese who are in charge and this has sometimes led
to Tamil mistreatment either in an extreme form – such as the alleged
mass slaughter of Tamils at the end of the civil war – to more subtle
forms of oppression. These more subtle forms can involve, for example, intimidation campaigns against Tamil activists and newspapers or the allegation that the Sri Lankan government have taken advantage of the civil war to illegally grab Tamil land in the North.
These are just a few reported cases of Tamil mistreatment by the
Sinhalese majority. Indeed, there is a common saying amongst the
Sinhalese in Sri Lanka that goes demala demalamayi or "a Tamil
is a Tamil." In other words, when a Tamil behaves inappropriately it can
hardly be avoided – it is a defect of the race. This sort of racism is
an unfortunate stain on the otherwise idyllic island of Sri Lanka.
For these reasons, we might expect Tamils to flee Sri Lanka for a better life overseas in countries like Australia – and, of course, they do. But what is most surprising is the fact that many of the Sri Lankan asylum seekers to Australia are not ethnic Tamils, but are actually Sinhalese.
The Sinhalese are not only the dominant ethnic group in Sri Lanka, they
also enjoy the lion's share of the wealth of Sri Lanka, and otherwise
dominate every facet of Sri Lankan society. How is it that the dominant
ethnic group of Sri Lanka, the group that is seemingly least in need of
asylum, are nonetheless the primary applicants for asylum in Australia?
There are two reasons for this, I think: First, there is a cultural
ethos of travel amongst the Sinhalese majority. Second, and in spite of
the fact that the Sinhalese dominate Sri Lankan society, there are
nonetheless a poor Sinhalese underclass who wish to travel and for whom
conventional immigration is not an option.
Amanda Hodge argues that a majority of the Sinhalese that get on boats to come to Australia are Catholic Sinhalese.
The Catholic Sinhalese live mainly along the coast of Southern Sri
Lanka and their primary occupation is fishing. Therefore, as a people
familiar with the sea, they are also attracted to the possibility of
finding a better life on distant shores. They are, Hodge argues, a
seafaring people. This is a fair point, but I do not believe that this
ethos of travelling is restricted only to the Catholic Sinhalese.
Similarly, I am not convinced that it is only Catholic Sinhalese that
want to take advantage of the people smuggling trade and get on a
rickety boat bound for Australia. The impulse to leave Sri Lanka for
better pastures is felt not just by the Catholics, but also by the
entire Sinhalese majority. It is a quality of the Sinhalese people as
such, and is not an attribute of any one religious or occupational
group. To understand better where this impulse to travel stems from it
is useful to consider the phrase gihila ennam.
Gehila ennam means, "to go and return." It is a parting phrase
similar to our "see you later." It is a common idiom used on a daily
basis throughout Sinhalese communities. But it is more than just a
simple idiom, it is also a part of the cultural ethos of the Sinhalese.
When a guest leaves their host's home they will say, gehila ennam.
When they this they are saying, "I will go now, but I will come back."
It is a promise that they will return, and this is significant socially
because it signals the importance of their host. It signals that their
relationship is not just that of a fleeting acquaintance, but is rather a
substantial partnership. It signals that visiting their friend or
relative is important to them; that they matter. The phrasegehila ennam therefore,
in one sense, cements social relations in Sri Lanka. Coming to
someone's house is an important event, more important – and more common –
than it is in Australia. People are expected to bring gifts when they
visit someone's house, and in return the host is obligated to provide
tea and refreshments. Yet in order to come back one also has to go and this element of going is as important as when one arrives.
For the purposes of understanding Sinhalese emigration, it is actually
more significant because, at a global level, this concept of coming and
going is a relation that binds Sinhalese all over the world. So although
the Sinhalese people may be split up with communities existing in every
corner of the globe, the Sinhalese people are also inextricably bound
together. They are bound in unity by the island of Sri Lanka, which is a
place that many feel they can always return to. Sinhalese habitually
leave Sri Lanka, but they leave in part so that they can one day return.
This is the concept of gehila ennam at a macro level.
This impulse to leave and return lies at the heart of Sinhalese
emigration. During the civil war, many Sinhalese families departed Sri
Lanka for a new life in foreign lands. Many of these families arrived in
Australia using more traditional routes of immigration and the sons and
daughters of these first generation immigrants now participate in
Australian society as doctors, lawyers, accountants and so on. Yet it is
the privileged middle and upper class of Sinhalese society that were
able to make the move to Australia in this conventional fashion. To be
able to make a new life in Australia it was necessary to be of the right
economic class. Nonetheless, this does not stop many poorer Sinhalese
making the big move of leaving Sri Lanka in order to find new
opportunities. Many of these less well-endowed Sinhalese end up working
as house maids in Middle Eastern countries. Those employed in such
menial jobs are often not well treated by their employers. There was
considerable outrage when a young female cleaner named Rizana Nafeek was executed in Saudi Arabia after being found guilty of homicide,
though the police investigation has already been called into question.
In spite of these risks, many poorer Sinhalese flock to the Middle East
so that they can send as much money home in order to support their
families in Sri Lanka.
This drive to leave the country, to make something of oneself overseas,
is an impulse shared not only by the middle and upper class Sinhalese,
it is a desire maintained also by those without many resources. To leave
Sri Lanka, and to come back in glory, is a dream of many Sinhalese.
This is in accordance with the gehila ennam ethos. It is widely
believed that developed countries like Australia are economic heavens
and that merely stepping foot in the country will confer great wealth.
One elderly Sinhalese lady who I knew was astonished to learn that there
were poor white people in Australia and that menial tasks such as
rubbish collecting was still conducted by human beings. She believed
that Australians employed robots for such tasks. There is therefore a
pervasive myth, in Sri Lanka, that the West is a place in which one is
granted great riches almost as a matter of course. This myth is
propagated by many expat Sinhalese who, upon their return to Sri Lanka,
seem to flaunt great wealth. This is so even in cases where expat
Sinhalese are employed in negligible jobs that pay very little. The
concept that there is a poor underclass in the West is not well
understood by many in Sri Lanka. This myth of the prosperity of the West
further bolsters the ethos of gehila ennam. One goes, but only to return in glory.
Captivated by this, many Sinhalese seek a new life overseas. Those that
cannot afford it, however, seek new avenues in order to realise their
goal. This is where people smuggling becomes significant. Poorer
Sinhalese, Sinhalese that who cannot afford a visa, let alone a plane
ticket, seek less scrupulous methods of realising their dream. Unlike
the traditional route of gaining a visa and a plane ticket, the people
smuggling route does not depend upon legitimate systems of trade and so
it is a method that is affordable for many poor Sinhalese. People
smuggling short circuits the traditional route by which people normally
engage in travel, a route that effectively keeps out unwanted peoples.
Nonetheless, it is also a route that keeps the aspirations and dreams of
some alive, and at the same time cynically preys upon those
aspirations. People smuggling is nasty business, but for some it is
their only hope.
The Sinhalese asylum seekers are therefore people who want a better life
but do not have the means to go about achieving that through
conventional methods. It can be argued that this, in part, is what lies
at the heart of Australian anger over asylum seekers. It is not merely a
matter of xenophobia, it is also a matter of classism. Some Australians
cannot tolerate the fact that asylum seekers have found alternative
routes into Australia. It is important to observe that the Australian
government does not object to wealthy Sinhalese coming to Australia to
study medicine or law. In fact, the government is very happy for them to
invest large amounts of money in Australia especially through inflated
international student fees. What the Australian government does mind
is poor Sinhalese coming to Australia who have nothing to contribute.
By 'nothing to contribute' this effectively means 'no money to invest.'
This is evident simply by virtue of the fact that so-called economic
migrants, i.e. those migrants who migrate due to poverty, are not
considered legitimate asylum seekers according to Australian policy.
Indeed, the immigration system in Australia is set up specifically so
that poor people cannot easily receive permanent residency visas
regardless of their individual character. I recall when I was applying
for my permanent residency I was struck by the obtuseness of the
application documentation, not to mention its pricieness. The PR
application cost around $3000. Furthermore, in order to make sense of
the legal minutiae and to expedite our application, we hired a lawyer
which cost us an additional $4000. We were, in fact, directed to hire a
lawyer at the outset by DIAC staff. I imagine this advice is given to
anyone, regardless of whether they can afford it.
The point of this is simply to illustrate that this mechanism is not
just a way for the government to earn revenue, it is also a way of
keeping undesirables out, that is, those who can't afford to stay. This
is simply a form of classism, and it is evident in the attitudes some
Australians – and certainly the Australian government - has towards
asylum seekers. Asylum seekers short circuit the immigration system by
refusing to comply with traditional immigration protocols, protocols
designed specifically to keep them out simply because of their
negligible economic status. As for the Sinhalese that participate in
this system, they are precisely from a poorer background. Yet, in
keeping with the aspirations of thegehila ennam ethos, they aim
to have a better life overseas. For their troubles, they are banished
to detention centres or are otherwise deported back to Sri Lanka to
fates unknown.
