Tamil racism and 13 A – 2

Karma

by Izeth Hussain-April 1, 2016, 7:19 pm 

I have argued for many years that the Sinhalese side can safely give any amount of devolution to the Tamils without that leading to separation by a supposedly ineluctable linear progression. Separation can take place only if the Sinhalese side is unable to prevent it, because of defeat in war or intervention by a foreign power or for some other reason. I never had a reply to that argument, obviously because at the theoretical level that argument is unassailable. But what about the practical level? The ground realities can change in such a way that what is valid at the theoretical level can become invalid at the practical level. That indeed, I must acknowledge, has happened to my argument.

I refer firstly to the new geopolitical configuration of Sino-Indian rivalry in South Asia and the Indian Ocean, which was the subject of the first part of this article. Let me add briefly to what I wrote there. Since 1948 India has postulated its relations with Sri Lanka on one unvarying principle: Sri Lanka by itself can pose no serious threat to India, but it can do so if it gets together with some foreign power. The important point is that China cannot withdraw from this region without jeopardizing its commercial and other vital interests. That should mean that China would want to secure a permanent foothold in Sri Lanka, and that could lead to complications in Indo-Sri Lanka relations. It has already done so in fact. We can assume that for the most part Sino-Indian relations will be conducted with pragmatic good sense and a spirit of mutual accommodativeness because both sides know that today wars between big powers can benefit no one. But we can never be certain about the future, something that futurological exercises have taught us very clearly. India could want a predominant or dominant position in Sri Lanka, or a North East enclave in which the Tamils are dominant. It could even want – as a worst case hypothesis – to impose a Cyprus style solution, on which I have written two articles. H.L. de Silva, some months before he passed away, wrote that he had thought my argument to be fanciful but he changed his mind after he wondered why India was so insistent on a North East merger. We must now wonder why Prime Minister Modi suddenly vaunted the attractions of federalism, which had for long been an "f" word in India.

 Read More