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, April 1, 2015
Wiggie’s Thunderbolt and 13A- not + as solution
By Izeth Hussain-March 27, 2015, 6:25 pm
To understand the significance of what transpired during the Modi visit
we must set it in the perspective of developments since the Presidential
elections of January 8. The outcome of those elections has been
interpreted in different ways. The most significant fact about those
elections was that the minorities voted solidly in favor of the
Sinhalese candidate Maithripala Sirisena, which was an exhilarating
display of our ability to transcend the ethnic divide. The minorities
came together with a substantial proportion of the Sinhalese in favor of
democracy and an end to our two ethnic problems, which had clearly
become impossible under the former President Rajapakse. The situation
clearly demanded that anything that might obstruct ethnic accommodation
should be removed. The international community responded accordingly by
postponing the presentation of the war crimes report by six months.
It seemed to be, at long last, halcyon weather on the ethnic front. But
it was at that moment that our Wiggie – Chief Minister of the Northern
Provincial Council, Wigneswaran – chose to detonate his thunderbolt in
the form of a demand that the international community investigate
charges of genocide against the Tamils perpetrated since 1948. The
timing seemed truly bizarre. The question that shot into my mind was
this: Is that man mad? If so, his bizarre behavior could be dismissed as
the kind of thing that somehow happens every now and then. But his
behavior seemed to me symptomatic of the kind of Tamil who is ostensibly
moderate but continues to hanker after Eelam or something close to it.
He can be expected to sabotage anything that might lead to ethnic
accommodation. However, we can afford to laugh off our Wiggie’s bizarre
antics, but not those of Prime Minister Modi. He came, he saw, and
conquered us with a superb display of Indian soft power, and has gone
smothered in laurel. But he has left two thunder clouds that could again
bode stormy weather on the ethnic front.
One Modi thunder cloud takes the form of his recommendation that we go
beyond 13A. It has been reported that at that point Wimal Weerawansa
staged a walk-out. I regret that many more did not join him, for that
recommendation has to be regarded as nothing less than outrageous. In my
last article I pointed out that that recommendation was objectionable
for being open-ended: it could be interpreted as meaning that the Tamil
side would be justified in asking even for a confederal arrangement by
way of devolution. Of course, Modi did not mean anything like that, but
he ought to have been circumspect bearing in mind that the Tamil side
has in the past shown a penchant for striking out for maximalist
positions. His recommendation was therefore made in an irresponsible
manner. But I have in mind a much more fundamental objection: it is that
since 1987 no Sri Lankan Government has committed itself to going
beyond 13A. True, former President Rajapaksa used to jabber and blabber
about 13A+, but that was just a form of Orwellian duckspeak, a form of
speech in which the larynx goes into action without the higher brain
centers coming into operation at all. His statements on 13A+ did not
have the sanction of the Government behind it, and was not much more
meaningful than the inane quacking of ducks. Considering the Peace
Accords and commitments made thereafter, it would have been legitimate
for Prime Minister Modi to request the full implementation of 13A. But
in going beyond that he was perilously close to interfering in the
internal affairs of Sri Lanka.
The second Modi thunder cloud took the form of his encomium on what he
called "cooperative federalism". I have studied the full text of his
speech to Parliament in which that encomium occurs. He was not making a
policy prescription for Sri Lanka to follow, and he explicitly
acknowledged that a single model of devolution would not fit all
countries. He was speaking of his experience as Chief Minister for
thirteen years and as Prime Minister for a brief period, on which basis
he clearly thought that a very wide measure of devolution, even to the
extent of cooperative federalism would be best for India. But are we to
suppose that Modi was merely engaging in personal reminiscences which
had no relevance to Sri Lanka at all? Surely, he clearly meant that Sri
Lanka, too, should try out a very wide measure of devolution going well
beyond 13A.
The two thunder clouds left behind by Modi – going beyond 13A and
cooperative federalism – can be expected to lead to stormy weather on
the ethnic front because they can encourage the taking of maximalist
positions by the Tamil side. We must not forget that there used to be a
time when the LTTE insisted that negotiations should be preceded by the
government acknowledging that the Tamils had a right to
self-determination inclusive of the right to set up a separate state.
Could arrogant stupidity have gone further? But, the situation today is
very different because the LTTE has been defeated and the TNA is led by
seasoned moderate politicians. It is worth mentioning that the Global
Tamil Forum did not want any demonstrations against President Sirisena
during his London visit. I would like to believe that the Modi line may
not necessarily prevail. But, I cannot ignore this from Chief Minister
Wigneswaran: "The thirteenth Amendment can never be the final solution.
No wonder you referred to your firm belief in cooperative federalism
yesterday in Parliament ... We need the services of a guarantor and it
is our considered view that the Government of India under your
stewardship is best suited for this role". It is to be noted that he was
not speaking in the first person singular but in the plural, using the
terms ‘we’ and ‘our’ to indicate that he was speaking for the Tamils as a
whole. So, we can take it that Modi’s advocacy of a very wide measure
of devolution will encourage the Tamil side to strike out for maximalist
positions, making the problem of ethnic accommodation even more
difficult than in the past. The Modi visit has therefore to be regarded
as a total unmitigated disaster.
At this point we must however consider a possible counter-argument. The
military defeat of the LTTE shows that the Sri Lankan Tamils cannot by
themselves establish Eelam. Therefore, even a very wide measure of
devolution, including federalism, will not pose any threat to the
political unity and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. In fact, the
failure to find a political solution, on the basis of wide devolution or
any other basis is precisely what might lead some other power, namely
India, to help the Tamils establish Eelam. I myself have advanced this
argument several times and have never found anything by way of a cogent
reply. The truth is that there cannot be a cogent reply at the logical
level. But I would concede that I have been arguing at an abstract level
without taking into account hard realities in the realm of practical
politics. The hard reality is that because of the historical experience
of many invasions from South India, as well as from the West, the
Sinhalese have an acute sense of Sri Lanka’s vulnerability and the dread
that a wide measure of devolution would lead ineluctably to Eelam. It
is an unreasonable dread, but a very real one all the same. A political
solution on the basis of a very wide measure of devolution is not in the
realm of practical politics in Sri Lanka.
I have to be terse in conclusion. I suggest that the government
undertake a two-pronged programme. It is a fact that there are
innumerable minorities all over the world who are living in reasonable
accommodation with dominant majorities without any devolution at all.
Our Tamils are very happy to settle down in the West where there is no
devolution for the Tamils. Why insist on a wide measure of devolution
only in Sri Lanka? Part of the reason is that the Tamils have an
essentially racist projection about the Sinhalese, the so-called
Mahawamsa mind-set which will forever prevent the Sinhalese giving the
minorities fair and equal treatment, and that means that the Tamils can
be happy in Sri Lanka only within a Tamil enclave. The government should
undertake a campaign to spread the view that the Mahawamsa mindset is
tosh, and that Sinhalese-Tamil relations have for the most part been,
not antagonistic, but symbiotic.
The second prong of the programme I have in mind is that the government
earnestly try to make a success of the Northern Provincial Council. The
implementation of 13A-, without land and police powers, backed by a
fully functioning democracy, should go a long way towards solving the
ethnic problem. If the government is earnest about implementing 13A-, it
will be occupying the moral high ground which is the only way Sri Lanka
can come through when challenged by powerful countries. But are we
capable of producing such a Government? I don’t know, but we had better
try, bearing in mind that Narendra Modi is not just any leader but a
devotee of the Hindutva ideology, an essentially Fascist ideology, and
that he is not an Oxbridge product.