Extinguishing the heat and hatreds caused by a bitter civil war takes time and a commitment on all sides to make peace work. Both now seem to be in short supply in Sri Lanka, which is sliding towards levels of violence not seen in that country since a ceasefire brought conflict to an end in 2002. Yesterday’s landmine attack on a bus in a mainly Sinhalese part of the country, which killed 62 people, including 15 children, and wounded 78 others, was much the most serious incident so far in a conflict that is returning rapidly into all-out war. The government’s response, indiscriminate “deterrent” air strikes on the Tamil north-east of the country, was a bleak sign of what may be to come: a sterile, sustained battle between two heavily-armed sides, neither of which can ever hope to win outright.
Between 1983, when fighting began, and 2002, some 65,000 people were killed. Under international pressure, and a recognition on both sides that a compromise had to be reached, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and the Sinhalese-dominated government reached a ceasefire that brought peace to the country but which did little to settle its constitutional future. That uncertainty, together with splits in the Tigers and an election last year that hardened the government’s nationalist stance, has eroded hopes that a stable settlement could be reached. Attempts at talks, led by the Norwegians, have been hampered by the EU’s recent decision to declare the Tigers a terrorist organisation (which has diminished trust) and by attacks on the ground.
Yesterday’s bombing - although denied by the Tigers- looks like their work, which will only make restarting talks harder. But both sides still say they want to find a workable agreement. This will have to involve concessions from both sides, although the Tamils have already made the biggest one of all by making a form of self-rule, rather than independence, their aim. The Sri Lankan government has done much less than it could have done to persuade Sinhalese voters, who make up 74% of the population, that will they have to give some ground, offering a much greater level of devolution than they have so far. Until the government engages properly, the talks will be empty ones, a route to a temporary deal rather than anything better. Yesterday’s airstrikes were a pointless response to a pointless terrorist attack. They were also a deeply alarming warning about the sad risk of civil war in an astonishing and beautiful country, of which it was once said that “only man is vile”.
Editorial published June 16, 2006.
Between 1983, when fighting began, and 2002, some 65,000 people were killed. Under international pressure, and a recognition on both sides that a compromise had to be reached, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and the Sinhalese-dominated government reached a ceasefire that brought peace to the country but which did little to settle its constitutional future. That uncertainty, together with splits in the Tigers and an election last year that hardened the government’s nationalist stance, has eroded hopes that a stable settlement could be reached. Attempts at talks, led by the Norwegians, have been hampered by the EU’s recent decision to declare the Tigers a terrorist organisation (which has diminished trust) and by attacks on the ground.
Yesterday’s bombing - although denied by the Tigers- looks like their work, which will only make restarting talks harder. But both sides still say they want to find a workable agreement. This will have to involve concessions from both sides, although the Tamils have already made the biggest one of all by making a form of self-rule, rather than independence, their aim. The Sri Lankan government has done much less than it could have done to persuade Sinhalese voters, who make up 74% of the population, that will they have to give some ground, offering a much greater level of devolution than they have so far. Until the government engages properly, the talks will be empty ones, a route to a temporary deal rather than anything better. Yesterday’s airstrikes were a pointless response to a pointless terrorist attack. They were also a deeply alarming warning about the sad risk of civil war in an astonishing and beautiful country, of which it was once said that “only man is vile”.
Editorial published June 16, 2006.
