NorthEast

Taxonomy Color
red
  • The myth about the Tamils of Sri Lanka

    The first casualty of war, they say, is truth. Sri Lanka has been at war for almost three decades. Hitler famously noted that if you’re going to tell lies, then tell a lie so colossal that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.”

     

    The greatest lie about Sri Lanka’s conflict, the central claim that cloaks international community’s amoral support for the Sinhala effort to militarily crush the Tamils, is that the Tamils are happy to be part of Sri Lanka, save for a few ‘grievances’ about language rights, access to jobs and such.

     

    This is the starting point for most explanations about what is going on in Sri Lanka, interpretations of what the Tamils are saying and what should be done to ‘resolve’ the conflict.

     

    In the wake of this fundamental claim, the Tamil demand for independence is, therefore, the demand of ‘extremists’. There is, of course, no possibility of reasoning with extremists, so the correct response is to attack and destroy them.

     

    On the other hand, the Tamils are not without grievances of course: they want their language rights, access to jobs (i.e. to development) and to have some local government powers. Given all this, they’d be content citizens of Sri Lanka.

     

    It is true that almost a hundred thousand Tamils have perished in the Sinhala dominated state’s efforts to destroy Tamil extremists. But the Tamils understand the necessity of this, because, remember most Tamils – 95% according to the US Ambassador – don’t want independence. Most Tamils just need their small grievances attended to.

     

    Unfortunately, just as the Tamil extremists want independence, there are Sinhala extremists who want to keep a unitary state. The correct solution, therefore, lies somewhere in between. So there is a need to explore power-sharing, devolution, federalism and so on.

     

    Now, the Sinhala extremists are very few – they support the JVP. Most Sinhalese, the majority, support the SLFP or the UNP. But these are also reasonable people because, remember, by definition, a majority of a people cannot be extremists.

     

    But the most important thing is to destroy the extremists on both sides. As long as the Sinhala extremists (JVP) don’t win elections and the Tamil extremists (Tamil Tigers) can be wiped out, then the reasonable, moderate people on both sides can get together and ensure the Tamils have their language rights and get jobs and so on.

     

    The above sums up the logic of the international community.

     

    The central claim, repeated frequently, is that most Tamils “don’t want Eelam”. To begin with, it is not explained why not. It is not clear what is so appealing about the Sinhala-dominated state that is supposedly making Tamils reject independence. It is simply asserted this is so.

     

    And anything the Tamils say to the contrary is either ignored or, more often, dismissed as the voice of the extremists.

     

    So on the one hand, all Tamil efforts to say no, they do want self-rule, they do want to be independent is ignored. For example, the Ponghu Thamil mass rallies are dismissed as LTTE events. Even if the LTTE was organizing these events – and that is to ignore the hundreds of Tamil community organizations that worked to bring hundreds of thousands of people to these events, then so what? Which mass demonstrations around the world haven’t been organized? Again, because we already know “most Tamils don’t want Eelam”, we know that these people were forced to go to these: what they wanted to really say was not “We want Eelam”, but “We want to be Sri Lankans”.

     

    On the other hand, those Tamils who contradict this ‘most Tamils don’t want Eelam’ myth, for example, talking about ‘state racism’ or ‘state terrorism’ or ‘oppression’ or ‘genocide’ are dismissed as extremists – or even ‘supporters of terrorism’.

     

    At the same time, those Tamils – like the paramilitary groups working with the Sri Lanka Army – who echo the ‘Tamil don’t want Eelam’ line, are celebrated as ‘moderates’ and the ‘true representatives’ of the Tamils.

     

    Now this myth falls apart if one looks closely at Sri Lankan politics. There is no

    ‘peace movement’ of any standing. Indeed, there never has been.

     

    There are no major rallies drawing Sinhalese and the Tamil speaking communities – Tamils, Upcountry Tamils and Muslims – together in defence of this blissful myth that the international community asserts.

     

    There is not Tamil-Sinhala grass roots movements. There are no Tamil-Sinhala political parties. There are no Tamil-Sinhala civil society groups. Even though, as – in another derivative of the myth – it is repeatedly asserted that ‘most Tamils live amongst Sinhalese’.

     

    Of course there is the odd Tamil in the Sinhala entities and vice-versa (there’s even a Tamil MP in the Sinhala extremist JVP). Tamils and Sinhalese sometimes purchase at each other’s shops.

     

    But, crucially, given the ferocity of the decades long war, there is no shared vision of a future Sri Lanka. There is, however, agreement on the present Sri Lanka; that it is a Sinhala hegemony. And hence the war – the Tamils want to be free of this ethnocracy, the Sinhalese want to maintain it.

     

    This is not a new dynamic. Post-independence Sri Lanka has always been this way.

     

    Which is why in 1977 – almost exactly thirty decades since the British handed power to the Sinhalese, the Tamils declared they’d had enough and voted overwhelmingly for the Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF) and its single point platform: Tamil independence.

     

    Which is why within a year of independence, the Sinhalese had enacted racist legislation and alarmed the Tamils – who then couldn’t envision the vicious repression coming their way – to ask for federal autonomy

     

    You notice there is no response when we point this out. Instead we get the repeated assertion that ‘most Tamils don’t want Eelam’.

     

    The truth, therefore, is plain to see. The Tamils want Eelam. The Sinhalese don’t want to relinquish control of our homeland (they would be delighted if the rest of the Tamils fled the island – so much for multiculturalism). In short, there is no midpoint.

     

    Why do the Tamils want Eelam. It is not because we have a sense of superiority to Sinhalese. It is because we are persecuted by the Sinhalese. We are trapped within Sinhala administration because the British – with typical contempt for all Third Worlders, lumped the ‘islanders’ together and gave sovereignty to the Sinhalese.

     

    Whilst we continue to make our case, to outline our suffering, to rationalize our demand for self-rule, to appeal for international sympathy, we must recognize that pleas will get us nowhere.

     

    The world’s major powers, whilst pontificating about human rights, good governance and such, have readily slaughtered millions of people – mainly in the Third World – in the pursuit of their own interest. (Recall how they first assisted Indonesia as it wiped out 30% of the East Timorese in a short war of conquest and then, three decades later, suddenly howled about human rights and forced Indonesia to give up its grip on that country – and its vast oil reserves).

     

    Faced with international refusal to accept our claims, for decades the Tamil people have been appealing to reason. They say you can wake someone who is sleeping, but not someone who is pretending to be sleeping.

     

    The international community is ignoring us because they can and there is nothing to benefit them from taking up our case – except to pressure economic and geopolitical concessions out of the Sinhalese.

     

    The only way we can secure our long term survival and well being is by placing ourselves on the international agenda. It is only though our own state that we can secure protection from Sinhala hegemony and, just as importantly, make the world listen to us.

     

    We have to stop worrying about the myth about us. We have to ignore the reality that we are being deliberately ignored. Instead, whilst keeping up our efforts to wake the pretend sleepers, we have to look to ourselves, to our own abilities, to our own capacities, to our own determination. The liberation of the Tamil people can only come from ourselves. Anything else is a myth.

  • ‘We will always have the support of the people of Tamil Nadu’

    In its latest edition ‘Ananda Vikadan’, an influential weekly from Tamil Nadu carried an exclusive interview with the head of the LTTE political wing, B Nadesan.

     

    A translation of the interview follows:

     

    What is the current situation in Sri Lanka?

     

    The Sri Lankan government and the security forces have unleashed genocide on the people of Tamil Eelam in a never before seen scale.  Tamil homeland is being subjected to aerial bombardment and artillery fires. Tamils are being killed everyday. There is severe shortage of food and medicine here. Sri Lanka thinks it can destroy the liberation struggle by starving the Tamils. Over hundred thousand people have been displaced in recent times. Against all these odds, the LTTE is fiercely fighting for the liberation of the Tamils.

     

    After the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, LTTE has lost India’s support for its struggle. Under these circumstances what form support are you expecting from the TamilNadu people?

     

    Instead of describing it as the LTTE’s struggle its best described as Tamil people’s struggle. The people of Tamil Nadu have always supported our struggle. This should not be interpreted wrongly. There are strong historical, cultural and ethnic links between the peoples of Tamil Nadu and Tamil Eelam. We will always have the support of the people of Tamil Nadu.

     

    The people who participated in our poll have opined their support for an independent Eelam. However, they are also of the opinion that action should be taken against Pirapaharan who is an accused in the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. What are your thoughts on this?

     

    I would like to convey appreciation to the Tamils who have expressed their views. The participants, who have expressed their support for our struggle, unfortunately have misconception about our leader. I can assure that these views will change in near future.

     

    For how long will this struggle continue?

     

    You cannot define timescales for liberation struggles. However, with the full support of the people we will soon win our freedom.

     

    How is the international community viewing Sri Lanka and the LTTE?

     

    The international community has a good understanding of Sri Lanka. Recently Sri Lanka was evicted from the UN Human Rights Council. Both the international community and human rights groups continue to voice their concern relating to the continuing human rights violations in Sri Lanka.

     

    The international community also has a good understanding of our struggle. They recognise that ours is a legitimate struggle against oppression.

     

    Has India’s policy towards Sri Lanka changed?

     

    Sri Lanka’s diplomatic manoeuvres have always been detrimental to India. Sri Lanka continues to maintain historic links with forces against India. The foreign policies of Sinhala political parties have always been anti-Indian.

     

    At present the war is moving towards a decisive phase. At this juncture, we are hopeful of a change in India’s policy towards Sri Lanka.

  • ‘My Daughter: the terrorist’
    The long awaited showing of ‘My Daughter: The Terrorist’ took place on Monday 11th August to a fully sold out mixed audience at the ‘The Frontline Club’, a media club promoting independent journalism. Following the controversy courted by the film, not least for the Sri Lankan Government’s attempts to block showings globally at numerous film festivals in addition to the reported death threats against the producers, the crowd was in an expectant mood. The film itself was directed by Norwegian Beate Arnestad during the period of the ceasefire between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government.
     
    The crux of the film is centred on the lives of the two protagonists; a pair of female Black Tiger cadres known by their nom de guerres Dharsika and Puhalchudar. The Black Tigers are famed, all be it notoriously, for their use of suicide bombing as a military tactic against the Sri Lankan Armed Forces. However, the stigma associated with suicide bombing, especially since 9/11, has often meant the method itself rather than its cause has been a matter of discussion. With full permission of the LTTE, Arnestad attempts to investigate an example of these causes and discover what it is that drives the Black Tigers into what they do.  
     
    Through a series of conversations with the two soldiers, Arnestad delves into their personal experiences, both as civilians and as cadres during the long running conflict. By visiting various locations which allow them to relive their experiences, the viewer learns about the regular problems endured by the women in particular, and the Tamil population in general, at the hands of the Sri Lankan forces, such as regular aerial bombardment of civilian areas. Additionally, by interviewing Dharsika’s mother, the film tries to explore the impact on the families of LTTE cadres. The interview is very open in content despite the emotions it evokes in her mother and as her mother reveals, Dharsika’s involvement coincides with the death of her father in an aerial bombing. 
     
    The film is extremely powerful and certainly achieves its aim in seeking out the inner feelings of the two women. They are candid in their knowledge of their likely fate yet they unflinchingly describe why they hope to be involved in such a mission. Their words and expressions are heartfelt and reveal their thorough determination and commitment to the cause yet simultaneously demonstrates their indisputable human nature with the revelations of their hurtful memories and tears at occasions. The trust that Arnestad gains with her protagonists is shown through their use of humour at regular intervals as the film progresses. The personal suffering and the genuine retelling of their stories gradually begin to develop an unwitting sympathy in the viewer, who feels their pain, yet is conscious that it contradicts their stand against the use of suicide bombing as a military means.
     
    Amongst the interviews with the soldiers, the producers have made a significant effort to maintain an unbiased standpoint with video clippings of past suicide attacks such as the attempt on President Kumaratunga, and the result of the Colombo Central Bank Bombing.
     
    Following the show, a question and answer session with Arnestad took place in which she was frank about how she went about her project, taking great care to not reveal the help she received and the reasons she picked these two women. Significantly however, whilst not supporting them in their stated missions, a note of the ‘state terror’ taking place was mentioned in tandem with pointing out that the majority of targets were in fact military as oppose to civilian.
     
    The film would be highly recommended for anyone interested in exploring the intentions and beliefs of a Black Tiger, rather than paying sole attention to the interpretation of the mainstream media into such actions. Despite the fact that the film does contain some strong and graphic imagery, one must note that it is with this that the emotions of the women can be put into perspective. 
  • Iran ‘willing’ to share nuclear technology with Sri Lanka

    Iran is willing to share nuclear technology for peaceful purposes with Sri Lanka, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told The Island newspaper.

     

    Mottaki, who was in Colombo to attend the 15th SAARC Summit told The Island, that Iran and Sri Lanka are long standing friends and Tehran was willing to assist Colombo in all fields, including uranium enrichment for peaceful purposes. He also called for the establishment of an Asia parliament on the lines of the European Parliament as a first step towards regional integration.


    Asked about allegations that Iran, was helping Sri Lanka because it has no friends in the world, Mottaki dismissed them as ridiculous. "Ours is a friendship based on mutual trust and understanding. To impute ulterior motives is mischievous to say the least" he said

    "Iran is sincerely committed to the development of Sri Lanka, whom we consider to be a true friend," he said.

    "Our commitment has already been proved by a pledge of over US$ 450 million in assistance for several Sri Lankan projects, including the Sapugaskanda oil refinery and Uma Oya irrigation scheme," Mottaki said.

    The reciprocal visits of Presidents Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mahinda Rajapaksa to each others' countries, bear ample testimony to the solid friendship that has stood the test of time, he observed.

    "Iran, wants to expand economic and commercial ties with all SAARC members including Sri Lanka. We can help the region develop its energy resources and food production among other things."

    Calling for the establishment of an Asian Parliament on the lines of the European Parliament, he said that it could be the first step towards greater integration, which is so vital for development.
  • ACHR brands Sri Lanka as worst Human Rights violator among SAARC countries

    Asian Center for Human Rights (ACHR), a New Delhi-based human rights watchdog, in a rights report covering the South Asian Association for Regional Cooporation (SAARC), released Friday, said "Sri Lanka ranks South Asia’s No.1 human rights violator," adding, "Sri Lanka’s human rights indicators must be considered within a context of very high levels of impunity which tend to suggest a worsening over the human rights picture over the long term."

     

    ACHR determination of ranking "is based on comparative assessment of records of the governments in 2007 on nine thematic issues crucial for enjoyment of human rights: political freedom, right to life, judiciary and administration of justice, status or effectiveness of National Human Rights Institutions, press freedom, violence against women, violations of the rights of the child, violations of the rights of the minorities and indigenous/tribal peoples and repression on human rights defenders," the report said.

    In ACHR's analysis, "Sri Lanka scored the highest negative points for the right to life, the rights of the child, attacks on human rights defenders and violations of the rights of the minorities."

    On press freedom, it [Sri Lanka] ranked No.2 violator only after Bhutan – which has no independent press – because of the systematic attacks on the freedom of expression and journalists, the report said.

    "Discrimination lies at the heart of the problem and the introduction of restrictions on Tamils travelling to Colombo are a powerful symbol of government intent. The political ramifications of the exclusion - not least in terms of prospects for a peaceful settlement of the conflict - of an entire ethnic group from the nation’s capital are of deep concern," the report added.

    Documenting that "540 persons disappeared across Sri Lanka from January to August 2007," the report pointed out that, "Tamils again suffered disproportionately from disappearances."

    Criticizing the judiciary and the endemic lawlessness, the report said, "[t]he rule of law had weakened since the appointment of Justice Sarath Nanda Silva, former Attorney General and Legal Advisor of former President Chandrika Kumaratunga as the Chief Justice. Justice Silva has a long legacy of political, rather than legal, judgements and has regularly interfered with political processes in Sri Lanka."

    Commenting generally on the worst rights violators that included, in the order of decreasing rank, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Pakistan, Maldives, Nepal, and India, the report said, "[d]iscrimination is endemic, institutionalised and in many cases legalised. Human rights violations are integral to counterinsurgency operations conducted by the military in the sub-region. Human rights are routinely violated in police detention including the routine use of torture. National security laws tend to be poorly framed, routinely abused and used as blanket cover to silence legitimate dissent rather than tackle security. These are not the assertions of one organisation but repeatedly confirmed by national and regional and international NGOs and the various UN bodies established to monitor human rights."

    Asian Centre for Human Rights is dedicated to promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the Asian region, according ACHR's website.
     

  • NESOHR: 70,000 new IDPs in Vanni in 60 days

    Documenting that during June and July, an additional 70,800 people registered with the Kilinochchi and Mullaitheevu Secretariats as new Internally Displaced People from areas proximity to Mannar, Vavuniyaa, Manalaaru, and Mukamaalai Foward Defence Lines (FDLs), a report released Friday by NorthEast Secretariat on Human Rights (NESoHR), a Vanni based rights group, said that restrictions imposed by the Sri Lanka Government on taking essential items to Vanni have further hampered assistance given by the humanitarian agencies.

     

    The report said a total of 130,123 have been catergorized as IDPs in in different AGA divisions in Vanni from different areas in the North.

    The report also detailed the shortfall in the essential items reaching Vanni due to restrictions imposed by Colombo.

    22% shortfaill in Sugar, 73% in lentils, 89% in milkpowder, and 20% shortfall in kerosine, add to the woes of the IDPs, and general population in Vanni the report said.

  • Sri Lanka, sick man of SAARC

    Britain has a moral obligation towards Tamils – as much as Kosovans or the people of Darfur.

     

    The report of the Asian Center for Human Rights (ACHR) dated 2nd August 2008 in which Sri Lanka has been named as the No. 1 Human Rights violator in the whole of the SAARC region, where nearly 2 billion people live, is a serious indictment of Mahinda Rajapakse, his security apparatus and his government.

     

    But these reprehensible abuses are carried out with utter impunity as the police, the government and the judiciary have actively collaborated to protect the abusers who use torture, death and disappearances as instruments of war. 

     

    Usually the Judiciary can be relied on to bring the culprits to book. But in this  case, ACHR has reported that the appointment of Justice Sarath Nanda Silva, the former legal advisor to President Chandrika as the Chief Justice, has resulted in a long legacy of political judgements and not legal judgements, that have interfered with the political processes of the country.

     

    The British legal and political establishment has to recognise this authoritative report on the aberration of government and has to give up its thoughtless stand on supporting the commonwealth government of Sri Lanka.

     

    We appeal to the British Foreign Secretary to take the initiative to suspend Sri Lanka from the Commonwealth as it has done with Zimbabwe and Pakistan at various times. If Foreign Secretary Milliband wants to be seen as a political heavyweight and a prospective future Labour leader, now is the time for him to take his stand for human rights and an independent judiciary in Sri Lanka.

     

    The 200,000 or more  British Tamils, who form a sizeable vote bank in some of the marginal seats in London and the principal cities, look upon their parliamentary representatives to become better acquainted with the causes of the ethnic crisis in Sri Lanka and the horrendous cruelty visited upon their own relatives and friends remaining in Sri Lanka.

     

    The Sri Lankan government in a calculated campaign of genocide, wants to clear all Tamils from the country by death or expulsion, in order to make Sri Lanka a Sinhala Buddhist country.  The rest of humanity in the world cannot remain indifferent to it, while the expatriate Tamils driven out of Sri Lanka can never close their eyes to the horrific suffering of their own people in Sri Lanka.

     

    The Sri Lankan government has sold a dummy to the West by calling its ruthless war against the Tamils a fight against ' international terrorism' when all that the Tamils are struggling, is for equality and freedom from oppression.

     

    The Sinhalese have chosen war but the liberty of man reposes as much in the heart and the mind as it is in their land. After 60 years of oppression the Tamils have voted and opted for a separate state called Tamil Eelam. The Sinhalese may win a battle of conquest or even a few, but the war can not be won.

     

    The hunger for Tamil Eelam is firmly etched in the hearts and minds of every Sri Lankan Tamil, and ultimately the truth is that freedom will prevail and Tamil Eelam will be born. This is the God-given right of all Tamils and no earthly power however militarily strong shall trample it down forever. Remember that the Jews came back to their home after 2000 years of wandering.

     

    The evil Sri Lankan war machine supplied by China, Pakistan, India, Israel and Eastern Europe is used to slaughter innocent Tamil women, children and elderly men. The West had a conscience during the racist reign of Milosovec and Karadic in the Balkans and assembled a mighty force to bring them down. The whole world rejoiced in this triumph over evil that set the standards of punishment for all racist thugs in power.

     

    Are the Tamils any less human beings than the Muslims of Serbia? If President Bashir of the Sudan can stand indicted as a human rights criminal for atrocities in Darfur, why is Mahinda Rajapakse not indicted for worse human rights crimes against the Tamils in the North and East of Sri Lanka? In the name of justice and with the cries of over 100,000 innocent dead Tamil souls from beyond the grave, consumed in the flames of an unjust and indefensible war for hegemony, we ask Britain to raise its voice and say that enough is enough.

     

    British Tamils will not forget all those Parliamentarians and human rights activists who supported them to rid this blight upon the fair homeland of the Tamils, when they next elect their representatives.

     

    Ivan Pedropillai is chief editor of the Tamil Writers Guild

  • Tamil Nadu opinion poll calls for independent Eelam

    An independent Tamil Eelam is the solution to the Sri Lankan crisis, decided a majority of voters in a Tamil Nadu poll last week.

     

    54.25% of the respondents said that they have always supported the Tigers and their goal of a separate Tamil homeland in Sri Lanka, in the results of a survey published in last week's Ananda Vikadan, which tops the circulation among weeklies in Tamil Nadu, said that

     

    Although it is known that support for the Tigers is rising in Tamil Nadu, as seen from the large attendance of people, especially youths in meetings addressed by pro-Tiger leaders like Vaiko, the amount of support for the banned outfit, revealed in a survey conducted by a media group, which is considered respected for its neutrality is quiet stunning, reported The Statesman.

     

    The fact that the magazine chose to publish the results showing support for a banned organisation is itself surprising, the Indian published Statesman publication noted. The outcome of the poll and its appearance in an influential media, foretell shifting paradigms in Tamil Nadu scenario, assessed TamilNet.

    Out of 12 issues raised by the weekly, 4 gained absolute majority opinions: India to retrieve Kachchatheevu from Sri Lanka (65.76%), urging India to involve in Sri Lankan crisis (62.9%), independent Tamil Eelam as correct solution (55.44%) and support to LTTE (54.25%).

    To a question on continuing the ban on the LTTE, 47.65% respondents wanted the ban to be lifted, while 27.43% were for continuing it. The rest of the respondents said that the Centre should wait for some time before thinking of lifting the ban.

     

    83 percent of the respondents held LTTE chief Velupillai Pirapaharan responsible for the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. However, about 50% of those convinced of LTTE's hand in the assassination felt that Pirapaharan should be condoned, the survey claimed.

     

    To a query on the growth of LTTE as an organisation with air capabilities, 46.24% of the people felt that it was a matter of pride for Tamils, while only 18.59% said that it was dangerous for India's security. The rest did not have any opinion.

    While 55.44% favoured a separate Tamil homeland for Sri Lankan Tamils as the only solution for the conflict in the island, 34.63% of respondents said that an autonomous state for Tamils within a federal structure would solve the problem.

     

    Only 13.61% of the respondents said that the pro-LTTE stand of Tamil Nadu leaders like Vaiko and Nedumaran was dangerous, while 49.36% of them felt that it was correct. About the stand of Tamil Nadu’s leading DMK on the Sri Lankan issue, 47.48% said the ruling party should support the Tigers without worrying about losing its government, while 22.71% of the people said that the DMK should oppose the Tigers.

     

    A considerable number of voters (43.14%) disagreed with LTTE's assassinations of dissenting Tamil politicians, while the remaining either felt that it was inevitable or that they were not in a position to pass a judgment.

    Most of the respondents, 62.59%, favoured India's intervention in the conflict. An overwhelming majority of 79.28% favoured release of Nalini, convicted in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.

     

    The survey taken at a time when resentment against the Sri Lankan government was high due to the killing of Tamil Nadu fishermen by the Sri Lankan navy, found that a large number of people, 65.76%, supported the retrieval of Katchatheevu island, ceded to Sri Lanka, and 29.65% said the Indian navy should attack the Sri Lankan navy if Tamil Nadu fishermen were fired at.

     

    On the fishermen issue, 34.89% of people favoured a dialogue with the Sri Lankan government, while 35.44% said that India should raise the issue at the international forum.

     

    The weekly said that it approached 4195 people, selecting them from various areas and sections and asserted that it is a true reflection of the people's mood in Tamil Nadu about issues concerning Sri Lankan Tamils.

  • TYO-NZ goes green

    Tamil Youth Organization New Zealand (TYO-NZ) went green on Sunday July 13, planting some trees in Auckland as part of a mentoring program for young Tamil children.

     

    Youth from TYONZ took children from Poonga Tamil Community Education on a tree planting trip organized by the Auckland City Council. The tree planting session was a follow up in a series of mentoring sessions by the TYONZ around the various Tamil schools in the Auckland area.

     

    Many young Tamil people, including some Tamil community members, planted over 400 trees in a native bush area surrounding the Auckland Zoo. The participants increased their knowledge of the native trees, the wildlife and the importance of sustaining New Zealand's clean, green environment.

     

    TYONZ says it hopes to be able to run more mentoring programs throughout the year to give young Tamils good role models and positive outcomes to look forward to.  And to integrate them into the New Zealand way of life while sustaining their Tamil heritage and culture.

  • Producing (In)Security

    As South Asia's political leaderships meet in Colombo this week and next, Sri Lanka's protracted conflict burns on. President Mahinda Rajapakse's government refused to reciprocate the Liberation Tigers' offer last week of a unilateral ceasefire and has instead continued its offensive. But the Tigers' diplomatic maneuver has served the purposes for which it was intended. To begin with, the LTTE's message of goodwill to the SAARC conference has further embarrassed Colombo. These are, in any case, not the conditions under which the Sinhala state had expected to play host to South Asia's leaders this year. There is no historic triumph over the Tamil rebellion to showcase to neighbours. Instead there is the ignominy of India not being prepared to entrust the safety of its delegation to the Sinhala armed forces. Despite Colombo's hysterics, Delhi does not envisage a threat from the Tamils. Rather, it is Sri Lanka's problematic dalliance with Pakistan and the shadowy Islamic radicalism which Islamabad is said to be stoking in the island's east which is at the forefront of India's concerns. That and, of course, Sri Lanka's heightened engagement with rising power China. If it needed underscoring, the two Indian warships off Colombo's shore will remind SAARC delegates on whose terms the future security of South Asia - and the Indian Ocean - will be based.

     

    Firstly, the Tigers' offer of a unilateral ceasefire has underscored yet again that it is the Sinhala state, not the LTTE, which is determined to pursue a military solution to the Tamil question. Some international actors have sought to blame 'both sides' while others have preferred to blame the 'terrorists' for the violence and to back the state. The refusal to pursue even a temporary cessation of hostilities - which plausibly could have led to a permanent ceasefire and perhaps international diplomatic efforts towards peace (indeed, the Norwegians have made it clear their good offices are still available) - has once again demonstrated, as many Tamil voices, including this newspaper, have repeatedly argued, that Sri Lanka has no interest in either negotiations or power-sharing with the Tamils.

     

    Secondly, the silence of the international community to both the LTTE's offer and Colombo's rejection of ceasefire speaks volumes of their own commitment to negotiations and a just peace. Had Sri Lanka made the offer of ceasefire and the LTTE refused it, the howls of protest from the self-styled peace-builders amongst the international community would have deafening. (Ironically, the silence which appears from a Tamil perspective to be unequivocal support for the Sinhala state will seem in the eyes of the Sinhala nationalists to be international complicity in the Tigers' treacherous ploy.) Either way, the pointed message for those Tamils still awaiting international intervention on their behalf is not to hold their breaths. In this regard too, the LTTE's ceasefire offer has served its purpose.

     

    The third aspect of the LTTE's offer is the message to the countries of South Asia. Sri Lankan leaders have long projected the Tamil resistance to their vicious repression of the Tamils as a threat to 'the region'. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is Sri Lanka's obsession with establishing Sinhala hegemony, rather, that has sparked and escalated war and insecurity off peninsula India. The LTTE does not pose a threat to any country except the chauvinistic Sinhala state. Indeed, the LTTE pointedly does not involve itself in the quarrels of the region. Nor is it a conduit for geopolitical tensions into the region.

     

    Moreover, the Tamil demand for independence will no more spur separatism in the region than would those of the Kosovans', say, or the East Timorese'. Indeed, the LTTE's message - enunciated recently in both the message to SAARC and LTTE leader Vellupillai Pirapaharan's Heroes Day addresses, including last year's - is that an independent Tamil Eelam would be a responsible member of the regional and international community of states.

     

    Which is more than can be said for Sri Lanka. For all its Buddhist pretensions, the Sinhala state is not identified with peace, non-violence and communal harmony, but with vicious violence towards its own citizens, with religious and ethnic persecution and contempt for the views of the international community. Certainly Sri Lanka has been able to enlist in the 'Global War on Terror', but, underlying the real undercurrents of that international project, which state has not been able to? Moreover, which state - in the region or elsewhere - can count the Sinhala state amongst its unswerving and loyal allies? This is not to deny that competing interests guide the actions of all states, but there are more or less principled ways for a state to pursue its own. The long-running Tamil rebellion, for example, pursues the safety of an independent state without interfering in the affairs of future neighbors and international allies. In short, it has consistently demonstrated, despite Sri Lanka's apocalyptic insistence to the contrary, that Tamil Eelam will be no threat to the region or spaces beyond.

  • Tamil Diaspora marks 25th anniversary of Black July

    Tamils across the world gathered to commemorate the 25th anniversary of Black July, the week in 1983 that saw a state sponsored pogrom kill over 3,000 of them killed in Sri Lanka.

     

    Events were held in the US, UK, Canada, South Africa, Netherlands, Australia, and New Zealand, among other countries.

     

    Over 2,000 British Tamils gathered in front of the parliament last Wednesday to commemorate the deaths during that week of violence in Sri Lanka in July 1983. Age, religion, and gender were no barrier as the whole spectrum of Tamils, from grandparents to babies in push chairs, attended the candlelight vigil between 8pm and 10pm.

     

    Although the British parliament was in recess, a few parliamentarians turned up to show their support. Leaflets were handed out during rush hour at various points to raise awareness among the British Public of the continuous human rights violations carried out by the Sri Lankan government.  

     

    In Canada approximately 350 people filled the Nepean City Hall, Ben Franklin Place, Ottawa, to capacity last Wednesday. The event was marked by a minute of silence for the victims who lost their lives in the pogrom and was followed by the Canadian national anthem sung by children.

     

    Thanks were given to the people and the countries that helped the victims of Black July and those displaced by the pogrom. Canada was thanked by many speakers for opening its doors to over 250,000 Tamils fleeing Sri Lanka after July 1983.

     

    Prayers were held by multi-faith religious leaders for those who lost their lives during the pogrom.

     

    An audio visual presentation on the Black July pogrom was made, in which the recorded footage of the actual events and testimonials from some of the victims were presented.

     

    Victim Testimonials were also presented by prominent community members on their personal harrowing experiences during those fateful days in July.

     

    Members of the Tamil community overwhelmingly signed up for blood donation under the "partner for life" national campaign in gratitude for the kindness offered by Canada in providing a safe haven for Tamils

     

    Also on Wednesday, Tamils in Netherlands gathered in Amsterdam to commemorate Black July. The event, jointly organised by the Tamil Women’s Organisation and the Tamil Youth Organisation, included a photo exhibition showing the suffering of Tamils at the hands of successive Sri Lankan governments and a street drama by the youth to provide further explanation to the locals who were observing.

     

    People for Equality and Relief in Lanka (PEARL), a US-based advocacy group, held a rally at Russell Senate Park, Washington, last Thursday and the rally was attended by over 600 participants from several U.S States.

     

    Two U.S. Congress members, through letters of support read at the rally, recognized the American Tamils' effort highlighting the human rights crisis in Sri Lanka.

     

    The rally was held in partnership with the U.S. Campaign for Burma (USCB), which commemorated the “8.8.88 Uprising” in Burma, in which thousands of peaceful protestors calling for the restoration of democracy were killed by that country’s armed forces.

     

    Participants called for the U.S. government’s help in ending the human rights crisis in Sri Lanka by advocating for U.N. human rights monitors on the ground.

     

    The rally concluded with a vigil to commemorate the victims of Black July, in which survivors of the pogrom shared their experiences.

     

    Others read the testimonials of survivors, performed commemorative songs and recited poems in honour of the victims.

     

    More than 600 South African Tamils assembled at the Kharwastan Temple Hall in Chatsworth,South Africa to observe the 25th anniversary of Black July on Friday, 25 July.

     

    African National Congress (ANC) Member of Parliament, Sisa Njikelana from Gauteng Province, delivered the key note speech, comparing developing situation in Sri Lanka to those in Rwanda and Brundi.

     

    An audio visual presentation of events that unfolded in July 1983, and clippings illustrating the human rights violations against the Tamil people were shown to the audience. South African Tamil youths gave dance and music programs that included Tamil Eelam songs.

     

    Asserting that South Africans are prepared to express their opinions publicly, Mr Sisa said: "[t]he looming tragedy of global inertia in situations such as Sri Lankan conflict is a matter of grave concern. The same occurred in Rwanda and Burundi – the world was just watching and dilly-dallying whilst humans were butchering each other. There are times whereby my observation leads to one conclusion i.e. the conflict in Sri Lanka is not a priority to some of the key global players and therefore may just have to be “shelved” for the time being."

     

    Australian Tamils held three events, beginning with a rally at the heart of Sydney Friday morning, followed by a protest meeting, and on Saturday afternoon a photographic exhibition in Melbourne at the State Library Forecourt, opposite the Melbourne Central Railway Station.

     

    More than 200 Australians assembled in Sydney City on Friday to protest the Sri Lankan State sponsored genocide towards Sri Lanka's Tamils.

     

    Police cordoned off main roads in the city as the demonstrators made their way beating drums at 10:30 a.m. Covering their mouths with black cloths to symbolise the oppressed cries of the Tamils' and participants finished the demonstration with the cries of "The charge is genocide; the struggle is for freedom!"

     

    The rally shut down several key transport arteries as it moved from State Parliament House towards Sydney Town Hall.

     

    The rally commenced with a testimony from Mrs Nalayini Santhra who shared her experience of Black July, where rioters supported by the government threw burning tyres upon her father and brother, burning them alive. She was 17 years old at the time.

     

    After the rally, participants moved to the Sydney suburb of Burwood, and assembled at Burwood Park, where many Tamil organisations of Sydney, under the leadership of the Australasian Federation of Tamil Associations, held a peaceful protest meeting held from 12 – 2 pm.

     

    Speaking at the event representing the Eelam Tamil Association, Dr. Victor Rajakulendran said, “Eelam Tamil association believes, a political solution, recognising the Tamils of Sri Lanka as a Nation, their entitlement to claim the territory they have historically occupied as their homeland and their right to self-determination can only, put an end to this, 60 years long suffering of the Tamil people in Sri Lanka. Therefore on this important day for the Tamils, I appeal to the Australian government and all the peace loving Australians, to make every effort to find that political solution and save the Tamils in Sri Lanka from State sponsored Terrorism.”

     

    On Saturday afternoon Tamils in Melbourne gathered at the State Library Four Court, in front of the Melbourne Central Railway Station to commemorate Black July and draw the attention of the Australian public to the plight of Tamil people in Sri Lanka.

     

    A photographic and video exhibition organised at the steps of the Library Four Court attracted the attention of the Australian public. A Tamil youth band provided the entertainment at the exhibition site.

     

    In New Zealand also the New Zealand Tamil Medical Association (NZTMA) and the Tamil Youth Organistion (TYO-New Zealand) organised a blood donation drive, and on Friday held a vigil marking the event.

  • Aware Colombo ‘fighting terrorism’ - Robert Evans MEP

    A visiting European Union delegation Friday came down hard on the government over alleged human rights abuses, but acknowledged that it was ‘involved in the fight against terrorism’.

     

    However, the EU delegation for South Asia relations also expressed confidence that Colombo would take the necessary steps to ensure its GSP+ status would be renewed.

     

    Reading out a press statement, delegation head Robert Evans said the EU Parliament is fully aware that Sri Lanka is involved in the fight against terrorism but still believes that more must be done to defend human rights and put an end to the abductions.

     

    “The European MPs are fully aware that Sri Lanka is involved in the fight against terrorism. It should be defeated for the development of the country,” he added.

     

    “Terrorism has no place. It must end and it must end sooner…We condemn LTTE violence and want them to come to the democratic process. We still believe in a peaceful solution for Sri Lanka. A situation of war is not good for anybody,” Evans said.

     

    The EU delegation, whilst welcoming the beginnings of the democratic process in the East, also expressed concerns about the lack of a timetable for weapons decommissioning adding that the former paramilitaries now running the Eastern Province are reported to still be using child soldiers.

     

    The delegation noted that in several meetings with the media, journalists spoke of continued harassment and the fear of being critical of the authorities. They said they also heard of many cases of media workers being arrested, and learnt that 12 have be killed in recent months, reported the Daily Mirror.

     

    The delegation intends to raise the case of Sunday Times columnist M. Tissainayagam and of his conditions of detention, in the European Parliament, the paper said.

     

    "The European parliament delegation urges the government of Sri Lanka, as a top priority, to organise investigations into these cases," the delegation said in a statement, describing the number of abductions as "frightening".

     

    "The widespread belief that the military and police enjoy impunity does nothing to set ordinary people at ease and may even fuel the LTTE," Reuters quoted the delegation as saying.

     

    Evans says they were informed officially that some 500 members of the military had been investigated for abuses and 100 had been prosecuted or convicted yet to date there is no evidence to substantiate the claims.

     

    “The Sri Lankan Government needs to pay more attention to the repeated tales of human rights violations. The military is immune from prosecution,” he said.

     

    “If the government wants to create a sense of security, it should take serious action against these HR violations,” he added.

     

    The delegation also commended Minister Tissa Vitarana for his attempts to make the All Party Representative Committee (APRC) live up to its name, by including all parties, but stressed that the APRC is incomplete without the participation of the Tamil National Alliance.

     

    In the light of apprehensions, the EU delegation remains extremely anxious about the impact a possible loss of GSP+ status would have on economy and employment in Sri Lanka and urges the Government to do everything possible to effective implement the international conventions that are required in order to address human rights concerns.

     

    “In my opinion, and this is not of the delegation, I don’t think Sri Lanka will qualify for the concession…but the door is not shut,” the Daily Mirror quoted him as saying.

     

    Evans, who lead the seven member delegation on its five day visit to the country, said that this is his personal opinion and no final decision has been made on whether to extend the GSP+ status further.

     

    “The solution is with the Government. It is aware of the issues that form the criteria for granting preferential trade status and it has to act on those issues,” Mr. Evans told reporters at a press briefing, the Sunday Time reported.

     

    However, the Daily News had a different take, quoting Evans as saying “The GSP+ issue is debatable but I am confident that Sri Lanka is capable of addressing the conventions and gaining the GSP+ to develop the economy and employment.”

     

    The trade concession, called the GSP+ scheme, expires in December. It helped Sri Lanka net a record $2.9 billion from EU markets last year, or 37.5 percent of total export income.

     

    "The European Parliament delegation remains extremely anxious about the impact a possible loss of GSP+ status would have on the economy and employment in Sri Lanka," the EU statement said.

     

    Sri Lanka was one of 15 countries granted GSP+ concessions in 2005 to help it recover from the Indian Ocean tsunami.

     

    The island's garment and textile industry, which employs hundreds of thousands of largely rural poor, would be hard hit if the special trade terms were axed.

     

    Speaking to the media after completing a visit to the country, the EU delegation also expressed disappointment as it could not visit Trincomalee, which was the main purpose of its tour to Sri Lanka, on the grounds of last minute security concerns.

     

    “The last minute cancellation and a catalogue of chaos and confusion meant that the delegation did not fly to Trincomalee, despite repeated assurances and endless complications resulted in the party being turned back from Ratmalana Airport destroying months of preparation, time and expense,” EU head of delegation for relations with South Asia, Robert Evans said.

     

    However, the Sri Lankan Foreign Ministry says the position articulated by a visiting EU Parliamentary delegation in its statement on not being able to visit Trincomalee is "regrettable" and is open to misinterpretation, citing logistical and procedural reasons on the part of the private aircraft operator for the trip failing to take place.

     

    However Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama had a different criticism of the EU delegation, saying it had taken hasty decisions on the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. He also declared that the EU delegation’s claim that it was prevented from visiting the east was a misinterpretation of what really occurred.

     

    “To know the real situation in a country, one has to visit areas and meet people. The EU delegation had confined itself to Colombo and only met people with their own political agendas,” the Minister said, addressing reporters in Colombo.

     

    “Since they have confined themselves to Colombo and seen the country situation through the eyes of others, they are in no position to make an accurate assessment of the situation,” The Nation newspaper reported him as saying.

  • In Search of our roots

    The Tamil Youth Organization of Canada, in partnership with the Canadian Tamil Congress and The Academy of Tamil Arts and Technology, held a youth conference titled “In Search Of our roots” at the University of Toronto in Scarborough on July 27. The conference was as part of a series of events remembering the Black July riots of 1983. 

     

    “The event was a means for our youth to be better informed and educated about the ‘Past, Present and Future’ of the Tamil Community,” the TYO said.

    The keynote speakers included Dr. Yamuna Sangarasivam, Dr. Joseph Chandrakanthan, and Dr. Ellyn Shandler, who all shared their experiences and knowledge about the pre and post1983 riots that marked the lives of Tamil people so deeply..

     

    The TYO, supported by Toronto based lawyer Harini Sivalingam also facilitated the workshop titled “Addressing Negative Portrayal of Tamil Canadian Youth,” which tackled current issues that Tamil youth and the general Tamil community face with the media as well as within the Education and Justice system.

      

    The day wrapped up with Beate Arnestad’s documentary titled “My daughter the Terrorist” which was well received by the youth.  The conference came to a conclusion with the three partnering committees highlighting the importance of youth engagement and participation within the Canadian and Tamil communities.

  • ‘Neighbours’, but so what?

    One oft-asserted claim in reference to Sri Lanka’s ethnic crisis and especially the Tamil demand for independence on the grounds of persecution by the Sinhala-dominated is that most Tamils live outside the Northeast, i.e. “amongst” the Sinhalese.

     

    In short it is implied, Tamils and Sinhalese have basically amicable relations, because, firstly, Tamils are “happy” to live amongst Sinhalese and, secondly, there is no communal, majoritarian violence.

     

    But these assertions are wrong as they are based on untenable assumptions.

     

    To begin with, no communal violence today is no guarantee it will be so in future.

     

    Secondly, many Tamils have no choice but to accept the risk of communal violence and come to the south. Not only are the central mechanisms of administration and economic life in the south (Colombo) and not in the Tamil areas, but the conflict-stricken Northeastern areas are already dangerous for Tamils.

     

    Past Tense, Future Imperfect

     

    The first assertion that because they are presently living safely in the south amongst the Sinhalese the Tamils have nothing to fear is plainly challenged by the histories of communal violence in numerous places - including Sri Lanka, itself.

     

    Here are a just few instances where once apparently ‘peaceful’ neighbours have turned on neighbours:

     

    -          India/Pakistan: Hindus and Muslims lived “amongst one another” under centuries of British rule, but the imminent formation of the independent states of India and Pakistan resulted in both mass movement and widespread communal violence between them;

     

    -          Yugoslavia: In post WW2 Yugoslavia, Serbs, Croats and Muslims lived “amongst each other” without major communal violence until the end of the Cold War. But ethnic and religious violence on a massive scale erupted within a couple of years (resulting, ultimately, in the formation – sometimes peacefully - of several new ethnically-defined independent states);

     

    -          Rwanda: In 1994, the Hutu majority turned on the Tutsi minority in genocidal violence – notably, shortly after a power-sharing pact had been signed;

     

    -          Iraq: Sunnis and Shiites lived ‘peacefully’ together under Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship – even though his Sunni-dominated regime was persecuting Shiites along with the (Sunni) ethnic Kurds. It didn’t take much, after the US invasion, for whole slaughter between Sunnis and Shiites to erupt, resulting in the present ethnic enclaves across the country. (Moreover, the present ‘peace’ has involved the US arming the Sunnis militia while the Shiites - and Kurds - dominate the new armed forces.);

     

    -          Kenya: earlier this year, simmering ethnic animosities erupted into violence that resulted several deaths (and ultimately required forceful international intervention to fashion even the present fragile accommodation);

     

    -          Tibet: China sent in the military this year to quell rioting by Tibetans. Their mobs’ target? Not the Chinese state apparatus, but ethnic Han Chinese who have been increasingly settling in Tibet over decades;

     

    -          South Africa: also in 2008, ethnic riots between South Africans and migrant workers erupted on a scale that has embarrassed the self-styled ‘Rainbow nation’.

     

    -          Germany: large numbers of Jews opted to remain “amongst the Germans” even as the Nazis assumed power and formalized their persecution.

     

    Whilst all these instances of communal bloodletting of course have different contexts and dynamics, on what basis of distinction can it be guaranteed mass violence against Tamils will not happen in Sri Lanka?

     

    Tamils in the South

     

    Whilst most Tamils originating from the Northeast (even many of the ‘Colombo Tamils’ have their familial roots there), large numbers have indeed lived in the south, amongst Sinhalese. But they have also suffered communal violence from the Sinhalese – condoned and sometimes openly supported by the Sinhala-dominated state.

     

    As Prof. Sankaran Krishna points out it, the period since independence in 1948 has been “punctuated by bouts of annihilatory violence, often called pogroms, directed against the Tamils in 1956, 1958, 1977, 1981 and 1983”.

     

    And in his seminal 1984 essay titled ‘The Open Economy and Its Impact on Ethnic Relations in Sri Lanka’, Sri Lankan academic Newton Gunesinghe described the period from 1977 to 1983, as “one of incessant ethnic rioting” by Sinhalese against Tamils.

     

    Prof. Krishna has written a key text on underlying dynamics of Tamil-Sinhala relations, titled ‘Post Colonial Insecurities: India, Sri Lanka and the Question of Nationhood’.

     

    He points out that, viewed against the Sinhala nationalist ideology of a majority-minorities hierarchy, these “periodic explosions of violence against Tamils represent efforts to put them back in their places on grounds they have become too assertive and need to be taught a lesson” (p54).

     

    This month marks the 25th anniversary of the 1983 anti-Tamil pogrom, when those Tamils ‘living amongst the Sinhalese’ were systematically massacred and driven from their homes in the south, including the capital, Colombo, often by their Sinhala neighbours.

     

    As has often been pointed out, the Sri Lankan state did nothing to stop the bloodletting. In fact, electoral lists were released to the rioters and army trucks moved groups of armed thugs from neighbourhood to neighbourhood.

     

    Six days after the mobs began their killing, President Junius Jayawardene made his first announcement in a radio broadcast.

     

    He did not apologise, comfort or promise protection to the Tamils. Instead he blamed the pogrom on the desire of the Tamil people for separation, which, he said, began in 1976.

     

    Ever present danger

     

    It has sometimes been pointed out that since 1983 there has been no repeat of such Sinhala-on-Tamil violence.

     

    But, firstly, that is to ignore the racial dynamics of the armed conflict in the Northeast: the Sri Lanka armed forces are overwhelmingly Sinhala-dominated. Today’s efforts to “teach the Tamils a lesson and put them in their place”, as Prof. Krishna puts it, is now the preserve of the Sinhala military.

     

    Secondly, it is to ignore the latent “threat” of Tamil self-defence or counter-violence: during the previous pogroms or riots, there was no sizeable organized Tamil militancy.

     

    In any case, the possibility of future communal violence cannot be discounted. Indeed, the threat is sometimes raised openly by Sinhala leaders and politicians.

     

    In early 2006, Sri Lanka’s Foreign Minister, Mangala Samaraweera, on a visit to the United States, told the press that if attacks on Sri Lankan troops by the Tamil Tigers continued, his government “may not be able to restrain” the Sinhala people.

     

    (Samaraweera, having split from the government of President Mahinda Rajapakse, has not styled himself as a champion of human rights.)

     

    Also, in early 2006, Champika Ranawake, a senior minister in the present ruling alliance declared: “in the event of a war, if the 40,000 government troops stationed in Jaffna are killed, then 400,000 Tamil civilians living in Colombo will be sent to Jaffna in coffins.”

     

    In Feb 2007, Ranawake, who is also the ideologue of the ultra-Sinhala nationalist monks’ party, the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), openly urged the murders of critics of his government’s critics, saying: “If they can't be dealt with existing laws we know how to do it. If we can't suppress those bastards with the law we need to use any other ways and means!”

     

    This attitude is reflected in a myriad of state practices when it comes to engaging with the Tamils; from the security forces at the checkpoints to the courts to the seeking of employment.

     

    Given all this, there is the question as to why Tamil “choose” to live in the south amongst Sinhalese. The answers are: escaping the warzone, pursuing basic economic life and transit.

     

    For many Tamils, the areas outside the Northeastern warzone are comparatively safer places.

     

    Whilst disappearances, indefinite detention, torture, etc are a risk in the south, the risks of these are far greater in their home towns and villages in the Northeast (consider the situation in Jaffna, for example, which has been under state control for 13 years). By the way, the imminence of (Sinhala) violence is referred to as ‘impunity’ by the international community.

     

    Secondly, following decades of state exclusion from investment, even by the early eighties, the Northeast had little prospect of economic life outside state employment.

     

    Which is why, despite, as Prof. Gunesinghe puts it, the period from 1977 to 1983, being described as “one of incessant ethnic rioting”, large numbers of Tamils remained in the south. Their luck ran out in 1983.

     

    Yet, there is little choice for Tamils trying to survive today. Attempting to secure a basic economic life, many accept the latent risks of living in the south. Their desperation is heightened by Sri Lanka’s rampaging inflation.

     

    Then there are those Tamils trying to get out of Sri Lanka, either for safety or to seek employment abroad to support families in the Northeast.

     

    But with the state administration (travel and other papers), international embassies (visas) and the island’s sole international airport being in Colombo, large numbers of Tamils have come to Colombo and languish in squalid ‘lodges’ or crowd relatives’ homes while they try to arrange their departures.

     

    Hardly the idyll of ethnic harmony claimed by those who abstractly point out that “most Tamils” – and that, incidentally, is also an uncorroborated claim – “live amongst the Sinhalese.”

  • Once bitten, never shy-India's Sri Lanka policy?

    SETTING aside domestic Tamil sensitivities, the Indian government appears to have involved itself in a full-fledged proxy war in Sri Lanka.

     

    While claiming to have adopted a hands-off policy with regard to its neighbour’s continuing ethnic conflict between the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the forces of the Sinhalese government, India is extending the latter its covert support.

     

    This was revealed by Sri Lanka’s army chief, Lieutenant General Sarath Fonseka, last week during an interaction with members of the Foreign Correspondents’ Association in Colombo.

     

    “Eight hundred of our officers are trained (in India) every year; free of cost,” Fonseka is reported to have said. “India gives them an allowance for the duration of their courses there. The support from India is huge.”

     

    Fonseka’s remarks came on the heels of a high-level Indian delegation’s visit to Colombo at a time when the government troops and the LTTE are locked in a fierce battle in northern Sri Lanka.

     

    The Indian officials’ trip was kept a close secret. According to media reports, even the Lankan foreign ministry came to know about the visit of India’s national security adviser, MK Narayanan, defence secretary Vijay Singh, and foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon only hours after they landed in Colombo on an Indian Air Force plane.

     

    Fonseka, who survived an assassination attempt last year, has vowed to achieve a military victory against the LTTE. His confidence stems from his military success against the Tigers in the Eastern provinces last year and covert Indian support to his war efforts.

     

    Fonseka, President Mahinda Rajapakse and his brother and defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse together form the powerful Colombo triumvirate that advocates a military solution to the ethnic strife that has claimed over 70,000 lives in the last three decades. In March, Fonseka made a six-day state visit to India, during which he met with top defence officials.

     

    Military relations between India and Sri Lanka have developed over recent years even though the two countries have not entered any formal cooperation agreement. While many in Delhi support such an agreement, it has not seen the light of day due to stiff opposition from political parties in Tamil Nadu.

     

    At present, however, India appears to have cast aside all neutrality in the Tamil-Sinhala conflict, and adopted a policy best encapsulated by an unnamed military officer to a news agency on the eve of Fonseka’s Delhi visit: “India wants to ensure that the Sri Lankan army maintains its upper hand over the LTTE.”

     

    India’s training of Sri Lankan army personnel has never been officially confirmed by either country, until Fonseka’s boast last week. More details of the military cooperation are, however, emerging.

     

    According to a July 1 report in The Times of India, in 2008-2009 alone, over 500 Lankan army personnel are to be trained in Indian institutions like the Counter-Insurgency and Jungle Warfare School at Vairengte in Mizoram and the School of Artillery at Devlali in Maharashtra.

     

    According to the report, about 100 gentlemen cadets will receive training at the Indian Military Academy at Dehradun, 39 officers at the College of Military Engineering at Pune, 15 in the School of Artillery at Devlali, 29 in the Mechanised Infantry Regimental Centre at Ahmednagar, 25 in the College of Materials Management at Jabalpur, 30 in the Electronics and Mechanical Engineering School at Vadodara, and 14 at the Military College of Telecommunication Engineering at Mhow.

     

    Support does not stop at training alone. India has been supplying ‘defensive’ military equipment to Sri Lanka, including the indigenouslymanufactured Indra radars.

     

    Officially, India claims it does not supply offensive weapons to Sri Lanka, but there are strong possibilities of a secret arrangement being in place already.

     

    However, in June last year, when MK Narayanan publicly cautioned Sri Lanka against purchasing arms from China and Pakistan, he also said it could approach India for any help it required. Narayanan’s statement could have meant only one thing, that India was ready to meet Sri Lanka’s arms demands.

     

    India’s relations with Sri Lanka is seen by many from the perspective of the Chinese geopolitical strategy in the region. Sri Lanka has moved closer to China in recent years, and Rajapakse, who came to power in 2005, has been particularly adept at playing the China card against India.

     

    Sri Lanka figures prominently in Chinese naval strategy, being part of China’s “string of pearls” (or strategic bases) starting from the South China Sea and extending through the Strait of Malacca, Indian Ocean and on to the Arabian and Persian Gulfs.

     

    Security experts like B. Raman, a former additional secretary of the Government of India, have been expressing concern about the Chinese threat. In a recent column, Raman noted: “The semi-permanent presence, which the Chinese are getting in Sri Lanka, will bring them within monitoring distance of India’s fast-breeder reactor complex at Kalpakkam near Chennai, the Russian aided Koodankulam nuclear power reactor complex in southern Tamil Nadu and India’s space establishments in Kerala.”

     

    While India’s need to counter this threat is beyond doubt, sections of those sympathetic to the Lankan Tamil cause see striking similarities in the present developments to the situation in the 1980s, in the run-up to the signing of the Indo-Sri Lanka accord in 1987.

     

    In that period, the then Sri Lankan president, JR Jayawardene, got India embroiled into fighting the LTTE. The consequences of that flawed intervention, and the immense suffering it caused Tamils at the hands of the Indian army, are yet to be erased from the bruised memories of Tamils all over the world.

     

    Discontent over the Centre’s policies in Sri Lanka continues to simmer in Tamil Nadu, with various parties urging the Indian government to stop military aid to the country.

     

    The LTTE has also made appeals. Following Fonseka’s visit to Delhi in March, the outfit issued a statement against India’s growing military aid to Sri Lanka, saying: “While proclaiming that a solution to the Tamil problem must be found through peaceful means, India is giving encouragement to the military approach of the Sinhala State. This can only lead to the intensification of the genocide against the Tamils.”

     

    A pro-LTTE Sri Lankan Tamil MP said recently, “We are optimistic even during this darkest hour. The Sri Lankan government will ditch India in favour of the Chinese in due course. Then India will have to change its policy and support the Tamils as Indira Gandhi did during her time.”

     

    Whatever may be the future twists and turns in South Asia’s highly unpredictable diplomatic world, as of now India cannot disown responsibility for its part in the Eelam tragedy.

Subscribe to NorthEast