A fact-finding team of civil society representatives traveled to Trincomalee on 16th and 17th of April 2006 in the wake of reports of civil unrest in the District. The findings of this mission have left us gravely concerned by the events that have unfolded in Trincomalee over the past week; events which have left over 20 civilians dead, over 30 shops and 100 homes destroyed by fire and over 3000 persons displaced and seeking refuge in schools and places of worship.

On 12th April, a bomb exploded in the vegetable market in Trincomalee town, leaving five persons, including one child, dead. Within 15 minutes of the explosion, a gang of armed Sinhala persons began a rampage through the business area of the town, setting Tamil shops on fire, and looting goods. According to bystanders, though the gang never consisted of more than 100 at any given time, there was no reasonable attempt made by the security forces to prevent the violence.

Several people have been reported killed in and around the market on the 12th during the course of the rioting. Some bodies were thrown into the flames of the burning shops. 19 deaths, including of 7 women, have been reported so far; however the figure is rising daily. The burning of bodies has resulted in delays in identification, and has destroyed traces of mutilation and sexual assault prior to the death.

Over 30 shops were burned in all, the majority belonging to Tamils and 2 to Muslims. It appeared that several large shops were specifically targeted – among them were Hari Electricals, the Dollar Agency, the Dialog Company and the Sunlight (Lever Brothers) Agency. The mob also attacked the Hatton National Bank.

Other incidents of violence, including arson and murder took place outside the town. The body of a young Sinhala man, identified as Nissanka, was found in Mahindapura on the 14th April. He had been missing since the 13th. Subsequently the Sinhala villagers of Mahindapura went on a rampage in the neighbouring Tamil village Nadesapura and set fire to over 40 homes. The office of the Trincomalee District Youth Development Organization (AHAM) was attacked and several vehicles belonging to the organization were set on fire; the Hindu temple in the village was also attacked.

Similar incidents have taken place in Thuwarangkadu, resulting in the displacement of almost 1000 persons, and in Andankulam, where several houses were burnt down. The houses in Andankulam were new, built under a post-tsunami reconstruction scheme.

The violence, as well as the fear and insecurity experienced by the civilians, has led to a fairly substantial displacement. As of the 20th April, the District Secretariat, Trincomalee, had this figure at 2673 persons (723 families).

This does not take into account the large numbers who are residing with family and friends, and those who are simply leaving their homes at night-time for more secure locations. The response to the displacement, even from NGOs, has been slow, hampered by the prevailing tensions and lack of personnel. In some areas government assistance was received only on the 18th April, despite the fact that people were displaced on the 14th April.

The speed with which the violence erupted after the explosion seems to indicate an element of pre-planning that is extremely disturbing. Two observers referred to the situation as being reminiscent of the anti-Tamil riots of July 1983.

The rioting lasted for over two hours, during the daytime. During this entire period the armed forces and the Police did almost nothing to prevent the violence from taking place. There are several very credible eye witness accounts to the manner in which the security forces stood by and allowed the burning and killing to take place.

Although there is a multi-ethnic Citizens’ Committee led by religious leaders of all communities in Trincomalee town, as well as Peace Committees initiated by the Police at the level of every Grama Sevaka Division, they have been ineffective in the face of the recent incidents of violence.

There is a very high degree of mistrust and animosity between the Sinhala and Tamil communities in particular. Groups remain polarized on the basis of ethnicity and there is no structure that has the capacity to bring them together in a positive and constructive manner. Even well-established social activists expressed their fear of taking the initiative to assist those affected by the violence; some of them were already receiving threatening telephone calls.

Given that Trincomalee has always been a flashpoint for ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka, it is imperative that civil society organizations in the south concentrate on strengthening existing networks and building new ones, to give a truly plural character to the moderate and peace-loving voices of Trincomalee’s peoples and to ensure that a slide back into barbaric ethnic tensions does not arise.

On the basis of its findings, we wish to highlight the following areas of concern and appeal to the government, political parties, non-governmental organizations and all members of civil society,

Immediate steps must be taken to ensure that all emergency and humanitarian assistance necessary is extended to those displaced by the violence; rebuilding of houses should be a priority;

A delegation of senior members of all leading political parties should undertake a visit to Trincomalee to meet with all sections of the population as a confidence-building measure;

The government should devise some means of accepting accountability for the inability of the security forces to prevent the violence; a collective apology from the state and from southern political parties to the people of Trincomalee would go a long way towards re-building bridges of communication and trust;

An independent investigation into the violence following the bomb explosion on 12th April should be undertaken by a team comprising representatives of government and non-government bodies; the investigation should aim at recording the various testimonies regarding the incidents and at making recommendations to the government regarding justice and redress for the victims;

These measures should take into account the culture of impunity that has prevailed in Sri Lanka, taking on board the experiences of previous commissions, and ensure that concrete steps are taken and implemented by the government to end impunity;

Civil society organizations should create a ‘rapid response’ network that will make regular and systematic visits to their partners and colleagues in Trincomalee in order to monitor the situation;

Payment of compensation should be transparent, unbiased and acceptable to all affected parties;

Institutions such as the District office of the National Human Rights Commission should be reinforced with material and human resources to enable it to act more effectively in a time of crisis such as this;

The Citizens’ Committee should be strengthened so that it can act independently and with the recognition of the authorities;

We note that the LTTE have been engaged in acts of armed attacks against the security forces resulting in further heightening tension and fear within the community and the Trincomalee area. We appeal to the LTTE to:

Halt these acts of violence and commit to the pursuit of its objectives through non-violent and democratic means;

Ensure that there are no obstacles in providing emergency and humanitarian assistance to those displaced by the violence and facilitate in creating a safe environment for the implementation of aid work by agencies and individuals;

It is imperative that all political actors are aware of the dangers involved in not taking control of the situation and ensuring that the potential for heightened violence in Trincomalee is curbed. The creation of an environment in which people can return to their homes and their livelihoods should be given priority.

In the current climate of insecurity, attempts by some politically motivated groups to incite ethnic and religious hatred should be dealt with immediately and all citizens need to be more vigilant about these manipulations. The fragility of the peace process at this moment calls for a concerted initiative to safeguard the CFA and strengthen the voices for peace in Sri Lanka.

Signed,
- Sunila Abeysekera, Udaya Kalupathirana: INFORM
- Packiasothy Saravanamuttu, Rohan Edrisinha, Devanesan Nesiah, Bhavani Fonseka, Mirak Raheem: Centre For Policy Alternatives
- Ramani Muttetuwegama: Law And Society Trust
-P.D. Gunatilaka: Devasarana Development Centre
-Buddhika Weerasinghe: Free Media Movement
-Ambika Satkunanathan, Soundarie David, Charan Rainford, Nimanthi Rajasingham, Sonali Moonesinghe, P. Thambirajah, S. Varatharajan, International Centre For Ethnic Studies
-Nimalka Fernando, International Movement Against Racial Discrimination
- Kumudini Samuel, Sepali Kottegoda Women And Media Collective
- Jayadeva Uyangoda, Social Scientists’ Association
- Rukshana Nanayakkara, Transparency International, Sri Lanka
- Anita Nesiah
- Manouri Muttetuwegama
- Darini Rajasingham
- Tharumini Wijekoon
- Samatha, Jawaharlal Nehru University

Sri Lanka’s international aid donors demanded an end to the escalating violence gripping the island and vowed “concerted action” to push the warring parties back to peace negotiations.

Peace broker Norway said the island’s top aid givers – Japan, the European Union and the United States – met in Oslo Friday to discuss the deteriorating security situation in the island and decided to continue talks in Tokyo.

No new dates for donors’ deliberations were announced but a statement issued by the Norwegian embassy in Colombo said they decided to meet again to “further discuss steps and concerted actions to encourage the parties to pursue a durable solution in Sri Lanka.”

Delegates “reiterated their deep concern at the recent deterioration of the situation in Sri Lanka, condemning all acts of violence and calling on this to stop,” the statement said.

“I am extremely concerned about the recent upsurge in violence in Sri Lanka,” Norway’s international development minister Erik Solheim said ahead of the Friday meeting.

The four co-hosted a meeting in June 2003 and raised 4.5 billion dollars in pledges for Sri Lanka’s peace bid, but linked aid delivery to progress in the Norwegian-backed process.

Earlier, the United States condemned the attack against an army headquarters in Sri Lanka’s capital Colombo and called the suicide blast a provocation by the Tamil Tigers.

“This is clearly an act of terror, which we condemn,” the State Department’s deputy spokesman Adam Ereli told reporters. “It is an unacceptable act of terror, a clear provocation and an escalation of violence.

“We express our sympathies and condolences to the victims of this attack and will continue our efforts to work with the parties in Sri Lanka, the friends of Sri Lanka, including the Norwegians, and all those who want to see a solution to this conflict through dialogue and through negotiation and not through violence.”

Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher said the attack marked a step back for the political process in Sri Lanka and risked plunging the country back into war.

“It’s regrettable that the Tamil Tigers have decided to restart the war instead of restarting the peace process,” he told reporters.

“We are in touch with governments around the world to bring to bear whatever pressure we can on the Tamil Tigers to abandon this course of action and to look for ways that we can support the government on coping with the threat.”

The Co-Chairs of the donor community – US, EU, Japan and Norway - condemning the attempted assassination of Lt. General Sarath Fonseka, exhorted the LTTE to cease all suicide attacks and other forms of violence.

Last Tuesday night, India’s Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee called President Mahinda Rajapakse to denounce the suicide bombing and express solidarity with the government and people of Sri Lanka. He was speaking in the absence of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh who is on a tour to Germany and Uzbekistan.

“We are shocked by the suicide attack,” Mukherjee told Rajapakse. “We condemn it in the strongest possible terms. Terrorism is completely unacceptable. Our solidarity is with the people and government of Sri Lanka.”

Swedish Major-General Ulf Henricsson, who heads the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) that oversees the truce, said if violence continued, peace talks would become difficult. The worst-case scenario was a return to war, he said.

“I think the parties are not prepared for that,” he said. “And if they were, it would be devastating for the people of Sri Lanka and for their own military capabilities.”

The Sri Lankan government and the LTTE were due to meet in Switzerland on April 24 to discuss ways to save their truce, but the talks were delayed after the government and the LTTE were unable to agree a method for safely transporting the LTTE’s eastern commander to the Vanni for a meeting.

The fresh violence made investors jittery. International credit ratings agencies Standard and Poor’s and Fitch downgraded Sri Lanka’s rating outlook from stable to negative due to the escalating unrest.

Sri Lanka’s Army Commander remained on life support this week after being seriously wounded by a suicide bomber within the sprawling Army Headquarters in Colombo last Tuesday.

Lieutenant General Sarath Fonseka and 30 others were wounded in the attack while eight of his bodyguards, two civilians and the alleged bomber herself were killed.

The attack, which shocked Sri Lanka’s military and political establishments, took place within the confines of the high security Army Headquarters in Colombo. A female suicide bomber entered the heavily-fortified compound and threw herself before the Army Commander’s motorcade, detonating explosives strapped to her person.

Five of Lt. Gen. Fonseka’s bodyguards were killed on the spot, and another 6 people have subsequently died. Lt. Gen. Fonseka, who received serious abdomen and chest injuries, was rushed to Colombo’s National Hospital where he underwent several rounds of surgery. The latest reports said he is now in a “stable condition”, but remains in intensive care.

Gen. Fonseka has still not regained full consciousness and is still on a ventilator, the Sunday Times quoted a surgeon as saying. The surgeon who was involved in the three-hour operation said the situation at one point was “touch and go” but the Commander pulled through.

“Army Commander Sarath Fonseka, who underwent four operations at the National Hospital, after being attacked by a suicide bomber on Tuesday, spoke a few words to his doctors last morning”, reported the Daily Mirror.

An organisation calling itself the High Security Zone Residents’ Liberation Force claimed responsibility for the attack, saying “the LTTE is merely wasting time by maintaining a ceasefire.” But many analysts charge this is a front organisation for the Liberation Tigers.

Some reports, quoting Sri Lankan officals, said the bomber pretended to be pregnant, while some subsequent reports suggested she was actually pregnant. Sri Lankan police told PTI they have reconstructed her face, but it was not medically proved if she was indeed pregnant as she had claimed.

“A top investigator said there was no forensic evidence to suggest she was pregnant except a record at the army hospital that she claimed she was carrying a child and had gone there to attend the ‘maternity day’ clinic” the news agency reported.

Police believe the woman was 21-year-old Anoja Kugenthirasah from the northern Vavuniya district. Police said her mobile phone was destroyed but they managed to recover the SIM card. Other press reports said the woman had received a call after the Army Commander left his office, prompting her to rush out into his route.

A police team investigating last Tuesday’s attack has detained at least five suspects, with two of them being family members of the alleged bomber from Puvarasankulam in Vavuniya. Two family members from the house at the address were arrested and taken to Colombo for interrogation.

Detectives found that the alleged bomber had stayed in a lodge in Colombo. Police also detained the lodge owner who was later released. Detectives had found out that the bomber had visited the Army Headquarters on a few occasions as an officer’s wife who was pregnant. Investigators are trying to find out how she had entered the high security area without arousing suspicion and being checked, the Sunday Times reports.

A senior official of the Criminal Investigation Department said that the investigators “believe that there would be someone inside, who provided and help to the suicide bomber to gain access to the premises and the Commander’s movement.”

“Someone inside tipped her off that Lt. Gen. Fonseka’s motorcade was approaching,” The Sunday Times reported.

On hearing about the attack, President Mahinda Rajapakse met with his most senior political and military advisors and then attended an emergency Cabinet meeting. He then called an all party meeting, where the other main political parties, including the main opposition United National Party, the Marxist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna and the Buddhist monk party, the Jathika Hela Urumaya.

Close to midnight on the day of the attack, the President went to the National Hospital where emergency surgery had just been concluded on Lt. Gen. Fonseka. The Sunday Times Political Column reported that he egged on the medical staff, saying “I would like you all to ensure a quick recovery for him.”

The Tamil Tigers do not seem unduly worried over the decimation of a beachfront training camp by this week’s air strikes in Sri Lanka’s north-eastern Trincomalee district.

S Elililan, the local Tiger political chief, says they had come to know of the military air strikes a good three hours before they began and informed the public.

“That is why we had such few casualties,” says Mr Elililan, sitting in his spanking new office, as an aide videotapes our meeting.

Two days of air strikes and shelling in Muthur left 15 people dead and more than 40 wounded - and the Tigers claim they have not lost any of their people.

Nestling in the sands of the wide beach in Sampore in Muthur, the destroyed beachfront LTTE training camp looks pretty rudimentary.

There is a thatched “classroom” where Tigers took lessons and watched television.

Outside on the sand, says my guide Yasodharan, the Tigers underwent six months of rigorous weapons training.

Twenty-five-year-old Tiger Kariavalan, who joined two years ago, expresses anger about the air strikes.

“Rather than suffer and lose our people bit by bit, we can fight once and for all,” he says.

“We are ready for war. We are waiting for orders from our leader. We hope he will give a call to war,” he says.

The damage in Muthur - hit by air strikes and shelling following the suicide attack on the nation’s army chief in Colombo - appears to be limited.

Most of the homes are intact, but outside the LTTE camp we see a gold shop and a house which have been destroyed in the attacks.

The electricity lines of Sampor which were destroyed in the shelling are being repaired by workers of the country’s Ceylon Electricity Board.

There is an effort to bring back things to normality.

The bumpy, red-earth roads of the Tiger-controlled areas are dotted with their health centres, banks, rest houses, post offices, the Tamil Eelam administrative service office, and mills. There are lush farms and red-tiled homes.

But look closely and you find that many homes are empty.

There is a great deal of fear, and most Tamils have fled their homes for makeshift dwellings under trees and in local schools.

For the time being, however, there does not seem to be a shortage of food - local NGOs and the Tamil Relief Organisation are already providing that. German wheat flour and Chinese mackerel in tomato sauce are already being shipped in.

Yasmin Ali Haque, a co-ordinator for Unicef in the area, says 5,600 people who fled Muthur are camped out at a school in Paddalipuram, fearful to go home because of the shelling.

“Adults in this area remember the aerial attacks from the early 1990s but they have never been exposed to shelling. People are very worried and scared,” she says.

Among the anxious families are Amrithalingam and his wife and children, who had just had lunch on Tuesday when they heard a thud. Then shots rang out in the midday heat.

The family huddled in a ditch outside their home until it was over.

Amrithalingam and his wife, Asha - with their four children on a tractor - walked five miles to Paddalipuram and joined other families who had set up camp under a tree.

Sandstorms lash them during the day, while mosquitoes prevent a good night’s sleep.

“We are scared to return. Three neighbours died in the shelling. It looks like the war is returning. But we want peace,” says Asha.

Back at Muthur, Mr Elililan says they are not returning to all-out conflict.

“We are being patient. We have never been this patient in the past after the sort of attack that has happened. Because there’s an environment of peace,” he says.

But peace could be on borrowed time in the Tiger heartland.

“From the beginning we have known war is the only solution,” says Mr Elililan. “Six rounds of talks have not yielded anything.”

It is not going to be easy restoring peace to Sri Lanka.

The last time Sinnathurai Kandasamy saw his wife, Thiraviyam, was a little over two weeks ago, when she left home for a hospital check-up in the east coast Sri Lankan town of Trincomalee.

Hours later Sinnathurai found his wife dead in a mortuary. A bullet had blown her left cheek away. Her eye was missing. Gone too were her ear lobes and fingers - chopped off for the gold jewellery she adored.

The 59-year-old was a victim of the violence that swept through the town’s main market just over a fortnight ago. It began with a bomb blast that the authorities blamed on the Tamil Tigers - a group that wants a state for the country’s 3 million Tamils carved out of Sri Lanka, which is dominated by the majority Buddhist Sinhalese population.

What followed in Trincomalee, say its residents, was murderous retribution. They tell of how the town square filled with Sinhalese mobs armed with knives and pistols. The town’s Tamils say this was a premeditated killing spree.

“The market is next to an army camp. There are armed police and soldiers there. Yet they just stood by. What had my wife done to deserve this?” asked Sinnathurai, between tears.

There are tales of butchery and rape. Shops owned by Tamils were burnt. Later the Tamil Tigers slaughtered five Sinhalese farmers in retaliation.

The trouble, say Tamils, started last November when a statue of Buddha materialised overnight in the square, a provocative religious act for the mainly Hindu Tamils of the town. Local Sinhalese claim that after Tamils won control of the council, there were overt displays of support for “terrorists”.

This reaction and, sometimes blatant, discrimination by the Sinhalese authorities has fed separatism among the local Tamils.

“They are trying to provoke us into becoming terrorists,” said Murugaiah Anandan, the nephew of Sinnathurai. “My aunt lay on the road for four hours. No one cares what happens to us. Why should we not join and fight?”

Trincomalee’s centre is now deserted, save for the heavily armed Sri Lankan soldiers at every crossing. Along the main drag, the shops are either shuttered or charred wrecks.

Concentrated mostly in the north and east of this small island nation in the Indian Ocean, these spasms of destruction punctuate daily life. They are some way from the full-scale conflict that the country witnessed for two decades since 1983, which claimed over 65,000 lives.

But in parts of Sri Lanka today the scene is of daily assassinations, abductions and gunbattles between armed groups.

At the heart of the matter is the refusal by both sides to adhere to the peace agreement signed in February. The Tigers promised to abjure from violence and in return the government agreed to rein in “armed groups” operating in its territory - a reference to a new Tamil paramilitary outfit led by the breakaway Tamil Tiger commander Karuna. Neither has happened.

Five hours drive from Trincomalee is Batticaloa, a palm-fringed town which straddles a blue lagoon that has become the frontline of a brutish battle between government-backed Karuna fighters and battle-hardened Tigers.

Large red letters daubed on lampposts proclaim that Batticaloa is under the control of the TMVP, initials in Tamil that stand for Karuna’s Tamil People’s Liberation party. The word on the street is that Karuna’s party is being built up as an alternative, more cooperative Tamil force capable of taking over administrative and police functions in the east of the country. Karuna’s troops are sheltered in the army’s barracks.

Batticaloa’s streets are now segregated into pro-Tiger and pro-Karuna fiefdoms. On the day the Guardian arrived in Batticaloa the Tigers killed 18 Karuna fighters, an act which was followed by the army spraying the town with bullets in hot pursuit of LTTE soldiers.

Report filed from Trincomalee Monday May 1, 2006

The Sri Lanka military launched a sustained barrage against Muttur East Tuesday and Wednesday last week, killing 18 civilians, injuring over 30 and displacing tens of thousands during the two days of indiscriminate air strikes and artillery fire.

The Sri Lankan government said the bombardment, which destroyed many villages and displaced 43,000 people according to civil servants in the area, was retaliation for the attempted assassination of the Army Commander (see separate story, p5).

But the international Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) ruled that the strikes were a violation of the ceasefire, sparking an angry outburst from the government (see separate story, p2).

Kfir jets of the air force and army artillery targeted several Tamil villages in LTTE controlled parts of Muttur east. One of the bombs had fallen on ‘Vaddam’, a Muslim controlled village in the government controlled Muttur town.

At least ten Muttur east villages were targeted during the 16 hours of attacks, with a dozen aerial bombs and nearly 600 artillery shells, including those from multi-barrel launchers, falling on the villages, Mr. S. Elilan, Trincomalee district political head of the LTTE, told the press.

In addition, villages that are outside Muttur East and under the control of the LTTE including Ralkuli and Upparu, also came under naval and army mortar attack.

“All targets hit were civilian. One LTTE base was slightly damaged. However, not a single LTTE cadre was injured in the attacks,” he said.

“The situation is like a war. People are being killed by bombs and artillery fire. You can’t say there’s peace in Sri Lanka anymore,” Mr. Elilan said.

“They are firing with artillery and cannons,” head of the LTTE Peace Secreterait, Mr. S. Puleedevan said during the bombardment. “It is like a war situation in Trincomalee. If the attacks continue, the LTTE will be forced to take military defensive action.”

Reportedly acting under international pressure, the Sri Lankan government called off its bombardment on Thursday, though sporadic shelling has been reported on and off in the past few days.

Having criticised the Sri Lankan government’s bombardment, the SLMM also rejected government claims that a shell which fell in a Muslim dominated government controlled area of Mutur, killing 4 Muslim civilians and injuring 9 others, was fired by the LTTE.

“The deaths and damage were clearly caused by a misfire of the Government forces and not by LTTE firing as claimed by the Army on Wednesday,” SLMM head Ulf Henricsson who visited the Muslim village, said afterwards.

Three Muslim civilians were killed and eight others were injured Wednesday when a Sri Lanka Air Force Kfir jet bombed ‘Vaddam’ in Muttur town, south of Trincomalee.

The pre-school and the science laboratory of Chenaiyoor Central College were also damaged in the air strike and artillery shell attack, a worker of a local non-governmental organization (NGO) in the area told Tamilnet by telephone. The NGO worker was under the first floor of the college when the artillery attack took place.

He said more than sixty shells fired by the security forces exploded in several villages, including Kaddaiparichchan, Chenaiyoor, Koonitheivu, Soodaikuda, Kadatkaraichenai.

The United Nations children’s agency confirmed Sunday that four children were killed in the government air strikes, and urged the reopening of schools in the affected area. UNICEF, which sent a mission to LTTE-held areas of Trincomalee district, said two schools were damaged in the bombardment.

“Four children between the ages of two and 16 years were among the 18 people killed in the air attacks,” UNICEF senior program coordinator Yasmin Haq told AFP. “We were told that another 24 children were wounded. We are checking on those reports.”

She said UNICEF was keen for the schools to be quickly rebuilt. “Children in the area are traumatised and it is important for them to go back to school as soon as possible. That is one way in which they can overcome the trauma,” she said.

Meanwhile, during the attacks the Sri Lanka Army (SLA) had refused permission to the International Committee of Red cross (ICRC) to take three seriously wounded Tamil civilians to a hospital in the government controlled area for further treatment.

The military had reopened access routes to LTTE controlled areas but relief workers were still encountering problems getting to refugee camps. “UNHCR calls for immediate access to all affected populations as soon as possible,” the agency said.

Up to 21,000 people had fled their homes following the air strikes, the United Nations said Sunday. “Altogether there is an established recent case load of some 6,000 families or about 21,000 people,” the office of the UN Humanitarian Coordinator in Sri Lanka said in a statement. “The UN agencies are starting immediate deliveries of aid to affected areas.”

But some reports said this number, lower than the 40,000 reported by the top civil servant in Muttur east, is based those displaced between the ethnic riots of April 12 and before last Tuesday’s air strikes. Families from Muttur east displaced by the aerial bombardment were not included in these figures the reports said.

Other reports put the number of displaced at 40,000, though the government claims the number is much lower, with only around 7,000 people displaced.

Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam, Tamil National Alliance (TNA) parliamentarian, told TamilNet: “the figure of 43,158 persons displaced is an official figure reported by the Divisional Secretariat of Muttur and confirmed by independent NGOs including INFORM. If this figure is wrong, the Government has to blame its own institutions.”

The UNHCR also said a smaller number of refugees had also fled to neighbouring India. “As a result of the latest security incidents in Sri Lanka, 16 people have landed on the shores of southern India,” the UNHCR said.

Humanitarian agencies working in these affected areas have pointed out that many people have been displaced and are languishing in refugee camps with little care and protection. They say children are the most affected with their education coming to a halt with most schools remaining closed due to the volatile situation.

United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Thursday said that it was deeply concerned about the humanitarian situation of civilians following weeks of escalating tension and violence.

“The loss of life, the new displacement of families, the destruction to businesses and property, as well as threats to humanitarian workers, are creating a climate of fear and tension for civilians,” said United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland.

The UN agency said it expected the displaced to return to their homes as tensions subsided. However, reports of a resumption of shelling in the Vavunathivu area on Saturday had caused further panic among the refugees.

SLMM spokeswoman Ms. Olaffsdottir said the fear and uncertainty among civilians after the attacks have gradually eased in the past few days. She said displaced people in the Trincomalee district have been temporarily sheltered mainly in temples, schools and public buildings. She added that many people, living in coastal areas hadn’t still gone back to their homes.

Meanwhile some NGOs said that civilians who were caught in the shelling are not receiving even basic humanitarian assistance. They alleged that people who have sought refuge in camps in areas such as Muttur and Kinniya in the Trincomalee district hadn’t received assistance for days and that people had to depend on other villagers for assistance.

They also noted that authorities instead of arguing about the actual number of people who have been displaced as a result of the recent volatile situation should concentrate on providing humanitarian assistance to them, the Sunday Times reported.

The recent escalation of violence that has put the Ceasefire Agreement under severe pressure, seems in many ways to reflect the mutually reinforcing relationship between Sinhalese and Tamil nationalisms and their respective protagonists. In such circumstances an argument is put forward more vociferously that the ‘extremism’ and ‘provocation’ of the LTTE’ feeds and justifies and the ‘hardline’ political rhetoric of Sinhala politicians and the violence of the state’s armed forces. This perspective has in many ways informed the myriad of actors who have contributed to the recent peace process, either as direct participants or as advisors offering comment and analysis to the major players.

Advocates of this perspective have argued that the only way to wean the Sinhalese population away from the uncompromising positions of nationalist actors is to transform the LTTE. Transformation of the LTTE has thus been the mantra that has guided many international analysts and policy maker for the last three or four years.

The argument goes thus: if the LTTE’s military capacity is radically curtailed and its political autonomy contained within the boundaries of commitment to a ‘united’ or ‘unitary’ Sri Lanka, the Sinhala hardliners will no longer be able to mount such vehement opposition to any mention of devolution or federalism. Once the LTTE has been de – fanged, more moderate Sinhala politicians will be able to confidently advocate a political solution that grants significant autonomy to the Tamils.

It is also argued that while the LTTE remains a significant military and political ‘threat’, ‘spoilers’ in the south will always outbid moderate Sinhala politicians attempts to find a negotiated settlement by whipping up the Sinhala polity’s anxieties about a separate Tamil state. In the idiom of its exponents, the claim that transformation of the LTTE will undermine Sinhala ‘spoilers’ of the peace process and thereby allow for the ‘reform of the state by liberal actors is now almost axiomatic.

Given the current perilous standoff between the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE, it might be time to examine the basic premises of this argument. According to the ‘transform the LTTE first’ mantra, the political plausibility of Sinhala nationalist positions is directly related to the actions and perceived intentions of the LTTE.

However, a close examination of the dynamics of politics within the Sinhala polity would suggest that southern opposition to any form of political devolution for the Tamils is sustained through sources that are completely independent of the LTTE per se.

The ideal of a unitary Sinhala Buddhist state in which the minorities have a politically recognised but subordinate position, resonates with the interests of a multitude of groups within the Sinhala polity. A compromise with the Tamils is rejected, not because of anxieties or loathing of the LTTE (alone), but because such a compromise would necessarily destroy this utopian vision, the most basic political assumption and aspiration of Sinhala Buddhist common sense.

The vision of a unitary Sinhala Buddhist state in which there is both a massive centralisation of resources and seamless continuity between the language, rituals and beliefs of the Sinhala Buddhist world and the institutions of the state, clearly has its appeal both for political elites and for non elite sections of the polity. For aspirant social groups, a centralised Sinhala Buddhist state not only provides opportunities through public sector employment through which they can achieve upward mobility, it also protects and fosters the integrity of their Sinhala Buddhist world.

It is for this reason that all political concessions to the Tamils, however mild, are immediately interpreted as both a material and moral threat. Any minor political recognition of a Tamil claim to the island or the state can be seen as undermining both the Sinhala Buddhist state and the Sinhala Buddhist religious, cultural and linguistic world that it protects. So for example, attempts during the 1950’s and 1960’s to replace the Sinhala Only’ legislation with official recognition for Tamil were decried as attempts to ‘destroy the Sinhala race’ or ‘make the Sinhalese learn Tamil.’

The continuation of this phenomenon can be seen in the fierce opposition that was mounted against both the PTOMS and the LTTE’s proposals for an Interim Self Governing Authority (ISGA). The ‘transform the LTTE’ school of thought often argues that both these proposals conceded far too much to the LTTE and thereby played straight into the hands of the Sinhala ‘spoilers.’

However, it must be remembered that opposition to both proposals mounted well before the actual details of the proposal were released. The substance of the proposals was therefore irrelevant, what was problematic for the Sinhala Buddhists was the recognition of a Tamil political identity that these proposals entailed. Both the PTOMS and the ISGA contained the assumption that the Tamils have legitimate political interests that have to be recognised and accommodated through institutions outside the control of the Sinhala Buddhist polity. It is this possibility that is deeply problematic for the Sinhala Buddhist psyche. This is not a recent phenomena, either; well before the emergence of the LTTE, attempts by Tamil political leaders to negotiate a compromise with their Sinhala counterparts were destroyed by opposition using the imagery of a Sinhala Buddhist state and world under threat.

While the Sinhala Buddhist state fosters and protects the social aspirations of non – elite Sinhalese, it is also a useful resource for political elites. The excessively centralised state gives political actors vast resources with which to build patron – client networks and consolidate their power. Neither the UNP nor the SLFP, the two main Sinhala parties, have robust party structures and both rely on access to the state’s resources to build and maintain a support base. Political competition therefore revolves on the distribution of the state’s resources. The parties in power can distribute resources through subsidies and patronage while the parties in opposition promise greater resource while mobilising the discontent of sections who have been excluded from government largesse.

Crucially, the political parties have no incentive to aggressively promote a political settlement and even if they had an incentive, they do not have the party organisation through which to spread such a message. Political competition is played out in a public sphere dominated by Sinhala Buddhist common sense.

Alongside their deep antipathy to any form of political recognition for the Tamils, Sinhala Buddhist nationalists are also deeply intolerant to every form of autonomous Tamil political activity. In Sri Lanka this leads this results in all expressions of an autonomous Tamil political identity being dismissed as results of LTTE manipulation and coercion. The same principle is increasingly being extended to the international arena and Tamil Diaspora political activity is carefully watched for ‘pro-LTTE’ tendencies by the Sinhala nationalist press. The baleful distrust and anxiety created by Tamil participation in local government (council) elections in far away England recently led The Island newspaper to print a front page story. IAccording to the paper, ‘pro LTTE’ individuals standing for local council elections are promising a mini Eelam in London with sports facilities, funding for Saturday schools and centres for the elderly, exclusively for Tamils. The argument of the story is clear – all Tamil political activity, however mild and unconnected to the ethnic question, is inherently separatist and dangerous. The fact that local councils in Britain have long provided such community facilities for their Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati, Chinese, Turkish and Pakistani citizens is somehow missed. ‘Even’ in Britain, today the Tamils are asking for a Saturday school, tomorrow they will want a separate state, the logic goes.

The poisonous racism that pervades mass circulation Island’s reporting of British Tamils is pervasive in wider Sinhala society and is reproduced within a variety of sources, over which the LTTE can have no possible influence. The political vision of a united Sinhala Buddhist Sri Lanka is reinforced and repeated through the media, the education system, public institutions, the rhetoric of politicians and recently the interventions of international actors.

Meanwhile, the biased and one sided international response to events in Sri Lanka simply reinforces the Sinhala Buddhist conviction that all Tamil political demands are indeed a moral threat to the Sri Lankan state and the Sinhala Buddhist world it protects. Each condemnation of the LTTE and its ‘reprehensible terrorist’ nature, every failure of the international community to stand by agreements such as the PTOMS, every instance where incidents of high profile violence against Tamils are followed by indifferent international silence, the Sinhala Buddhist position is once again assured of its (international) legitimacy.

Given that the sources of Sinhala Buddhist nationalist are demonstrably independent of the LTTE, transforming and containing the LTTE is unlikely to produce an attitude of compromise within the Sinhala polity. Indeed, once the Tiger has been de – fanged, there will be even less reason for Sinhala political leaders to concede even a modicum of political devolution. Attempts to transform the Sri Lankan state, which would give the Tamils some form of political recognition, would, as always, instantly arouse opposition as a cloak for dangerous Tamil separatist aspirations.

In order to transform the Sri Lankan state both pro peace advocates and the Sinhala polity have to replace their unhealthy fixation with the LTTE with a serious consideration of the sites and mechanisms through with Sinhala Buddhist nationalism is reproduced. International actors have to consider why they cannot confront Sinhala Buddhist nationalism of the Sri Lankan state with the same open contempt with which they dismiss Tamil aspirations.

As is increasingly argued on the Tamil street, in the absence of any change in either the Sinhala Buddhist or international mindset, the Tamils, whose struggle has never enjoyed or needed external legitimisation, may be better off concentrating on changing facts on the ground.

Sri Lanka this week vehemently protested accusations by international truce monitors that government forces have been responsible for extrajudicial killings and rejected their ruling that that the airstrikes last Tuesday and Wednesday in Trincomalee were a violation of the 2002 Ceasefire Agreement.

Officials of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) said they “fear that government security forces have, in the north and the east, been involved in extrajudicial killings of civilians. This conviction is based on our observation and inquiries on the ground.”

“The air strikes that were conducted by the Sri Lankan Government in Trincomalee district on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) targets in Sampoor area on 25 and 26 April 2006 are a clear violation of the Ceasefire Agreement. Article 1.2 of the Ceasefire Agreement clearly states “Neither Party shall engage in any offensive military operation,” said the press release issued by the SLMM Saturday.

The government of Mahinda Rajapakse, which has clashed with the SLMM recently over the latter’s criticism of the presence of anti-LTTE paramilitaries in Army-controlled areas, angrily rejected the SLMM statement.

“We are surprised that the statement has been made at a time when the country is reeling from the bomb attacks carried out by the Tigers,” said Palitha Kohona, secretary general of the government’s peace secretariat, referring to the statement on extra-judicial killings.

“We are unconvinced about the ‘facts’ on which the statement has been made by the SLMM,” Kohona told AFP.

He made no comment on the other statement that government air strikes on northeastern Trincomalee district Tuesday and Wednesday were a clear violation of the 2002 ceasefire accord.

SLMM spokesperson Helen Olafsdottir reiterated the ceasefire monitors were following up on some “alarming” cases of extra judicial killings allegedly carried out by certain elements in the security forces but stressed that it did not mean the killings were part of a coordinated act of the government, reported the Daily Mirror.

“What we are saying is there are some rogue elements in the security forces, about whom the government may not be aware of. We want to bring this to the notice of the government,” she said. “We met the defence secretary [Monday] and raised the matter. I must emphasize this is not an overall judgment on the government forces.”

But Minister Keheliya Rambukwella, government spokesman on security matters, told AP “The government is not involved in any way in the so-called extra-judicial killings.”

“We categorically deny the charges, which are outrageous and not based on facts,” he said.

Commenting on the criticism over the SLMM ruling of the aerial bombing in Trincomalee, Ms. Olafsdottir stressed the only reason the aerial bombing was ruled as a violation was because there was no proof to say the LTTE fired on the Sri Lanka Navy first as claimed by the government.

The military has said it acted in self-defence when it launched the air and naval strikes, but coming after the attempted assassination in Colombo on Tuesday of the army chief, the attacks are seen as retaliation.

Ms. Olafsdottir also dismissed allegations that the SLMM was silent on the suicide bombing at the army headquarters, stating that the very next day the head of mission Ulf Henrikson in interviews with the international media raised suspicions of LTTE involvement.

“In the statement we released on the day of the suicide attack we said we could not point fingers as inquiries were just beginning. Now that the government has made some leads with the inquiries into the Colombo bombing, we are waiting for the results in order to make a ruling,” she said.

The SLMM on Saturday warned that any further operations by government forces would “only add fuel to the conflict.”

The confidence building measures of 2002 have been reversed. Roads into Tamil areas not under the control of the Sri Lankan military are routinely closed, preventing goods and people from getting in and out. This is an unofficial, albeit intermittent, resumption of the decades economic embargo that was lifted – at least on paper - with the signing of the 2002 ceasefire agreement.

Mass arrests in cordon and search operations are back on – over 200 Tamil and Muslim people were detained after one such operation in Trincomalee last week while another 100 Tamils were arrested during an operation in Colombo. Such large-scale detentions, where often the people are released after a few days with no charges being laid, are all intended to terrorise the population being targeted – the Tamils.

And violence against Tamils civilians has escalated. Not as well documented (except by the Tamil press) as the attacks on the security is the murders of Tamil civilians in many parts of the northeast and, now, even Colombo. Businessmen, traders, farmers and civil servants – over 85 Tamil civilians from all walks of life have been killed in the past few weeks.

The international monitors of the SLMM last week triggered a storm when they official stated a well known fact: Sri Lankan security forces are conducting extra-judicial killings.

Then there is the Trincomalee communal violence, which left over 20 dead, some 75 hospitalised and compelled thousands to flee. The predominantly Sinhala security forces stood by throughout.

While all these might suggest the country is back at war, that apparently is not the case. “We still have a valid ceasefire agreement. No party has ended it,” SLMM chief Lt. Gen. Ulf Henricsson, said, before confusingly adding: “but of course it is not a ceasefire right now.”

Meanwhile, the government launched air strikes in the east, in retaliation for the suicide bomb attack on Lt. Gen. Fonseka in Colombo. The government claimed these air strikes in Trincomalee, Muttur and Batticaloa were targeted at LTTE positions, but it was mainly civilians who were killed, injured and displaced in their tens of thousands as a result of the bombardment. While the LTTE admitted one of its camps had suffered damage, no cadres had been killed.

The Tamil National Alliance protested the “indiscriminate air, sea and land bombing and shelling” and said “the immense sense of insecurity that has been created by the indiscriminate and blatantly anti-Tamil actions of the GOSL armed forces has also resulted in over forty thousand Tamil civilians leaving GOSL controlled areas and taking refuge in LTTE controlled areas.”

So perhaps there is another objective. Any reasonable person might not be faulted for believing that the Sri Lanka government, while not officially returning to war – to quote Norwegian mediator Eric Solheim, “this is very far from what Sri Lanka suffered during (the) war. At that time at the maximum 1,000 people were killed in one week. So this is definitely not war” – is engaged in a form of collective punishment against the Tamil population.

The notion of collective punishment rests on assigning collective responsibility for an action attributed to a representative member of that group. People are to be held responsible for others’ actions on the basis they tolerate or support either tacitly or directly without actively taking part in these actions Therefore the group is punished for the actions of the few because the many did not prevent the former from engaging in those actions. In short, guilt by association.

The severity and effectiveness of holding a group collectively responsible for the actions of a minority may vary greatly, but it is aimed at (and often succeeds in) instilling fear and passivity among group members. Some have argued it is almost always a sign of authoritarian tendencies in a home society that seeks to impose collective responsibility and punishment.

At this point is should probably be noted that collective punishment is forbidden by international law. Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention forbids collective punishment and states that a person shall not be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. In particular, Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War states: “Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited” and protected persons in this case refers to civilians.

Yet in Sri Lanka, the government is praised by the international community even as it collectively targets sections of the civilian population as it is deemed to be ‘refraining’ from attacking the LTTE. When, after a claymore attack on soldiers, the military failed to protect Tamils and Muslims, the international response was uniform: they condemned the claymore attack and made no comment on the civilians.

Speaking of the attack on the military, the US said: “This is clearly an act of terror, which we condemn. … We express our sympathies and condolences to the victims of this attack and will continue our efforts to work with the parties in Sri Lanka, the friends of Sri Lanka, including the Norwegians, and all those who want to see a solution to this conflict through dialogue and through negotiation and not through violence.”

Similarly, last week, while many governments including the US, EU, Japan, India and China condemned the attack at the Army Headquarters, there was not a single statement criticising on Sri Lanka’s bombardment of Tamil villages in retaliation. The SLMM’s ruling criticising the shelling has also been contemptuously rejected by Sri Lanka, but there is no international response to that either.

Sri Lanka may or may not be sliding back to war – depending on who you ask. In either case, the lack of a response from the international observers to the death and displacement of Tamil civilians can only reinforce doubts about the ability or willingness to underwrite the security of Tamils. And the lack of security for Tamils in Sri Lanka is at the heart of the Tamil liberation struggle.

The continuing ‘shadow’ war between Sri Lanka’s security and paramilitary forces and the Liberation Tigers claimed scores of lives over the past two weeks amid widespread violence across the Northeast and also in Colombo.

Apart from a suicide bombing inside the Sri Lanka Army (SLA) headquarters in Colombo that claimed 11 lives and the subsequent government air strikes against Tamil villages in the east that claimed 18 lives, the shadow war claimed at least 90 lives over the past two weeks whilst many others were wounded.

These include several paramilitaries killed by LTTE commandos who overran their camps in government controlled part of the eastern province.

Additional several hundred Tamils have been arrested as the Sri Lanka military stepped up mass cordon, search and detention activities both in the Northeast and in Colombo.

May 1

Two Sri Lanka Navy (SLN) soldiers and four Tamil civilians were killed when a claymore fragmentation mine attached to a bicycle was detonated in Trincomalee town. Three SLN personnel and two civilians were wounded.

April 30

On Sunday evening, a 29-year old woman, who was shot and seriously injured by unknown gunmen near the old bus-stand in the Jaffna Islet of Velanai, succumbed to her injuries at the Jaffna Teaching Hospital. Two gunmen riding in a motorbike had fired at the woman as she was walking along the main road in the Army-controlled town.

Two SLN personnel were seriously injured in a claymore attack near Allaipitti in Kayts, within the SLN’s High Security Zone (HSZ). The injured soldiers were airlifted to Palaly military hospital.

The conductor of a private bus was shot dead at Power House road in Jaffna town, about 100 metres from SLA’s 51-2 Brigade HQ. The dead man was identified as M. Prakash, 25, of Columbuthurai who plied a bus between Muhamalai and Jaffna town.

Also on Sunday, a claymore mine was recovered by Valaichenai Police in Kiran, Batticaloa. Meanwhile, unconfirmed reports said that a high level Sri Lanka Army (SLA) officer and an SLA trooper were killed when their vehicle hit a mine after the pre-dawn attack on paramilitary camp in nearby Welikande.

Meanwhile, unidentified attackers lobbed a grenade at a check post located inside the high security area of the SLA’s 22-3 Brigade headquarters in Batticaloa Sunday, wounding a soldier. A cordon and search operation was launched following the attack, but there were no reports about arrests.

But in the island’s west, seven Tamil youths staying in Pesalai refugee camp, located along Talaimannar and Mannar road, were taken into custody by the SLN Sunday in a cordon and search operation. Pesalai refugee camp provides shelter to displaced villagers in 1990 violence from the districts of Mullaitivu and Killinochchi.

April 29

On Saturday a civilian injured in a claymore attack by an SLA Deep Penetration Unit in Thetchanamadu area of LTTE controlled Madhu area succumbed to his injuries. Mr. M. Jeevananthan, 24, was injured during the attack on Thursday and was transferred to the Jaffna Teaching Hospital Saturday morning for urgent surgery, but died during the operation.

Meanwhile, the SLA fired mortar shells towards LTTE-controlled Vavunathivu on Saturday, Daya Mohan, Head of Batticaloa district LTTE Political Wing told reporters. Several homes of residents of Mankikattu, Navatkudi and Puliyadikuda villages have been damaged but no one received any serious injuries, he said.

The attacks started when residents displaced by the earlier artillery shelling were returning to their residences, the LTTE district political had said. The mortar attacks continued for more than two hours and stopped only when members of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) visited the areas attacked, he added.

In another incident, two cadres of the Tamileelam Auxiliary Force were killed in a claymore attack carried out by a DPU of the SLA on Saturday in an LTTE-controlled part of the Manalaru region in the Mullaitivu district.

April 28

On Friday, gunmen on a motorbike shot and killed a Tamil youth at Urelu in Valikamam, Jaffna, and then rushed into the SLA camp in the area, villagers who chased the gunmen said. More than a hundred enraged villagers surrounded the SLA camp Friday night and Urelu was shut down in protest Saturday as the villagers launched a protest hartal against the killings. Protesting villagers say that the Urelu SLA intelligence camp is behind the killings in a terror-campaign targeting auto rickshaw drivers and traders.

Meanwhile, Sellathurai Asokan, 36, alias Asok, a former member of the LTTE, was shot dead by SLA commandos Friday at Mandur in the Wellaveli police division in Batticaloa. Asokan, a father one who had lost a leg in a battle during his seven year membership with the LTTE, was shot dead while he was riding his bicycle.

Separately, suspected Army-backed paramilitaries shot and killed two Tamil youths Friday near Kinnayadi Nagathambiran temple, Valaichenai. Two motorbike riding gunmen had killed the victims while they were crossing the river near the SLA camp in Kinnayadi.

In another incident, two men entering into the market on the Valaichenai-Kalkuda road on a motorcycle were shot at Friday by suspected paramilitaries travelling in a white van, residents in Kalkuda said. No one was injured and the gunmen sped away. The fleeing gunmen dragged in a youth into their white van, in front of the Valaichenai Annur National school and assaulted him. They fired shots into the sky before leaving the scene, said eyewitnesses.

Mr. A. G. Hussain Ismail, Vice Chancellor of the South Eastern University located in Oluvil in Amparai district, escaped an assassination attempt Friday, during which unidentified gunmen on a motorbike fired at his car four times when he was on his way to the varsity from his official guesthouse. Three bodyguards and another person travelling with the Vice Chancellor also escaped unhurt.

In a separate incident, two civilians were wounded when their water bowser was attacked by a claymore mine inside the LTTE controlled area at Madhu junction Friday. The bowser was returning after supplying water to personnel at the LTTE Forward Defence Line in Madhu.

Separately, unidentified attackers lobbed a grenade and shot at an SLA unit in Nanattan, 20 km south of Mannar town, wounding four soldiers on Friday. The soldiers opened fire for 15 minutes following the attack. More than 50 families fled into the nearest church.

Unidentified gunmen also shot dead a Tamil civilian Friday at Kallaikaadu in Mannar. SLMM monitors visited the scene and conducted an inquiry. About fifty-five families residing in the village are about to leave due to fear following the killing, press reports said.

April 27

In Jaffna, auto rickshaw driver Suresh Fernando, 35, was found shot dead Friday morning in Urkavathurai (Kayts). Shots were heard after he left home Thursday night, his relatives said. Fernando’s killing is the fourth murder of rickshaw drivers in Jaffna in the past few days - the first in Nelliyady, killing two and the second in Irrupalai, killing another.

Meanwhile, eleven youths arrested by Eravur police in the roundup of the Eravur public market Thursday remained under police detention and are yet to be produced at the Courts. More than 70 Tamils had been taken into custody for investigations by Eravur police in a cordon and search of the Eravur Muslim Public market. 21 Tamil youths were detained for further inquiries, including the 11.

Separately on Thursday, two men on a motorcycle lobbed a hand grenade into the SLA sentry point at the Thadatheru junction on the Kankesanturai road in Jaffna, seriously injuring two troopers. The soldiers fired at the attackers who escaped in their motorcycle. A Tamil youth passing by the place of the grenade attack after the roadblock was arrested by the SLA. His parents have registered a complaint with the Human Rights Commission office in Jaffna.

Two SLN troopers on a road clearing patrol in Urkavathurai, Jaffna, were killed in a claymore ambush Thursday.

In another incident, three SLA soldiers travelling to Vallakkulam near Vankalai in Mannar district were killed and three others seriously wounded in a claymore ambush Thursday. Two civilians bathing in Vallakkulam, including a 40 year-old woman, are missing.

Three Special Task Force (STF) elite troopers were injured in a claymore blast that targeted a road patrol at Kaddukarai kulam in Mannar Thursday. The STF is the elite counter insurgency arm of the Sri Lankan armed forces.

April 26

In Colombo, SLA soldiers and police arrested 97 Tamils from residences in the suburbs of Bambalapitiya, Collpetty, Dehiwela and others last Wednesday night through Thursday morning, and have detained them in Police stations across Colombo. The security forces and police conducted thorough search of several residences and lodges.

Meanwhile, SLA soldiers arrested Ms Bhavani Balasubramaniam, 47, a medical doctor from Jaffna, at the Colombo National Hospital last Wednesday morning. She had travelled to Colombo the previous day on a work related visit to the Colombo hospital. Other reports said she was arrested after she had accidentally wandered into the area where the SLA commander, Lt Gen Sarath Fonseka was being treated.

Also on Wednesday last week, three Tamil civilians were hacked to death and two children were abducted by Sinhala home guards at Thanganagar in Seruvila police division. The Sinhala home guards covered their faces with black clothes entered the houses of Tamil civilians and pulled up the inmates and cut them to death. Women in these houses had fled from the area, reports said.

SLA soldiers cordoned off and search the premises of the International Students Union office near Parameswara Junction, Wednesday morning. Soldiers ransacked the building and damaged students’ property.

Separately unconfirmed reports said a SLA trooper was injured in a grenade attack in Sithankerni area in Jaffna last Wednesday.

SLA soldiers also ransacked Tamil National Alliance (TNA) parliamentarian Mr. S. Gajendran’s office located inside the building, reports said. SLA soldiers also arrested one student who was later released and admitted to the Jaffna Teaching Hospital to receive treatment for injuries received while in SLA custody, student leaders told TamilNet.

In Vavuniya a senior member of the All Ceylon Tamil Congress (ACTC), Mr. S. K. Senthilnathan, was shot by paramilitary gunmen last Wednesday and succumbed to his wounds at Vavuniya hospital. Mr. Senthilnathan, a popular trader, was a candidate for the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) in the local elections to be held in Vavuniya.

April 25

Amid escalating violence following the suicide bombing in Colombo and army bombardment of Muttur east in Trincomalee, violence escalated elsewhere in the Northeast also.

Two civilians and two SLA soldiers were killed in Jaffna district Tuesday night. One was shot dead by unknown gunmen at his relatives’ residence in Urumpirai, Jaffna Tuesday night and the other was shot by SLA soldiers during a cordon and search operation near the fish market in Chavakachcheri.

Two SLA soldiers were killed when they were attacked by unknown gunmen in Inuvil, Thuraiveethi area. Following the attack, additional SLA troops arrived at the scene and arrested several traders from the area.

A Tamil civilian, Mr. S. K. Raveendran, 36, was shot and killed inside the SLA High Security Zone (HSZ) in Omanthai on April 25.

Also on Tuesday, Dr. S. Arulanantham, 44, a qualified doctor who ran a private medial clinic at his home in Mattakuliya, Colombo, was shot dead by two unknown gunmen inside his clinic.

Three SLA soldiers and three civilians were injured in four incidents of grenade attacks in Jaffna peninsula Tuesday. In one attack by unknown assailants near the Kondavil,, two SLA soldiers were seriously injured near the Uppumadam SLA camp. In another grenade attack on the Point-Pedro-Palaly Road, near Ariyakulam junction, one SLA soldier was injured and three pedestrians were wounded. There were two other attacks on SLA positions near Sangilian Road close to Nallur Temple and another at Arasady Road Jaffna, but details of casualties were not available.

April 24

On Monday last week, two policemen and three civilians were wounded in a grenade attack on a police post in Eravur. The previous day, a three and a half year old child was killed and her mother was wounded in Polonnaruwa Muslim Colony when two unidentified gunmen entered a house searching for a man and shot his family members.

A Vavuniya trader was abducted by unidentified armed men in a white van that Monday. Around 7 to 9 persons were in the white van, eyewitnesses told TNA parliamentarian Vino Noharathalingam. The MP, who lodged a complaint at Vavuniya police, said there were again reports of paramilitary men demanding large ransoms from traders in Vavuniya town.

On the same day unidentified gunmen shot a Sinhalese man in the Seruvila police division, while an attempt by two unidentified people to kill a civil servant in Muttur was foiled. Also that day, two armed home guards were shot dead in Thutuwewa, south of Vavuniya and a former member of LTTE was shot dead by unknown gunmen in the Maravankulam area of Vavuniya. The home guards were returning home for vacation when they were shot dead by unknown gunmen.

Late that Monday, SLA soldiers opened fire on a mini bus at Kanakampuliyady junction in Jaffna, killing its civilian driver. The fate of at least four passengers was not known, but residents, who heard gunfire and screaming from the vehicle, had expressed fear that all inside the bus were killed and the traces removed from the attack site. The attack on the civilian bus took place 2 km from a claymore explosion site at Sarasalai-Meesalai border where an SLA soldier was killed and another wounded earlier that Monday evening.

Large numbers of soldiers were deployed at Kanakampuliyady junction following the claymore attack and the traffic had ceased. On Monday night, SLA officials said that their troopers shot at the bus after gunshots were fired at them from the bus. However, on Tuesday, SLA officials said the mini bus was fired upon as it did not stop at a roadblock set up by the soldiers.

On the same day, a bomb fixed under a bridge exploded on the Nelliyadi-Point Pedro Road, but no casualties were reported. Nelliyadi continued to be tense from the previous Saturday when two auto rickshaw drivers were shot and killed as part of a terror campaign targeting auto rickshaw drivers in Jaffna.

Also on Monday, paramilitaries who entered the Education Office in Valaichenai shot and killed a clerk from Vaharai Education Office and injured another official. The gunmen were covering their faces with helmets, witnesses said.

Meanwhile SLA troopers gunned down a youth and another was reported killed by the blast when SLA soldiers detected a claymore attack in Vantharumoolai, north of Batticaloa. The SLA claimed that the youths killed were attackers, and reported that a soldier was wounded in the attack.

A former Vice President of the Kayts Pradesiya Sabah was also shot dead by unknown gunmen Sunday, April 23. Nagamuttu Tharmarajah, 71, was appointed to the Kayts PS by the paramilitary Eelam Peoples Democratic Party (EPDP) and was a well known supporter of the group.

Also in Jaffna, an ice-cream seller was seriously injured when gunmen fired at the van in which he was travelling. The driver and his front-seat passenger said that the gunfire was from SLA soldiers who were stationed near the junction. The soldiers blocked ambulances from taking the injured to the hospital for more than half an hour, local witnesses said.

That afternoon an auto rickshaw owner was shot dead by gunmen at Irupalai junction on the Jaffna-Pt.Pedro main road. “The victim was sitting inside his vehicle. He was chased by the assailants when he tried to escape. He was shot and killed near Vairavar temple. Army soldiers were standing by,” an eyewitness told TamilNet.

April 23

Five Sinhalese people were killed, four injured and six others were reported missing when a group of gangsters attacked a suburb in the Morawewa police division along the Trincomalee-Anuradhapura main road. The attackers had set fire to a paddy harvester and attacked people in the village.

A former member of the PLOTE, Amirthanathan Kennady,35, was gunned down at Navanthurai, in Jaffna, around noon, Sunday.

Also that Sunday, a 54 year old Tamil man was seriously injured and his lorry severely damaged in a claymore explosion triggered by a SLA deep penetration unit in LTTE controlled area in the Vavuniya district. In the weeks prior to this attack, five Tamils were killed in six separate claymore attacks by SLA deep penetration units in the LTTE controlled areas of the Vanni and three Tamils who went hunting were hacked to death by a SLA DPU, press reports said.

Also that day, three cadres who were repairing the bunkers at LTTE controlled Vavunathivu were wounded by SLA gun and mortar fire, the LTTE’s Political Head of Batticaloa District, Mr. Daya Mohan, said. However, the SLA officials claimed that the Tigers were wounded when SLA troopers counter-attacked an LTTE penetration team attempting to enter government controlled area.

Meanwhile, unidentified attackers lobbed a grenade into the police check post located in front of the Batticaloa Police Headquarters wounding a Sub Inspector, a sergeant and a Police Constable. Another police sergeant was wounded in a grenade attack the previous night at Navalkuda police sentry in Kalmunai in Batticaloa district. Also, two SLA soldiers were wounded when unidentified gunmen launched an ambush attack on a check post southeast of Welikanda, with gunfire exchanged for about 30 minutes.

That Sunday also saw the funeral of a seventeen year old Tamil youth from Kanniya who had been taken into custody by the SLA the previous Friday and shot by soldiers while in custody. Another youth was shot dead at Kappalthurai, a Tamil village in the Chinabay police division, and the bodies of another two Tamil youths were found with gunshot injuries at Poddankadu in Kantalai. According to villagers, the victims were among five Tamil youths who had travelled to Kantalai from Muttur Saturday to meet representatives of an Insurance Company and were detained by Sri Lankan armed forces.

April 22

The day before, unidentified gunmen shot and killed a shop owner in the Vavuniya district. Local residents said he was a Tamil activist and was involved in the dispute with the security forces on flag hoisting during Heroes’ day celebrations.

Two SLA personnel were killed and 6 wounded when a Buffel Armoured Personnel Carrier was hit by a claymore blast at Kalmadu in Vavuniya that Saturday.

Also that day, two policemen were seriously injured when unidentified persons lobbed a grenade at their checkpoint at Anuradhapura junction in the Anpuvallipuram area, a suburb of Trincomalee town.

Two Tamil civilians were killed in the LTTE controlled area in Mannar district when their motorbike hit a claymore mine fixed in a tree by DPU of the SLA and collaborating paramilitaries.

An SLA Major and another soldier were killed and five soldiers wounded when their pickup was ambushed with a claymore on the Batticaloa-Polonnaruwa border.

Another soldier was killed and another injured when three claymore mines targeted at an SLA road patrol exploded north of Vavuniya. Also, unidentified gunmen shot a Tamil woman from China Bay and injured her husband after they arrived in a white van, entered her house and opened fire.

April 21

In anti-Tamil mob violence, fourteen houses, eight shops, one tractor, five two-wheel tractors and three motorbikes belonging to Tamil people in Menkamam and adjacent Tamil villages in Seruvila division were burnt down by Sinhala thugs following two claymore mine attacks on Sri Lanka government forces Friday morning and afternoon.

Sinhala mobs forcibly entered Tamil houses in these villages, ransacked the houses and looted jewellery from Tamil women. Hundreds of Tamil families started fleeing for safety seeking refuge elsewhere, reports said.

Also that Friday, a businessman from Vavuniya was killed in a claymore explosion and Kathankudy police, recovered the body of a middle-aged male at Kallady beach in Batticaloa. Meanwhile, the body of a youth with bullet wounds, recovered by Kathankudy police on 18th April from the Poonochchimunai cemetery in Kallady and another body of a youth around 17 years, recovered by the Kathankudy police on 11th April from Veloor in Kallady, were taken to the mortuary of Batticaloa Teaching hospital as police sought help to identify the deceased.

Two policemen were killed and two others were injured when a claymore mine hit a police jeep at Thanganagar village in Seruvila division in Trincomalee district that Friday.

A Tamil farmer was hacked to death and several houses were set on fire when Sinhala thugs armed with knives and clubs attacked villagers of Menkamam, a traditional Tamil village in the Seruvila division in Trincomalee after a homeguard was killed and a policeman wounded Friday morning. The claymore attack in the Sinhala settlement Friday morning was believed to be a retaliation for the killing of a Tamil youth Thursday.

April 20

Unknown gunmen forced their entry into the home of a Muslim couple in Vavuniya and shot dead the owner Thursday that week. His wife also sustained gunshot wounds and was admitted to Vavuniya Teaching Hospital.

SLA soldiers killed a Tamil youth near Kanniay village during a road patrol.

Meanwhile, a civilian went missing and another youth was injured by unknown gunmen in a separate incident in Trincomalee.

12 Tamil civilians from Kanguvely, another traditional Tamil village in the area were arrested and taken by the Sri Lanka Army to their camp close by.

In Jaffna, two unknown gunmen shot dead a fish-trader who ran a market in Chulipuram. The gunmen arrived in a motorbike, requested the trader to come out of the building, and escaped after shooting him at close range. This was the 17th killing of civilians to take place in Jaffna within a week, media sources in Jaffna reported.

On the same day, three claymore attacks targeting Sri Lankan forces were reported in Batticaloa. Two SLA soldiers were wounded in one attack in Urani northwest of Batticaloa town by a claymore mine was fixed to a beached boat. There were no casualties from another mine targeting a road patrol southeast of Batticaloa town. Two SLA soldiers were injured in the third attack also at Urani. Unidentified gunmen also shot and killed a senior paramilitary cadre of the EPDP at Batticaloa public market.

That morning two bodies with severe cut wounds and gunshot injuries were found in Kuttinagar area, Vavuniya, by local residents. The faces were covered with black cloth and gagged with duct tape, reports said.

April 19

Two motorbike-riding gunmen also shot and killed a shop owner at Kondavil junction in Jaffna the previous day. The gunmen asked the business owner to come out of the shop, opened fire on the victim and fled the site in their motorbike. Also that Wednesday two weeks ago, a 51 year old Korean citizen, was injured when the pickup truck he was travelling at the Vavuniya Aluthgama junction came under claymore attack. Meanwhile, two Sri Lanka Navy personnel were wounded in a blast at Vankalaipadu.

Sri Lanka’s Tamil, both in the island and the Diaspora, are now all too familiar with the laissez-faire approach the international community adopts in responding to humanitarian abuses against Tamil civilians in Sri Lanka. Hence, there was no particular surprise to the muted reaction from the international community when state-organized mobs, in some cases with the support of the security forces, embarked on a series of attacks on Tamils in the Trincomalee district.

Almost since independence and throughout the decades long ethnic question there have been several episodes of state-sponsored violence against its ethnic minorities. The most notorious was the 1983 anti-Tamil pogrom. President J.R. Jayawerdene, in the aftermath of violence that killed over 3,000 Tamils, asserted with satisfaction, that the minorities had been ‘taught a lesson’. His international allies murmured some discontent before carrying on as usual.

A decade later, the Sri Lankan military embarked on the ethnic cleansing of Tamils from large swathes of the island’s east, instigating a series of massacres which resulted in the mass movement of Tamils out of the area as Sinhala colonists moved into their homes. The violence and this strategy only ended when the LTTE began to retaliate in a similar manner.

Even before last month’s anti-Tamil rioting, the government of President Mahinda Rajapakse and its allies had indicated that violence against the wider Tamil population is tolerable, at the least, and at worst, a legitimate means of subduing Tamil political ambitions. Mangala Samaweera, the Rajapakse administration’s foreign minister, floated a veiled threat during a recent visit to the United States, saying that should LTTE violence against state forces increase, the Sri Lankan government ‘may not be able to restrain’ Sinhala mobs from attacking Tamils. Champika Ranawake, the policy guru of the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), the hardline Buddhist party allied to Rajapakse, was far more lucid, stating: “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.”

To date, the international community have chosen to allow President Rajapkase, despite his ultra-nationalist electioneering, the benefit of the doubt. The Colombo diplomatic community chose to embrace a comforting fiction that the President has been misjudged and is, in fact, a moderate attempting to placate his rightwing allies on which he is dependent. The policies now being implemented by Colombo vis-à-vis the Tamils must therefore have come as a rude shock. Repeated actions by Colombo that might have escalated the violence to an all out war have only been interrupted as the Indian government has not been averse to stepping in and telling Rajapakse to knock it off.

India, through its extensive experience in the region, has long been familiar with the duplicitous and chauvinistic politics of the Sinhala leadership, even if it has supported the latter to specific ends. Furthermore, with elections looming in Tamil Nadu and sympathy for the Sri Lankan Tamil plight growing there, India would come under severe pressure to act should Colombo’s actions result in large numbers of civilian casualties. Meanwhile, India has undoubtedly also been irritated by the Sri Lankan government’s decision to pursue Pakistan as a partner, after they failed to elicit support for their hard line policies from New Delhi. Historically an unreliable partner, there is no reason for New Delhi to give the current Colombo administration substantial backing.

The rest of the international community are however not burdened with the same concerns. The Tamils are well aware that the international community in the past has been happy to allow the Sri Lankan state to inflict collective punishment on its minority population to achieve its military objectives and thereby, their (international) interests.

The embargo that accompanied President Chandrika Kumaratunga’s ‘war for peace’ inflicted enormous suffering on the Tamils outside Colombo’s control. Yet the international community backed Kumaratunga’s strategy with billions of dollars of financing. International non-governmental organisations concentrated on campaigns against recruitment of under-18s by the LTTE, even as hundreds of thousands of Tamil children where denied food and medical assistance by the state. This deliberate collective abuse by the state against Tamils was accepted as a natural component of the conflict and was rarely challenged, except for a few critical observations in periodic human rights reports.

It is clear that the present Sri Lankan government is preparing the same strategy. Just as during the ‘war for peace,’ the military has begun preventing international humanitarian workers and press from reaching the Northeast as part of a wider process of controlling information that comes out of the region.

The unfortunate decision by the Canadian government to list the LTTE as a terrorist organisation a week before the state unleashed its violence against Tamil civilians is indicative of the misguided policies applied by international actors to Sri Lanka’s ethnic conflict. It is particularly ironic that it was the LTTE which was censured last week considering it has largely limited its attacks to military targets in contrast to the Sri Lankan military’s consistent retaliation against Tamil civilians.

The ban by the Canadian government is whilst of limited impact, given the longstanding bans by the US, UK and India, is nevertheless a reminder of the uneven approach the international community has taken to resolving Sri Lanka’s conflict. Canada’s limited understanding of Sri Lankan dynamics is manifest when contrasted with that of India, arguably the most significant geopolitical player in Sri Lanka. Delhi, it is clear, is – at least for now - adopting a more even handed approach to controlling the violence.

With a European Union ban in the pipe, the international community has meanwhile opted to sever political relations with the only player backed by a majority of Tamils, whilst maintaining and endorsing the political position of their principal adversaries, the Sinhala elites running Sri Lanka.

To date the international community has displayed a cold-blooded pragmatism, rather than a commitment to humanitarian standards, when it comes to Sri Lanka’s conflict. During the early 1990s, when it was widely considered feasible to solve the ‘Tamil problem’ through militarily destroying the LTTE, many states were content to turn a blind eye to Sri Lanka’s brutality against the Tamils - some going further to finance and assist the project.

But by the turn of the century it was clear that this approach was not working. The LTTE had established a position as a quasi-state and had inflicted a series of telling defeats on the state. This had left the LTTE in control of substantial tracts of territory and a dominant position in the Tamil polity. With armed conflict proving ineffective, the international community them tempted both parties to the negotiating table, promising Sri Lanka further financial and military assistance and luring the LTTE with the possibility of legitimacy should it cooperate.

The international community ‘s approach to the LTTE has been mistakenly focused on the Tigers’ supposed desire for legitimacy and have lost sight of the LTTE’s greater objective: to irrevocably secure the protection of the Tamils against Sinhala aggression. In the face of a belligerent and confident Sri Lankan military, which is now publicly calling for an annulment of the 2002 Ceasefire Agreement and the resumption of military hostilities, the LTTE is unlikely to be particularly responsive to any further international threats.

More generally, the international community has proved reluctant to rethink its pro-state bias which has underpinned its past policies towards Sri Lanka. With the exception of India, there appears no willingness to confront and challenge the hawkish policies of the present Colombo administration, for example.

Moreover, pressure on the LTTE at this stage is unlikely to work amid the ongoing contest for military advantage. Both sides are recruiting, training and rearming. The state is receiving international assistance and is being promised more. Should the Sri Lankan military gain the upper hand because the LTTE ignores strategic risks whilst attempting to satisfy international demands for peace talks, the LTTE’s ability to deter aggression will be weakened. In an extreme case, should the military build up an overwhelming advantage, it is entirely possible that an all out ‘war for peace,’ this time by the Rajapkse government, could again be endorsed again by the international community.

Cognisant of this threat the LTTE will understandably prioritise security interests at the expense, if necessary, of the fleeting goodwill of the international community. Conversely, should the LTTE make any substantial gains in any impending conflict, it will likely further strengthen the organisation’s position at the negotiating table.

The international community had set out to engineer a peace process which would deliver some limited devolution to the Tamils in exchange for an end to Tamil violence and the disarming of the LTTE. This outcome, given the ending of Sinhala hegemony it entails, is unacceptable to the present Colombo administration. An international project which had been engineered to contain the LTTE has thus resulted in the Sinhala leadership being corralled into an unacceptable path toward federalism or similar.

Therefore, from President Rajapakse’s point of view, should his military succeed in gaining the upper hand in a renewed military conflict, the government can abruptly end any discussion of federalism and even revert to the scenario of the late 1990s where Sri Lanka had international backing to concentrate on militarily subduing the Tamil rebellion.

On the other hand, should Colombo’s military adventure fail then it would be back to the peace process and the road to federalism, as this ‘cap’ on Tamil aspirations, has been guaranteed by the international community, as even recent statements by many states demonstrate.

For the Sinhala hawks, therefore, there is nothing lost by exploring the military option. This perspective, moreover, is based entirely upon the premise that the future policies of the international community will mirror those of the past. It will be impossible for the international community to negate this logic; given its weak track record, it has no credibility in challenging a dominant Sri Lankan state. In other words, even if foreign states now promise to punish Sri Lanka if it pushes for war, Colombo won’t be deterred: if the state wins, then the international community, regardless of its pledges, will carry on backing.

The incentives and dangers for both protagonists are thus abundantly clear.

Meanwhile, it is unrealistic for the long suffering Tamil community to expect the international community to substantially deviate from their policies of the past. There has rarely been any moral basis for the policy considerations of foreign states in Sri Lanka. The more naïve members of the Tamil community nurture hopes that the international community will recognise the administration in Colombo for the chauvinists they are and dramatically change their approach toward the Tamil problem. Regrettably, history has proven that only a change in the ground realities of the conflict have resulted in any shift in policies.

But hoping that the international community will undergo a spontaneous realisation that they are backing a morally corrupt state and curb Sri Lanka’s abuses, is unfortunately just that – wishful thinking.

With the violence in Sri Lanka steadily reaching ever higher levels, even the international monitors overseeing the February 2002 Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) admit there isn’t at present a condition of ceasefire (i.e. a cessation of hostilities). Nevertheless, they and the international community continue to take comfort from the commitment in principle by the Liberation Tigers and the Sri Lanka government to uphold the CFA and to pursue the Norwegian brokered peace process.

But it is clear to everyone that the peace process is disintegrating in an ever-deepening quagmire of violence and counter-violence as Army-backed paramilitaries and, increasingly, the Sri Lankan armed forces attack the LTTE and unleash deliberate punitive measures against Tamil civilians. It is the escalation of the latter that, above all else, raises the question as to whether there is indeed a peace process left to salvage. Tamil civilians are being murdered on a daily basis. Tamil parliamentarians are being threatened. This week saw a brazen attack on the offices of the popular Tamil daily, Uthayan. The international community, whilst making muted comments about a need to continue the peace process, have studiously avoided criticism of the Sri Lankan government (though some states, as ever, have been quick to heap invectives on the LTTE).

It is in this context that the determination by the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) last week on killings of civilians was gratefully received by the Tamils. “We fear” the SLMM said, “that government security forces have, in the north and the east, been involved in extrajudicial killings of civilians.” Moreover, “this conviction,” the SLMM pointedly stated, “is based on our observation and inquiries on the ground.” The determination was vital as the SLMM, tasked by both sides with supervising the truce, has the attention of the international community. The ruling thus formally highlighted the ongoing murders of Tamil civilians suspected by the Sri Lankan military of being sympathetic to the LTTE. Crucially, therefore, it could have galvanised international pressure on Colombo to rein in not only its murderous paramilitaries, but, now, its security forces also. The SLMM ruling, of course, merely reflects what alarmed observers in Sri Lanka’s Northeast have been protesting for some time. In that regard, it must be noted, the ruling was long overdue.

However, this week the SLMM obfuscated its position on the extrajudicial killings. It did so, moreover, “after consultations with the Sri Lankan government” on the matter. Press reports say the second statement occurred after President Mahinda Rajapakse’s administration had summoned the SLMM and delivered a vehement denial. But it would have been expected to. What was not expected, was that the monitoring mission would buckle under the government’s howling rage and stutter a confusing ‘clarification’ that, for all intents and purposes, is being interpreted by all concerned as a retraction of its earlier unambiguous position. Instead of ‘conviction’, the SLMM now has ‘concerns.’ Whilst first ‘government security forces’ were blamed, now it is ‘some individuals on the ground.’ Most despicably, instead of ‘extrajudicial killings of civilians’ there are now ‘clandestine activities against civilians.’

This episode has amply demonstrated that the SLMM, for all its internationally accorded backing and prestige, is not a robust institution which can make courageous determinations and stand by them. It has lowered itself to level of the many well-meaning, but essentially powerless human rights organizations which have sooner or later quailed before an enraged Sri Lankan state during the conflict. The SLMM’s backtracking this week will therefore have far reaching implications for the integrity of the CFA, for the possibilities of curbing violence against civilians and, above else, for its own authority.

Most importantly, a dangerous precedent has been set. If the international monitors are prepared to retract their statements or abandon their ‘convictions’ simply because the Sri Lankan state expresses its displeasure, then what purpose is served by the SLMM? To monitor the LTTE alone? It is an unwritten but understood truism that the SLMM’s moral authority is underpinned by the support of powerful states for the CFA and the peace process more generally. But even that authority has been undermined by the SLMM’s timid behavior this week.

This, of course, still leaves the Tamils of the Northeast with the problem of how to protect themselves from the increasingly brazen and undisguised violence being unleashed against them by the Sri Lankan military and its paramilitary allies. With hopes of an effective defence of human rights by the international community now all but dashed, there can be but one option for the Tamils to fall back on.

Many of us living in the multi-cultural, pluralist societies of the West tend to take for granted our freedoms. Britain, for example, is, on the whole, a multicultural and tolerant society. But even Britain faces its communal fissures. Post June 2005, there has been considerable soul searching as to whether Britain’s multiculturalism, its encouragement of diversity, has gone so far as to prevent the establishment a unifying national identity that will withstand the pressures of opposing religious and national loyalties. Ethnic harmony, it seems, is not inevitable; it needs constant nurturing even amongst the most tolerant of societies.

In contrast, the question for Sri Lanka is whether ethnic harmony can begin to be achieved within the framework of a single country. There is an unstated assumption among the international community as well as the Southern (Sinhala) electorate that just because countries like Britain has achieved a level of multi ethnic harmony, so can Sri Lanka - eventually, if not now.

Southern voters demonstrably privilege the maintenance of a unitary state over that of multi-ethnic harmony (the latter is only valued in its contribution to the former).

Or perhaps, at least that Sri Lanka can appear to. For the priority of those who oppose an independent Tamil state on the island is not a multi ethnic Sri Lanka but merely a unitary one. The principle of a unitary Sri Lanka is thus more important than that of multiculturalism. This unitary state is the platform on which the current President, like those before him, was elected. A multi ethnic Sri Lanka is an unavoidable necessity for a unitary Sri Lank, a means to this end. The alternative – a mass emigration (or, for some extremists, expulsion) of the Tamils is not feasible.

The question as to which – ethnic harmony or unitary state – is more important by posing two stark choices. (a) two happily functioning multi ethnic states, side by side or (b) a single Sri Lanka with an discontent Tamil population. The former entails Tamils and Muslims living as a minority in the southern state and Sinhalese and Muslims living as minorities in the northern state. The latter entails dwindling minority populations as the ranks of Diaspora in the West and elsewhere expand.

Undoubtedly the second option would be a clear preference. All the signs today point to this. The current president was elected on a staunchly unitary platform, even though it will perpetuate the ethnic tensions in Sri Lanka. President Rajapakse could easily seek a mandate to go to war to recover the unitary state, if peace talks fail to dismantle the de-facto new state in the north. This moreover, despite the obvious death and deprivation this would visit on the minority communities in the Northeast.

A high proportion of Tamils have already emigrated, fleeing the civil war. Undoubtedly more will leave if the war resumes, despite the best efforts of international immigration measures to prevent this. There are an estimated million Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora around the world, particularly in North America, Europe and Australia, representing roughly a third of the Tamil population of Sri Lanka.

But the proponents of a unitary Sri Lanka have never been against the emigration “solution”. On the contrary, in the past, emigration of non-Sinhala communities has been encouraged or forced through legislation. The 1948 citizenship act which deprived a million Upcountry Tamils of citzenship, almost all of whom were third generation ‘Sri Lankans,’ followed by the 1964 Srima-Shastri pact which provided for the repatriation of almost 650 000 of these to India is the most notable.

No southern political party objected to the 1948 act or the follow up repatriation 16 years later. No southern party has lamented the departure of the Tamils, let alone reached out to this now massively skilled and educated population to return for Sri Lanka’s betterment.

Now in theory, the first solution above, that of two peacefully coexisting enjoying harmoniously multi ethnic polities is perfectly possible. Yet there is a barely concealed assumption both within the Tamil and Sinhala communities that secession by the de-facto LTTE state will require an outward movement of Tamils from the south and Sinhalese from the south - primarily for security reasons.

This is evidenced in a number of public statements, most recently in 2005 by the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister on a trip to Washington that the government could not guarantee the safety of the Tamils in Colombo in the event of a resumed conflict. It also underpins that oft asked question: what would become of those Colombo Tamils who wish to live in Colombo if the island were no longer a single state?

To those of us who live in truly multi ethnic societies the answers to these questions seem blindingly clear. Even if the traditional Tamil homelands were to become a new state, what is to prevent those Colombo Tamils who prefer it, from opting for southern (Sri Lankan) citizenship? Equally, what is to prevent an (Tamil) Eelam citizen from living in Colombo or holding property? Clearly the other foreigners will continue to live or work in Colombo?

Rhetorical questions, of course – at least for now. But in the lack of acceptable answers to these questions, we see the superficiality of Sri Lanka’s claim to a multi-ethnic, pluralistic vision. There are no election manifestos with discussions of how to ensure the safety of the Tamils in the south in the event of conflict: even those ‘liberal’ politicians who seek the southern Tamil vote rarely dwell on this in public (and yet are surprised when Colombo Tamils heed the advice of (Tamil) political forces and do not bother to vote). Rather, Southern elections are won through championing of the ways and means, including war, by the unitary state can be protected and preserved.

Southern voters demonstrably privilege the maintenance of a unitary state over that of multi-ethnic harmony (the latter is only valued in its contribution to the former).

This then posits another question: can Sri Lanka, in a reasonable period, evolve to a genuinely multi ethnic society instead of the present Sinhala-Buddhist dominated one? The latter has been around for six decades (remember ‘Sinhala Only’ of 1956?) and has become increasingly entrenched with even the international community sensitive to Sinhala-Buddhist sentiments.

But despite the manifest practical difficulties of dismantling Sinhala-Buddhist dominance – a pre-requisite to produce an individual based equality, there is a stubborn refusal amongst single-state liberals to acknowledge this will not only need enormous willpower – or pressure – but will take an dauntingly long time, with no guarantee of success or of reversal on the way.

And here in lies the rub. It is easy to forget that Britain’s multiculturalism has been at least sixty years in the making (assuming the result of two thousand years of successive immigration or invasion by the early Celts, Romans, Vikings, Saxons and Normans can be considered a single community before World War 2). It is Britain’s democratic institutions and liberal value underpinned society which provide the foundation for its present multiculturalism. And, as is well known, even then there have been resistance, tension, even serious ruptures on the way.

Nevertheless, Britain has assimilated – by strong liberal principles, rather than strong unitary state – immigrants from every continent, perhaps every country. There are, for example, an estimated 4 million ‘Indians’ who still cherish strong Indian – Bengali, Gujarati, Tamil – identities (as well as an Indian and a British one), whilst being loyal, productive and, above all, happy, UK citizens.

Sri Lanka, by contrast, has hardly produced a national identity in which even the island’s non-Sinhala communities – let alone others from abroad – could easily join. The Scots and English have lived separately for millennia, but are equally British. Tamils and Sinhalese, who have lived for almost the entirety of their centuries of occupation of the island as two separate communities. The latest set of ‘immigrants’, the Upcountry Tamils, are still segregated and outside the Sri Lankan’ identity.

The administrative ‘unification’ of the Tamil and Sinhala entities by British colonial administrators two centuries ago, could, arguably, have led post-independence to genuine integration. See Singapore. But this opportunity was spurned and gave way instead to racist post-independence legislation.

'A unitary state is not a prerequisite for inter-ethnic harmony and peace, whereas the reverse is true.'

Between independence and 1983, the periodic riots ensured that security remained a fundamental concern for Tamils seeking to live and work in traditionally non-Tamil parts of the country. The argument that the anti Tamil riots are events of the past is made hollow by the fact that there has never been even a symbolic act of reparation: neither an effort to bring the perpetrators to justice, nor an apology, nor compensation. And the 1983 anti Tamil riots were followed immediately by the eruption of civil war as the Tamils sought separation and the south began to focus its effort (and defense budget) on maintaining the unitary state.

It is worth noting a unitary state is not a prerequisite for inter-ethnic harmony and peace, whereas the reverse is true. Whereas a unitary state can be built and (for some time at least) held by force, a truly pluralistic and multi-ethnic state can only be built with consensus and a truly shared, even loved identity.

But that consensus cannot be built when there is no acceptance of the ethnic tensions and animosity that underpin Sri Lanka’s election campaigns, media reporting, ordinary life. It is on critical – political - matters that ethnic harmony is truly put to the test and must be judged, not the superficial unity of cricket or mixed neighbourhoods.

It is also impossible to move from here to the ideal multi-ethnic vision without acknowledging the objective realities of the Northeast. The obsessive pursuit of the unitary state by military means disenfranchises and alienates the Tamils. The de-facto Tamil-dominated state in the Northeast is a product, not a cause of ethnic tensions. The Sinhala garrison patrolling Tamil Jaffna is corroding the foundation of a multi-ethnic state. But without this foundation the unitary project is ultimately doomed. Catch 22. But who dares admit it?

Traditional bharathanatyam dancers were amongst performers who entertained the audience of six hundred people at the ‘Ilanthir 2006’ event hosted by the Tamil Youth Organisation (TYO) in London on Sunday April 9