Expatriate Tamils in London last weekend held a remembrance ceremony for Rohan Rajasingham, an accomplished sportsman who strove against institutionalized Sinhala majoritarianism to better the conditions for aspiring Tamil sportsmen and women in Sri Lanka. Rajasingham passed away on January 8, 2008 after a brief battle with cancer, aged 50.

Described as outstanding student by his former classmates at Mahajana College, Tellippalai, Rajasingham represented his college at football, hockey, cricket and in athletics, and captained the teams to championship wins in football and hockey.

Led by Rajasingham, Mahajana College team won the all island Singer Shield football tournament at Sugathasa stadium, Colombo, under flood lights in front of a large crowd in 1978, classmates recalled. In 1980, Rajasingham joined Grasshoppers Sports Club, one of the best hockey team in the island.

In 1994, Rajasingham completed his Diploma in Athletics. In 1996 he travelled to Brazil where he acquired a Diploma in Brazilian Football. That year he also gained a Diploma in Coaching and Training in India.

However, in Sri Lanka itself, Rajasingham, along with other Tamil sports players, struggled against entrenched anti-Tamil chauvinism in national sports bodies.

“He was amongst the first to experience the darker side of sports in Sri Lanka; his experience is very much that of today’s youngsters,” classmates at the Mahajana Old Students Society said.

Rajasingham’s ability to speak all three languages – Tamil, Sinhala and English – allowed him to overcome hurdles other Tamil youths could not.

Starting his carrier as a Sports officer in 1986, Rajasingham attended the Sports Officers programme offered by the National Institute of Sports Science (NISS).

The nine-month course was conducted in Sinhala as prescribed in the 1973 Sports Law which specifies that the medium of instruction should be Sinhala.

Along with others, Rajasingham agitated for changes. It was only a decade later, in 1996, that the NISS agreed to hold its examinations in Tamil as well. However lectures and field instruction are in Sinhala still.

His experiences of discrimination spurred Rajasingham to strive for the development of sports training in the Northeast. “His dedication to improve the education of sports officers and physical education teachers continued until his untimely passing away,” a classmate said.

In the early nineties, Rajasingham coached Northeastern teams in netball, football, hockey and athletics, many taking championship trophies.

In 1997 he took up a role in the Sports Planning Office in the North, at the same time coaching the Northeast football team which took third place in national competitions in1998, 2001 and 2002.

The period coincided with the height of President Chandrika Kumaratunga’s ‘War for Peace’.

Rajasingham also sought to establish the Sports Science Institute (SSI) in military-occupied Jaffna with the intention it would be affiliated to the NISS.

In 1999 he submitted a proposal to the Director of NISS. After two years of silence, Sri Lanka’s Director General of Sports rejected the proposal.

Dismayed, Rajasingham turned to battling other aspects of the state discrimination that aspiring Tamil sportspeople were facing, notably the lack of facilities, funding and opportunities in the Northeast.

He reached out to the Tamil Diaspora for support and encouragement and was welcomed.

In 2002 he helped to put together a cricket team from the University of Jaffna to visit Britain.

The next year, he trained and brought a netball team from the Northeast to the UK; it sparkled, beating all rivals pitted against it.

Rajasingham was instrumental in establishing a sports academy for Northeast. The initiative was enthusiastically supported by the Tamil School Sports Association (TSSA), UK, which welcomed the idea and worked on a comprehensive plan and budget.

As a consequence, the Sports Academy of the NorthEast (SANE) was registered as an NGO in Jaffna and later in Kilinochchi.

After 2004’s devastating tsunami, SANE, with the help of international NGOs, established sports fields near the clusters of temporary shelters in the coastal areas in Vadamarachchi East and Mullaitivu.

Planning began for permanent sports facilities next to proposed sites of permanent resettlement.

Amid the scramble for international reconstruction funding, Sri Lanka’s Ministry of Sports came up with a proposal to build a stadium in Kilinochchi. But nothing came of it.

In 2006, Rajasingham took up the position of District Sports Officer in Kilinochchi and moved there with his wife and three young children. He designed and built a modest building to host all of SANE’s operations. The project was funded by TSSA(UK).

Rajasingham trained sports officers as well as athletics and netball teams and organized sports tournaments. The goal, he insisted, was to develop sports in the Northeast to an international level and for that, a foundational cadre of dedicated and well trained instructors was essential.

Heavy casualties and flooding of battle zones due to heavy rain has forced a pause in Sri Lanka Army (SLA) operations in the north, specifically in north-western Mannar region.

Over 55 SLA soldiers were killed in heavy fighting between the SLA and the LTTE on Saturday, March 22 at Iththikkandal in Paalaikkuzhi, Mannar.

Around 120 SLA soldiers were wounded in the heavy fighting that lasted from 4:20 a.m. till 5:00 p.m. on Saturday in Paalaikkuzhi battlefront, according to the LTTE Operations Command in Mannar.

The fighting intensified as SLA captured some LTTE points in Paalaikkuzhi. The Tigers re-captured the points from the SLA and the fighting raged on as both the SLA and the LTTE were fighting for the control of the points.

Finally, at 5:00 p.m., the SLA was forced to retreat after 10 hours of fighting in which the SLA sustained heavy casualties.

On the same day, elite Black Sea Tigers, engaged in a confrontation with a Sri Lanka Navy (SLN) fleet in the seas off Mullaiththeevu, attacked and sunk a SLN Dvora Fast Attack Craft (FAC).

At least 14 SLN sailors were killed in the clashes. LTTE announced that three Black Sea Tigers, Lt. Col. Anpumaran, Major Niranjani and Major Kaninila, were killed in action in the fighting that lasted for 45 minutes.

The SLN claimed that the FAC had hit a sea mine and was completely destroyed before it sank. Denying confrontations in the sea, the SLN said it had launched a search operation to locate the missing sailors.

The next day, on Sunday, 4 SLA soldiers were killed and 7 wounded at Paalamoaddai in Vavuniyaa district, according to LTTE Vavuniyaa Operations Command. The fighting lasted for more than an hour.

Fighting was also reported on three fronts in the Northern Front at Kilaali, Naakarkoayil and Mukamaalai on Sunday. At least one SLA soldier was killed and several others were wounded when the Tigers counter attacked the SLA soldiers.

According to Sri Lankan military sources, other than the heavy casualties, another factor that is impeding operations is the flooding of battle zones in the northwest Mannar district.

Military spokesman Brigadier Udaya Nanyakkara said the offensive against the Tigers was continuing, but flooding had caused supply bottlenecks.

"Rain has created problems with some of the bunkers filled with water," Nanyakkara told Reuters. "The movement of vehicles and supplies are restricted to main roads, although much of the fighting relies on ground troops," he said.

Heavy rains have also prevented the army using helicopter gunships against the LTTE, who were digging new fortifications along the frontlines of their northern strongholds, according to Sri Lankan news paper, Sunday Times.

Ground forces were also held up by knee-high floodwaters and marshlands, with only sporadic artillery and mortar fire.

The Sri Lankan military, which has been battling to break through LTTE defences in Vanni from three fronts, has had no significant gains in over eight months of continuous attempts.

With no significant shifts in forward defence lines, the Sri Lankan military has resorted to claiming wildly exaggerated casualties for LTTE to claim the upper hand in battles.

According to the Sri Lankan government, it has killed 2,343 Tigers since January against the loss of 136 of its own troops.

In the latest news release the military claimed clashes on Saturday and Sunday in the districts of Mannar, Vavuniya and Manal Aaru left at least 100 LTTE and five soldiers dead.

Flash floods triggered by torrential rain have affected more than 170,000 people in the war-torn Mannar and Batticaloa districts of Sri Lanka.

Over 50,000 people in Mannar and 120,000 in the eastern Batticaloa District have been affected by flooding caused by heavy rain which also left five dead, the National Disaster Relief Services Centre (NDRSC) said on 19 March.

In Batticaloa rain forced more than 7,000 people from their homes, with some taking shelter in schools and mosques, officials said.

Some of the flood victims were families living in basic camps, who had already been displaced by renewed war between the Government and Liberation Tigers.

“A total of 7,200 people have been displaced in Batticaloa due to the heavy rains,” said Keerthi Ekanayake, national coordinator at the National Disaster Management Centre.

"Of those there are about 600-700 people who were in IDP (internally displaced) camps who were already displaced by battles," he added.

An estimated 5,000 war-displaced are still living in camps in Batticaloa district, waiting to be resettled in areas that are still military high security zones.

The camp conditions are often basic, the sandy soil floors of the shelters sodden during heavy rain, and some families have had to sit on their haunches through the night to avoid lying down in water.

In Mannar, “floods have caused immense damage to affected areas, interrupting all economic and social activities,” the NDRSC stated in a situation report.

“It is also reported that there is tremendous damage to infrastructure facilities in the areas [of Mannar]. About 14,010 families or 54,323 people have been affected.”

Government officials in Mannar told UN news agency, IRIN, they had began distributing relief items and were awaiting assessment reports to decide on additional assistance.

“We started distributing meals almost as soon as the first displacements were reported over the weekend,” A Nicholaspillai, Government Agent for Mannar district told IRIN.

“We have made initial plans to continue the distribution for three days at least,” he added.

The area has witnessed intense clashes between government forces and the Liberation Tigers during the last six months, restricting access to relief agencies.

Continuing clashes between government forces and the LTTE along the line of control in Mannar had already restricted access to the district before the latest flooding.

“Since 4 February, access has been restricted to vehicles north of Madawachchiya checkpoint, creating additional challenges for civilian travel across Mannar District,” the Inter-Agency Standing Committee stated in a situation report released on 15 March.

In January, more than 30,000 people were displaced in the east by monsoon flooding, while in December 175,000 people took refuge in welfare centres and temples in the eastern and central parts of the country following flash floods.

Political parties in Tamil Nadu, including ones in the India’s coalition central government, have said that military aid to neighboring Sri Lanka should be stopped.

The Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) and Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK), constituents of the Dravidar Munnetra Kazhagam -led DPA in Tamil Nadu, on March 13 accused the Central government India of functioning in contravention to Tamils' expectations on the Sri Lankan issue.

"Tamils in India wanted an amicable solution to the ethnic crisis in the island nation. But the Union Government's activities are contrary to their expectations," PMK founder S Ramadoss and VCK general secretary Thol. Tirumavalavan said in a joint statement after holding a meeting to discuss the issue.

They alleged that the Sri Lankan Government was attempting to resolve the problem through military means, by launching a 'brutal attack' on the Tamils in Sri Lanka.

Calling for a change in the Central Government’s approach to the issue, they said India should stop providing assistance and training to the Sri Lankan Army.

Ramadoss said both the PMK and the VCK would raise the Lankan issue in the coming budget session of the state Assembly.

"We are prepared for any sacrifice on the issue," he added.

Further commenting on the issue, G.K. Mani, president of PMK, which has five members in the lower house of Parliament, said an offensive by the Sri Lanka Army in the north is a matter of ‘grave concern’ as ethnic Tamils are the main target and civilians are being killed.

“All the people who are being massacred in Sri Lanka are Tamils. They are our brethren,” he said.

“They have already killed a lot of Tamil people. India should stop this.”

India must stop “training officers of the Sri Lankan army and should not supply weapons,” Mani said.

“India has a lot of members belonging to the Tamil community. People who are being killed in Sri Lanka are Tamils. People living in Tamil Nadu feel the pain. They feel as if their own people are being killed.”

TamilNadu, the mainly Tamil state is India's sixth-most populous with 62 million people, according to the 2001 census.

India “should ask the Sri Lankan government to find a political solution and end its military offensive,” Mani said.

“If Norway can step in and try to solve the crisis then India should not shy away. India is Sri Lanka's neighbour.”

In the interview, Thol Thirumavalavan, the founder of VCK, said: “India is giving moral and military support, it must stop at once.”

“It even gave a warm welcome to the Sri Lankan military chief. This is not appropriate from our viewpoint,” he said.

India's ban on the LTTE should be removed by holding a referendum in Tamil Nadu, Thirumavalavan said.

“Some bureaucrats took the decision without consulting the people.”

The Communist Party of India (CPI) also took up the issue Indian military assistance to Sri Lanka during Question Hour in the Rajya Sabha (Upper House of the Indian Parliament).

The National General Secretary of the CPI, D. Raja, launched a no-holds-barred attack on the Central Government during deploring the Indian Government for “not uttering a word against the deployment of sea-mines by the Sri Lankan Government” in the Palk Straits and for giving training to the Sri Lankan army in a "clandestine" manner.

"What is the policy of the Government of India, and why is the Government of India keeping quiet on the question of sea-mines? Why the Government of India is extending all kinds of military support to the Sri Lankan Government?" he asked.

He sought to know why New Delhi was keen on helping a rogue nation that was "violating various international conventions" relating to land and sea mines, and asked the Indian Government to declare its policy.

He noted that "the military offensive in Sri Lanka has been gradually turning to be a war against the Tamils" and "all sorts of human rights violations are taking place" in the war-torn island.

Tamil National Movement leader Pala Nedumaran, along with two hundred members of the Tamil Eelam Supporters Co-ordination Committee (TESCC) staged a demonstration Saturday March 22, to condemn the Indian Government's military aid to the genocidal Sri Lankan Government.

Nedumaran condemned the Indian Government for secretly imparting training to Sri Lankan Army personnel who were carrying out a genocide against Tamil people. He pointed out that any military support to Sri Lanka would be used only against innocent Tamils.

Slogans condemning the Indian Government, and the Tamil Nadu Government were raised.

Several leaders of various political and non-political organizations took part in the agitation: Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam Presidium Committee Member Anoor Jagdeesan, Devendra Kula Vellalar Kootamaippu President Pasupathi Pandian, Tamil Desa Podhuvudamai Kadchi President Maniarasan and Tamil Desa Viduthalai Iyakkam Secretary Thiaygu.

Dravidar Kazhagam also registered its protest against Indian military assistance to the Rajapakse regime and passed a resolution demanding a change in Indian Government policy. The organisation also announced plans to stage state wide protests on March 28 to express their solidarity with Tamils in Northeast of Sri Lanka.

The resolution further said the 80 million strong Tamil community in TamilNadu and around the world are disappointed and condemn India’s military support to Sri Lanka which contradicts with its stated policy of negotiated settlement for the island’s long dragging ethnic conflict.

No military solution

The central government of India, which provided $500 million aid to Sri Lanka in additional military assistance including training, repeated its customary call for negotiated political solution.

“The way forward lies in a peacefully negotiated settlement within the framework of a united Sri Lanka acceptable to all communities, including Tamils,” Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said in a letter to a Marumalarchi Dravidar Munnetra Kazhagam, General Secretary Viako.

In the letter dated March 5, 2008, the Indian premier further said the interests of the Tamils in Sri Lanka was of particular significance to India in the country's dealings with the island nation.

In his letter, Mr. Singh also endorsed Sri Lanka’s move to implement the 13th amendment and refused to take action against the Sri Lankan Navy for routinely killing Indian fisherman in Palk Straits.

Responding to the Indian premier’s letter Viako condemned Indian naval officers for endorsing "atrocious, false statements" of the Sri Lanka Navy.

"Our naval, army and air-force officers are working hands in glove with the Sri Lanka military officers. Because of this factor, our navy officials deliberately do suppress the real facts and make false statements furnishing wrong information to the government, which is glaringly exposed in your letter," he said in a letter.

Vaiko questioned why the Indian Government had failed in its duty to "give stern warning" to the Sri Lankan Government to stop attacking Indian fisherment. He charged that by failing to protect the lives of the Tamil Nadu fishermen from the SLN, India had betrayed the Tamils.

Responding to Manmohan Singh's endorsement of the 13th amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution, the MDMK leader pointed out that New Delhi had been easily hoodwinked by the Government of Sri Lanka.

India should have raised serious objections when the Sri Lankan government moved Supreme Court for a demerger, he said and added that the Tamils had long ago rejected the 13th amendment.

He pointed out that the Sri Lankan government had "sabotaged" the Norway-initiated peace talks, and was presently perpetrating a "genocidal murderous attack" on the Tamils by acquiring arms from various countries.

On the other hand, the Tamils in Sri Lanka were dying of hunger, starvation and lack of medical aid, and yet, India had refused to give clearance to send food and medicines to the suffering Tamils.

Vaiko also noted that it was a "matter of sorrow and shame" that the Indian Government had not condemned the murder of four Tamil Members of Parliament by the GoSL forces whereas its strategic help to Sri Lanka, through the supply of radars and military hardware, only enabled the GoSL to pursue military attacks. He labeled the red-carpet welcome to Sri Lankan Lt Gen Sarath Fonseka by the Indian Government as a black day for the Tamils.

However according to a leading Indian academic, India's government isn't going to change its policy on Sri Lanka because of demands from Tamil political parties.

India is providing ‘non-lethal’ weapons and trains Sri Lankan military officers, N. Manoharan, senior research fellow at the New Delhi-based Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies said.

“This government is at the last lap of its mandate,” Manoharan said, referring to general elections due to be held next year.

“I do not think the government will take any serious steps based on the statements made by these parties. They are going to stick to the stated policy.”

The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) from its Head Quarters in Vanni March 10 released a statement condemning the Indian 'State welcome' extended to Sri Lanka Army Chief Lt. Gen. Sarath Fonseka and the statements made by Indian military chiefs in this context.

"The Indian State must take the responsibility for the ethnic genocide of the Tamils that will be carried out by the Sinhala military, re-invigorated by such moves of the Indian State," the statement said.

"LTTE wishes to point out to the Indian State that by this historic blunder, it will continue to subject the Eelam Tamils to misery and put them in the dangerous situation of having to face ethnic genocide on a massive scale."

The view expressed by the Indian military chiefs, "India wants to ensure that the Sri Lankan Army maintains its upperhand over the LTTE", just illustrates the efforts of the Indian State to prop up the Sinhala war machine, the LTTE statement said.

The Indian State’s move of "propping up the politically-militarily-economically weakened SriLankan State has upset Eelam Tamils."

"We did not leave the ceasefire agreement and we did not start the war. We are only undertaking a defensive war against the war of ethnic genocide of the Sri Lankan State."

"We still have not abandoned the Norway sponsored peace efforts and we are ready to take part in such efforts."

Full text of the LTTE statement follows:

Head Quarters
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
Tamil Eelam
10 March 2008


Is the Indian State attempting yet another historic blunder?

The State welcome given by the Indian State to the Sri Lanka military chief Lt. Gen. Sarath Fonseka, who is heading the Sri Lankan State’s war of ethnic genocide against the Eelam Tamils, has deeply hurt them.

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) strongly condemns the Indian State action of extending a State welcome to the military chief of the Sinhala State which has unilaterally abrogated the ceasefire agreement and has launched widespread military offensives in the Tamil homeland.

The Sri Lankan State is facing many warnings and condemnations for its attempt to seek a military solution and for its enormous human rights violations.

Despite this, the Sinhala State ignores these warnings and condemnations and continues with its abductions, killings, and arrests of Tamils.

The Sinhala State, keen to cover up this truth, is blaming the freedom movement of the Tamils, the LTTE, for the continuation of the war and is seeking assistance from the world for its war of ethnic genocide.

Many of the European countries, understanding this hidden motive of the Sinhala State, have halted all assistance that could support the ethnic genocide of the Tamils.

The Indian State also knows this truth. Yet, while pronouncing that a solution to the Tamil problem must be found through peaceful means, it is giving encouragement to the military approach of the Sinhala State. This can only lead to the intensification of the genocide of the Tamils.

LTTE wishes to point out to the Indian State that by this historic blunder it will continue to subject the Eelam Tamils to misery and put them in the dangerous situation of having to face ethnic genocide on a massive scale. On behalf of the Eelam Tamils, LTTE kindly requests the Tamils of Tamil Nadu to understand this anti-Tamil move of the Indian State and express their condemnation.

We did not leave the ceasefire agreement and we did not start the war. We are only undertaking a defensive war against the war of ethnic genocide of the Sri Lankan State.

We still have not abandoned the Norway sponsored peace efforts and we are ready to take part in such efforts.

In this context, the Indian State’s move of propping up the politically-militarily-economically weakened SriLankan State has upset Eelam Tamils.

The view expressed by the Indian military chiefs, "India wants to ensure that the Sri Lankan Army maintains its upperhand over the LTTE", just illustrates the efforts of the Indian State to prop up the Sinhala war machine.

The Indian State must take the responsibility for the ethnic genocide of the Tamils that will be carried out by the Sinhala military re-invigorated by such moves of the Indian State.

Carrying the red and yellow flag, an impressive number of South Africans of Indian Origin, demonstrated outside the Indian Consulate in Durban on Thursday, March 20, to register their collective opposition to the military oppression of Tamils in Sri Lanka by the Sri Lankan Government.

They appealed to the Indian government to stop military assistance to the Government of Sri Lanka. While the Chairperson of the South African Human Rights Commission received the memorandum of the demonstrators and spoke to them, the Indian Consulate refused to accept it. Except a negligibly few Eezham Tamils, the vast majority of the demonstrators were people of Indian origin.

South Africans of Indian origin prote-sting in Durban against India selling arms to Sri Lanka.

The demonstration was organised by the Tamil Co-ordinating Committee of South Africa to coincide with the Human rights Day in South Africa, falling on 21 March. South Africa is home to the largest number of Tamils living outside of India, more than 700 000, of which approximately 340 000 reside in KwaZulu Natal and its surrounds.

Mr D Maduray, member of TCC-SA handed a memorandum to the Chairperson of the South African Human Rights Commission, Mr Jody Kollapen. A memorandum was also to be handed over to a representative of the Indian Consulate but the Consulate refused to accept it.

Mr Maduray stated, “India as a superpower in the region has done absolutely nothing about the Sri Lankan Government withdrawing from the Ceasefire Agreement and we object to the military support that India is giving to the Sri Lankan Government to murder innocent people.” He also said “the Indian Government is demonstrating their contempt for the Tamil people by refusing to accept the memorandum.”

On acceptance of the memorandum Mr J Kollapen, chairperson of the SAHRC said “the Universal Declaration of Human rights means that human beings all over the world are regarded as equals and are entitled to enjoy simple rights like living in your country of birth, speaking your language, practising your culture and religion, but 60 years later, millions around the world do not enjoy their human rights like the people in Palestine, Iraq and Sri Lanka, particularly the Tamils.”

He also said “South Africa achieved its liberation because millions of people across the world stood with us” “This is not a Tamil issue. Our challenge in South Africa is to take this issue beyond the Tamil community.”

“The truth is we cannot be free when people in other parts of the world are not free,” he said.

South Africa was the land that moulded Gandhi to become Mahatma. While in South Africa, Gandhi was in close association with the Tamils and learnt to read and write Tamil. He always remembered with humility and thanks the contribution of South African Tamils against racism and discrimination. The life sacrifice of the young Tamil girl Va’l’liyammai during a demonstration was even recorded in his ‘My Experiments with Truth’.

"The representatives of today’s independent India behaved worse than the British Raj in their contempt to a memorandum from the people of Indian origin," said one of the demonstrators to TamilNet correspondent in Durban.

FOR 25 years, the dirty little war on the island in the Indian Ocean has stretched its octopus arms across the world. The ethnic Tamil diaspora has provided vital funding for separatist Tamil Tigers; remittances from Sri Lankan workers abroad have propped up the economy; the government has relied on foreign assistance to battle the insurgency.

Today, a shifting world order is bearing new fruits for Sri Lanka. Most notably, China’s quiet assertion in India’s backyard has put Sri Lanka’s government in a position not only to play China off against India, but also to ignore complaints from outside Asia about human rights violations in the war.

The timing is propitious. The government jettisoned a five-year cease-fire this year, and is now banking on a military victory over the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. In so doing, it has faced a barrage of criticism over human rights abuses and has lost defense aid from the United States and some other sources. And, in recent months, government officials have increasingly cozied up to countries that tend to say little to nothing on things like abductions and assaults on press freedom.

Sri Lanka’s foreign secretary, Palitha Kohona, put it plainly when he said that Sri Lanka’s “traditional donors,” namely, the United States, Canada and the European Union, had “receded into a very distant corner,” to be replaced by countries in the East. He gave three reasons: The new donors are neighbors; they are rich; and they conduct themselves differently. “Asians don’t go around teaching each other how to behave,” he said. “There are ways we deal with each other — perhaps a quiet chat, but not wagging the finger.”

The Tamil Tigers, for their part, have succeeded in getting themselves classified as a terrorist group in many countries, including the United States, Canada and the European Union, making it harder for the guerrillas to raise money abroad.

At the same time, according to Mr. Kohona, Chinese assistance has grown fivefold in the last year to nearly $1 billion, eclipsing Sri Lanka’s longtime biggest donor, Japan. The Chinese are building a highway, developing two power plants and putting up a new port in the hometown of the president of Sri Lanka, Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Sri Lanka also buys a lot of weapons from China and China’s ally Pakistan.
Chinese diplomacy in South Asia, grounded as it is in a policy of “harmony” and deep pockets, is of obvious concern to India. So are the sentiments of Tamils at home. Overt support from India for the Sri Lankan counterinsurgency program can be explosive among India’s Tamils. But coming down hard on the government here could push Sri Lanka deeper into China’s embrace.

“There is little choice,” said Ashok Kumar Mehta, a retired general who was a leader of an Indian peacekeeping force in Sri Lanka nearly 20 years ago.

“India’s policy is virtually hands off.”

Mr. Kohona, the Sri Lankan foreign secretary, noted that India’s contributions had also grown, to nearly $500 million this year. India is building a coal-fired power plant and Indian companies have been invited to build technology parks and invest in telecommunications. New Delhi, like Washington, has shut the tap on direct military support, but it can still help with crucial intelligence, particularly in intercepting weapons smuggled by sea.

The picture in Sri Lanka is emblematic of a major shift from 20 years ago, when India was the only power center in the region. Now come China’s artful moves in India’s backyard. As C. Raja Mohan, an international relations professor at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, points out, China has started building a circle of road-and-port connections in India’s neighboring countries, and it has begun to eye a role in the Indian Ocean, as its thirst for natural resources makes it more important to secure the sea lanes.

That offers countries like Sri Lanka ample opportunities. “Now the smaller countries have increasingly turned to China to influence India’s strategic interests, and thus silence it on human rights issues,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia researcher for Human Rights Watch. She cited Burma, where, in the 1990s, India pressed for democracy and watched the military junta sidle up to Beijing. “Now India is concerned about China’s role in Sri Lanka because of control over the Indian Ocean,” she said.

Iran is the latest entrant. Late last year came the promise of a whopping $1.6 billion line of credit, primarily to help Sri Lanka buy Iranian oil.

Washington still counts. Sri Lanka is sore at losing American military aid and development assistance. The United States has also irritated the government by pressing for United Nations human rights monitors after the visit last October of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour. She said at the end of her visit that “the weakness of the rule of law and prevalence of impunity is alarming.”

That infuriated the government. Sri Lanka’s mission in Geneva sent out acerbic opinion pieces published in Sri Lankan newspapers. One, an editorial in the pro-government newspaper, The Island, declared that “those U.N. knights in shining armor tilting at windmills in small countries should be told that the protection of human rights is next to impossible during a fiercely fought war.” Still, criticism over human rights continues to dog Sri Lanka.

Last Thursday, a report by Human Rights Watch blamed the government for a pattern of disappearances. The same day, an international Group of Eminent Persons that the government had invited to monitor Sri Lankan investigations into human rights violations said it was leaving; it cited “a lack of political and institutional will.”

The attorney general’s office responded by saying that the government would reconstitute the panel with “an alternate group of eminent persons.”

But however free Sri Lanka feels to dismiss Western concerns about human rights these days, there are still long-range costs it may find itself confronting one day. The real Achilles’ heel for the government is looming economic trouble, as its war chest expands and inflation reaches double digits.

And in that, the world matters. For its failure to ratify certain international conventions, Sri Lanka already risks losing trade preferences with the European Union at the end of this year. And, however much China has risen in importance, Europe remains this country’s largest trading partner.

ALL too many regions of the contemporary world are afflicted with recurring outbreaks of warfare between nation-states and ethnic or sectarian minorities. One of the worst has been festering for the past quarter-century in Sri Lanka, where 70,000 people have perished in intermittent fighting between a government dominated by a Sinhalese Buddhist majority and minority Tamils, who are mostly Hindu.

Over the past two years, that war flared up worse than ever. In January, Sri Lanka's president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, disavowed a 2002 cease-fire that Norwegian mediators had negotiated between the government and the armed group known as Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Cease-fire monitors from several Nordic countries were then called home. The monitors had been sidelined for the past year while the army assaulted the predominantly Tamil eastern and northern provinces and the Tigers responded with attacks on army forces in the north and east as well as bombings in the capital, Colombo.

The government, under pressure from Sinhalese hard-liners, has opted to end the conflict by winning the war. Political and military leaders speak of crushing the Tigers by the end of the year. They insist the Tigers are nothing but terrorists and that once their funding from abroad is cut off, the army will solve the conflict over Tamil minority rights by wiping out the Tigers.

The reality is not so simple. A recent Human Rights Watch report shows how Rajapaksa's government has committed grave human rights abuses. In its 241-page report, "Recurring Nightmare: State Responsibility for 'Disappearances' and Abductions in Sri Lanka," the human rights group documents a pattern of abductions of civilians by security forces. The report calls on the government to acknowledge its "responsibility for large-scale disappearances and take all steps necessary to stop the practice."

Human Rights Watch also calls on the Tigers to "cease abductions and extrajudicial executions." Still, it is hard to deny that the government's human rights violations deprive it of the ethical high ground.

Asian powers China and India, competing for influence in Sri Lanka, do not help its government by withholding criticism. At bottom, Sri Lanka's conflict is political, and it must be resolved by political means. A lasting solution will require that the central government grant meaningful self-rule to the Tamil region, perhaps in a confederal structure that maintains the unity of the country. Continuing attempts to resolve the conflict militarily can only produce more suffering and more war

An emerging picture in recent times in Europe and North America is the active and successful participation of Tamils in the local politics. The new impetus seems to be coming from the younger generation of Eezham Tamils. Twelve candidates of Tamil origins have been elected to the local bodies of Paris and suburbs in the local government elections concluded last Sunday in France. Seven of them are Eezham Tamils while three are of Pondicheri origins and one each of Mauritius and Guaduloupe background.

Six of the twelve Tamils elected to local bodies in and around Paris, France.  Photo TamilNet

The French – Tamil connections are a long legacy ever since the French East India Company was established at Pondicheri in 1664. The French and the Danish (at Tharangkampaadi) were the two European powers who thought of having their colonial headquarters in the land of Tamils.

A considerable part of the modern history of Tamils had a strong link to the colonial history of the French. Tamils migrated to various French colonies across the world and a representative group are living in France today. A large number of Tamils who have made France their home are from Pondicheri who migrated to France with the annexation of French territories by independent India.

Pongkal festival participated by six organisations of Tamils from different parts of the world in Paris in January, 2008. Seen in the photograph is a Tamil band called Inniyam, a recent innovation of the Eastern University in Batticaloa, Sri Lanka. [Photo Courtesy: appaal-tamil.com]

A program given by Caribbean Tamils at the Pongkal celebrations. [Photo Courtesy: appaal-tamil.com]Even though Tamils have found representation in French politics, new inspirations came with the arrival of Eezham Tamils, shaping and giving form to a common Tamil identity in France.

Around 125,000 Tamils are estimated to be living in France. Of them, around 50,000 are Eezham Tamils.

A significant event that took place in Paris last January was Tamils of all shades jointly celebrating Pongkal as a common festival of Tamil identity.

Another noticeable manifestation of the emerging cultural consciousness is the presence of four Tamil bookshops in the La Chapelle area of Paris.

Fourteen Eezham Tamils contested in the local government elections in early March in Paris and suburbs alone. Five were elected in the first round. In addition, Two Pondicheri Tamils and Mrs. Lilawtee Rajendram, a Mauritiun Tamil married to an Eezham Tamil were also elected in the first rounds.

A striking feature of the concluded elections is that almost all the elected Eezham Tamils belong to left wing political parties. Observers identify a subtle message of Tamil unhappiness conveyed to the present right wing government, says writer Ki.Pi. Aravindan in Paris.


Thilagawathy Sanmuganathan, Thusyanthy Ganechandra, Sumathi Wijeyaraj and Khamshajiny Gunaratnam were elected to municipal and local councils in Oslo and Akershus in 2007. [Photo Courtesy: notam.no]Last year, in Norway, eight Eezham Tamils, five of them women, were elected to the local bodies. Two of the women were aged 19 and 22 when they got elected.

According to Statistics Norway, a Norwegian government survey, 70 percent of Eezham Tamil women participated in the voting which is the highest among the migrants in Norway.

Political consciousness, education and long established familiarity with the norms of democratic politics are said to be the reasons behind the diaspora Tamil political activism.

The details of candidates elected in Paris and suburbs are:

Mme Naguleswary Ariyaratnam, (Eezham)
SEINE SAINT-DENIS (93) – Clichy-sous-Bois

Mme Sarmela Sabaratnam, (Eezham)
VAL D'OISE (95) – Louvres

Mme Sophia Soosaipillai, (Eezham)
VAL D'OISE (95) – Sarcelles

Mme Preetty Navaneetharaju, (Eezham)
ESSONNE (91) – Evry

Mme Asamtathayalini Willam-Reginald (Eezham)
SEINE ET MARNE (77) – Chelles

M. Arulasantham Puvanespararajah, (Eezham)
SEINE SAINT-DENIS (93) – La Courneuve

Mme Kalaiyarasi Raviendranathan, (Eezham)
VAL DE MARNE (94 ) – Villeneuve-Saint-Georges

M. Alain Anandane (Pondicheri)
SEINE SAINT-DENIS (93) – Drancy

M. Chandrasegaran Parassouramane (Pondicheri)
VAL D'OISE (95) – Villiers-le-Bel

Mme Shama Nilavannane (Pondicheri)
SEINE SAINT-DENIS (93) – Le Bourget

Mme Marie Darves-Bornoz (Guaduloupe)
HAUTS DE SEINE (92) – Bagneux

Mme Lilawtee Rajendram (Mauritius)
SEINE SAINT-DENIS (93) – Bondy

Amidst a boycott by the main opposition and the main Tamil party on the island, the Sri Lankan government party and a paramilitary group allied with it claimed victory in the Batticaloa Municipal Council polls held earlier this month.

Sri Lanka President Mahinda Rajapaksa's ruling United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA), which contested jointly with the paramilitary Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pullikal (TMVP), secured 11 seats with 14,158 votes. A coalition of other paramilitary groups won 6 seats, while the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) and the Eelavar Democratic Front (EDF) both secured one seat each in the Municipal Council.

The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) and the main opposition United National Party (UNP) did not participate in the election, citing the lack of conditions for free and fair polls.

Polls were also held for another eight local councils.

A TMVP candidate, Pirabakaran Sivakeertha, known as Pathmini, polled 4,722 preferential votes and was appointed Mayor of Batticaloa. She is the first woman to be appointed to the post.

Her father, Sathiyamoorthy Rajan, was a TNA candidate during the 2004 general elections, and was assassinated on the campaign trail.

Edwin Silva alias Piratheep Master, a TMVP contestant, who polled 3,805 was appointed Deputy Mayor.

The Mayor and Deputy Mayor of Batticaloa Municipal Council, chairmen and deputy chairmen of other eight local councils and the members of all nine local councils elected on the UPFA and TMVP tickets took their oaths in the presence of Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa at the presidential secretariat on March 18.

Key Paramilitary operative, Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan alias Pillayan, who was present at the presidential secretariat was greeted by Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa.

The seven members elected from the SLMC did not attend the function and they will take their oaths in their own area in the presence of their leader Rauff Hakim, the party secretary M.T.Hassan Ali said.

Elected members of the other paramilitary and ex-militant groups were also not present to take oaths.

Voter turnout was at 53 percent in Batticaloa city, with around 10% of the voters who turned up casting invalid votes.

Meanwhile, the Special Task Force (STF), which had occupied the Batticaloa Municipal Council office, vacated the premises. The compound had been occupied by the Sri Lanka Army and the STF for over 18 years.

The office, hall, store and 3 guest houses in the Batticaloa MC building complex have been taken over by the Municipal Council Commissioner, who will be inspecting the buildings with a view to commencing their renovation.

Sri Lanka’s violent conflict raged on this week despite repeated calls by different international actors for an end to war and a return to the search for a political solution. However, although heavy casualties and flooding have produced a lull in the Sri Lankan military’s efforts to capture the Vanni from the Liberation Tigers, Colombo’s determination to achieve a military solution is undiminished. It is against this foil of militarism that numerous international efforts to bring about a solution, even forcibly, are being contemplated.

Although the international community has failed to grasp this, the rationale underlying the Sinhala leadership’s commitment to a military solution turns on deep seated ideological conceptions of itself, the Sinhala people, and the island’s minorities, especially the Tamils. We have repeatedly argued that the crisis in Sri Lanka is not of two irreconcilable demands – a unitary state and Tamil independence – but of majoritarian state repression of the Tamils. However, the notion that political compromise is the key to resolving these two political, albeit ‘extreme’, demands has long underpinned international misunderstandings of Sri Lanka’s impasse.

To begin with, the Tamil question emerged well before Colonial Britain, quitting South Asia, left Tamils and Sinhalese divided yet locked within a single administration. That was sixty years ago. Majoritariniasm emerged almost instantly and ethnic tensions erupted within a few years. The Tamils suffered marginalisation and communal violence sanctioned, if not backed, by the state for at least three decades before the Tamil militants emerged. The demand for political independence, Tamil Eelam, become an overwhelming demand and was endorsed by the Tamil United Liberation Front’s sweeping success in the 1977 elections, several years before today’s armed conflict erupted. The permissive conditions for 1983’s anti-Tamil pogrom emerged through three decades of untrammeled Sinhala power over the minorities.

The point here is that permanently ending Sri Lanka’s protracted conflict is not about disciplining the LTTE and/or rewriting the majoritarian constitution, but about creating an unshakable political arrangement on the island that will, once and for all, ensure an end to majoritarian persecution of the Tamils. We, along with many Tamils since the mid-seventies, have consistently argued that the only solution that will ensure lasting peace is a two-state one. For as long as there is state repression, there will be resistance and counter-violence, a truism underlined by both recurrent and persistent conflict in the Middle East, Sri Lanka and other parts of the world on the one hand and, on the other, the creation of new and stable states in other parts. Peace does indeed come from security.

No matter how much international actors (and some West-backed local actors) may wish – or adamantly insist – that the ‘majority’ of Tamils and Sinhalese want to live together, Sri Lanka’s ground reality, should they care to look, says otherwise: the Sinhalese will not be dissuaded from the notion the Tamils are interlopers in ‘their’ island. Especially since the Rajapakse regime assumed power, the underlying majoritarian drivers of state repression have become unabashedly open. To be sure, the forceful reemergence of geopolitics has arguably unfettered the Sinhala state’s hegemonic project, but it was never in abeyance - that is why Sinhala leaders have never reached any substantive agreement with their Tamil counterparts and why even minor agreements have all been abrogated by the state at a moment more convenient. In short, the goodwill of the Sinhala majority is a brittle basis for lasting peace.

The consequent point is, whether there is an LTTE or not, majoritarian state repression will not end. Nor, therefore, will violent Tamil resistance. The utopian vision of a united, multi-cultural Sri Lanka is an impossibility amid the deep-seated majoritarianism that underpins governance in Sri Lanka. Entrenched within the constitution, state structures and political system, Sinhala nationalism is incessantly recycled by powerful processes and actors that no amount of international cajoling or threatening can shift; this is because Sinhala nationalism is not the preserve of an extreme minority in the south, but a powerful, mainstream force.

Meanwhile, the liberal-speak of Sinhala governments since the mid-nineties has engendered a sanguine belief amongst (particular Western) international actors that it is Tamil extremism – i.e. the LTTE - which is standing in the way of liberal peace. However, the blatant lurch towards the Sinhala right by the southern polity that has followed the Rajapakse regime’s coming to power has cracked the veneer of liberalism that has cloaked Sinhala majoritarianism since the nineties. Moreover, the undisguised chauvinism that has engulfed Sri Lanka in recent years has undoubtedly stemmed from a confidence the LTTE can be destroyed and hegemony – i.e. a solution within a united Sri Lanka – can be violently imposed on the Tamils. Although Sri Lanka’s military has run into serious difficulties in the north, Southern confidence, bolstered by fantastical battlefield claims and media discipline, is undiminished.

If the liberal interventionists are right, the apparent weakening of the LTTE heralded by the state’s internationally-backed capture of the East between mid-2006 and mid-2007 should have produced a rush to pluralist accommodation between Tamils and Sinhalese. It has produced exactly the opposite. The international community, particularly the West, is unable to reconcile the ‘victories’ against the LTTE and the absence of a spontaneous eruption of liberalism. Which is why the increasingly vocal international criticism of the Sri Lankan state is absurdly interspaced with forceful demands of the same state that it must voluntarily share power with the Tamils and thus ‘solve’ the problem.

Amid these contradictions, the global liberal order is breaking with its habits of recent years and attempting to strong arm the state into being, ironically, more liberal. But these laughably tentative efforts – marked by symbolic cutting of aid and lectures on human rights – has done nothing to tame the Lion. Powerful states are inevitably imbued with a conviction they can forcefully fashion arrangements that suit their demands. However, if it takes powerful intervention to create peace, it will take powerful intervention to make it last, a point underscored by countless international projects since the end of the Cold War.

The alternative, as many of these projects have themselves demonstrated, is to ensure a stable distribution of power among the peoples in conflict. The demand for Tamil Eelam is not a consequence of notions of Tamil cultural superiority, but an understanding that only a state can check a hostile state. Since the Peace of Westphalia, sovereignty has formed the basis for international order. It underpins the United Nations today. However, Sri Lanka is not a stable polity and given the resilience of Sinhala majoritarianism, it does not have the makings of one. The dynamics within the island today forcefully underline the Tamils’ assertion, first articulated so clearly in 1977, that independence for the Tamils and lasting peace in the island are one and the same.

Despite international concern and calls for the Sri Lankan government to reign in the deteriorating human rights situation, abductions and disappearances in war-torn Northeast and in the capital Colombo, blamed on the Sri Lankan security forces, has increased in recent weeks.

The US State Department’s Human Rights reports on Sri Lanka, published in mid-March highlighted that "the overwhelming majority of victims of human rights violations, such as killings and disappearances, were young male Tamils."

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, also noted that those who disappear are "primarily young ethnic Tamil men."

Backing the US report and the UN high commissioners accusations, both local and international media reported numerous cases of abductions and disappearances that took in the past few weeks alone.

On Sunday March 16, Yogarajah Arunrajah, 21, a Tamil youth who had come from Jaffna to go abroad, was forcibly dragged away from his residence at Sangamiththa Mawata by armed men in police uniform, reported TamilNet. His mother complained to Kotahena police, whilst relatives sought assistance from Deputy Minister P. Rathakrishnan, an Upcountry Peoples' Front parliamentarian. Though Mr. Rathakrishnan contacted the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and the Terrorist Investigation Department (TID), he was unable to obtain information on Arunrajah’s whereabouts .

The European Union has expressed "very serious concerns" about human rights violations in Sri Lanka and warned that existing trade concessions could be at risk if the rights abuses continue. The EU also requested diplomatic access to Vanni to deliver key messages to the Liberation Tigers.

EU Troika Director for Asia and External Relations James Moran warned that renewal of Sri Lanka’s trade status is jepordised over human rights abuses.  Photo Sanka idanagama/AFP/Getty Images.

“The EU continues to harbour very serious concerns about continuing reports of human rights abuses," said a statement issued at the end of a three-day visit by a six-member group representing the EU's current president Slovenia and future president France, as well as the European Commission and the EU Council of Ministers.

Speaking at a media conference at the European Commission office in Colombo, representatives from the EU reiterated their concern over the human rights situation in the country.

“Respect for human rights is one of the key principles underpinning Sri Lanka's relations with the European Union” said Janez Premoze, head of the three-member EU delegation.

“Nonetheless, the EU continues to harbour very serious concerns about continuing reports of human rights abuses” Premoze told reporters.

Trade concessions at risk

The statement issued on Tuesday, March 18, also warned of the possibility of the EU withholding trade concessions from Sri Lanka due to the island's worsening human rights record.

The delegation noted Sri Lanka's key clothing export industry has benefited by doing business with the EU, where trade concessions are given based on sustainable development and good governance.

Sri Lanka’s existing tariff concessions end this year and nations wishing to renew must show high labour, environment and human rights standards when they reapply.

James Moran, Asia Directorate at the European Commission linked trade concessions to human rights record and said that the extension of the GSP-plus concessions for Sri Lanka were yet to be considered.

He further added that concession requests would only be assessed when the concerned countries reapplied for the facility by October this year and would be governed by objective criteria including linkage between trade preferences and Human Rights.

Regret over IIGEP exit

Delegation head, Premoze, expressed regret that the Independent International Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP) had decided to terminate their work with the Presidential Commission of Inquiry because of concerns about its compliance with international standards and institutional lack of support for the work of the Commission.

“The EU underlines the seriousness of calls by the IIGEP and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, for the government to deliver concrete results through taking cases to court,” he said.

IIGEP, headed by P. N. Bhagwati, a former Indian Chief Justice, was invited by President Mahinda Rajapaksa to monitor the workings of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry, set up in November 2006 to investigate 16 of the most serious rights abuses.

But the IIGEP resigned en masse in late February after declaring it was unable to carry out its work. Meanwhile, the Commission of Inquiry has yet to prosecute anyone in any of its 16 cases.

Access to Vanni

Mr. Premoze also said the EU remained committed to its present role as one of the Co-Chairs of the Tokyo process and, therefore, continued to believe in the importance of guaranteeing access to Killinochchi for diplomats.

He insisted that the Sri Lankan government should allow the Co-chairs of the 2002 peace process and the Norwegian facilitators to travel to the LTTE administered Vanni to meet the LTTE leaders to deliver key messages – including a request to resume the peace process, to observe humanitarian access and to respect human rights.

However, according to local reports the Sri Lankan government had rejected the EU request, citing the prevailing security situation in the areas administered by the LTTE, which is under attack by the military.

The EU delegation which was in Sri Lanka for three days met, among others, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Ministry Secretary, Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights, Minister of Science and Technology and Chairman APRC, President’s Advisor Basil Rajapaksa, Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, the leader of the Opposition and leaders of other political parties including the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna and the Tamil National Alliance.

Expressing deep concern over the escalating violence in Sri Lanka, South Africa this weekend called for renewed negotiations to end the protracted conflict and emphasized “no solution to this conflict can be found without the involvement of the two principal parties to the conflict – the government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE.” Speaking in London, South Africa’s Deputy Minister of Communications Roy Padayachie assured that his country would render every assistance towards making peace but, in an implicit criticism of approaches by some other countries, said: “we will never ever impose our involvement in any part of the globe.”

Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a two-day seminar in London organized by Global Peace Support (UK), a Tamil expatriate organization, Mr. Padayachie said: “South Africa is deeply concerned about the escalating conflict in Sri Lanka and in particular the difficulties … over the resolution of the Tamil question.”

“The South African government is concerned that negotiations between the two principle parties in the conflict – the LTTE and the government of Sri Lanka – have come to a close.”

“We believe – and it is the very firm and principled view of the South African community, supported by their government – that every effort must be made to encourage the parties to return to the negotiating table.”

“The South African community – and this has been communicated – is very clear that no solution to this conflict can be found without the involvement of these two principle parties to the conflict – the government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE.”

The LTTE, he also noted, “is regarded by the Tamil people as their authentic representatives.”

“We believe that the international community must escalate its own efforts in supporting a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Sri Lanka,” he said.

However, he said, “It is not for the international community to prescribe what solutions are necessary to resolve this problem. We believe very firmly this is a matter for the Sri Lankan peoples on their own.”

“That is the view of the South African people, and it is certainly our [South African government] view,” he said.

Asked about his views on the proscriptions of the LTTE as a terrorist organisation, Mr. Padayachie noted “you know, when we fought the liberation war against Apartheid, the African National Congress was described as a terrorist organisation.”

“We never accepted that. We fought that and we struggled against it,” he said.

“And one of the critical, strategic issues we mobilized around, was to create the right conditions for free political activity. So that the people could participate openly, without fear of any repressive law, in the dialogue, in the debates, that were necessary to forge a free and democratic South Africa.”

“We argued strongly that one of the conditions for creating the appropriate conditions necessary for a negotiated settlement in South Africa was the need to unban our organizations that were banned at the time and to release political prisoners.”

“Those were all obstacles in the way of our struggle, we had to deal with them squarely; we had to mobilise our community and the international community to remove these obstacles.”

“That’s the lesson that comes from our experience and I think it has relevance to your struggle,” he told Tamil reporters.

Mr. Padayachie was in London to represent South Africa’s government at a seminar on Sri Lanka’s conflict held at the University of East London on March 22 and 23.

In his address to the seminar on Sunday, Mr. Padayachie reiterated his government’s call for renewed negotiations between the LTTE and GoSL and noted the importance of the assistance of a third party.

“At some stage to come back to the negotiating table you may require the facilitation of parties who are sympathetic and parties who are respected by both the protagonists,” he said.

“As for South Africa, we cannot be involved in any conflict any any part of the world if we are not invited by both the parties. When we go into Zimbabwe, when we go into Cote D’ivor, when we go into Burundi, it is at the invitation of the parties to the conflict.”

“We will never ever impose our involvement in any part of the globe,” he said.

Drawing on the experience of the ANC with the Apartheid regime, the Deputy Minister said that even before negotiations proper, there had to be “talks about talks.”

“We [ANC] initiated the process of talks about talks. And there were preconditions that we set. We said don’t expect us to talk to the Apartheid government and lay down our arms if you do not un ban [us and other] organisations, if you do not release the political prisoners, if you don’t set conditions for free political activity,” he said.

“And if you demonstrate your willingness to do all these things then we are prepared to say we’ll suspend the armed struggle and go into negotiations,” the ANC had told the Apartheid regime, Mr. Padayachie said.

Noting there was a question in any negotiations as to who constitutes the credible and legitimate representatives, the Deputy Minister told the seminar: “I received a very interesting pamphlet from colleagues who were part of the Tamil Centre for Human Rights.”

“It’s really quite a brilliant pamphlet. I want to recommend to everybody. It’s called ‘The Tamil Peoples rights to Self Determination.’”

“In case any one of you is very unsure of what the South African peoples understanding is of this question about who is the authentic leader [of the Tamils], I want to read something which I thought resonated a lot with the way South Africans think about the Sri Lanka’s crisis,” he said.

The Deputy Minister noted that the 2002 Ceasefire Agreement conferred an official de jure recognition, from the Sri Lankan government, of the LTTE as one of the two parties to the armed conflict.

In another recognition of the LTTE as representing the Tamils, the Sri Lankan government also deproscribed the LTTE ahead of negotiating a solution, he pointed out. Colombo also held several rounds of negotiations in international capitols with the LTTE towards forging a final political solution to the conflict.

He also noted that the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) won a resounding mandate in the 2004 elections and “their manifesto stated that the TNA accepts the LTTE’s leadership as the national leadership of the Tamils.”

Quoting from the pamphlet Mr. Padayachie pointed out: “with the current political climate framed by the War against Terrorism, maybe it is timely for the International Community to reassess and to review its assessment of the LTTE as a terrorist group as it would seem clear that it is resorting to the right to self defence whilst struggling for the right for Self Determination.”

“The International Community needs to take a balanced account of this conflict, it also needs to give diplomatic support to the LTTE to negotiate with the Sri Lankan government. If the International Community wants peace in this part of the world it must encourage this particular process.”

“So it is clear to all of us what this booklet says captures the hearts and minds of the way peace loving and democratic people throughout the world feel and think about the Sri Lankan situation,” Mr. Padayachie said.

“And ladies and gentlemen, today it is absolutely clear that the two most pressing challenges that we all have before us is to ensure that hard work whether you’re are located in government, civil society, NGOs or in any community must be directed at supporting a return to the Ceasefire and to the negotiating table between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government, and at the same time to escalate in the International Community our efforts to support and solidarity for peace in Sri Lanka on a permanent basis.”

Meanwhile, sources at the University of East London said this week the institution had come under intense pressure from the Sri Lankan High Commission in London to withdraw its provision of the venue for the weekend seminar.

The University had initially withdrawn the venue, citing Sri Lanka’s strident objections in writing, but its top management had subsequently met with Tamil expatriates who challenged the decision and having discussed the nature of the event and those attending, the University had decided the contract with Global Peace Support should be honoured, the sources said.