A powerful explosion tore through a bus at Dambulla in north-central Sri Lanka, killing at least 18 people and injuring 51 others.

Military spokesman Brigadier Udaya Nanayakkara said, on Saturday February 2, a blast inside the private bus that was heading to north-central Anuradhapura city from Kandy occurred at 7.05 a.m. local time at a bus stand in Dambulla town, 148 kms from Colombo.

The ill-fated bus left Kandy at 5:15 am, with around 90 passengers at the time – three of them children – and by the time it got to Dambulla, there were almost 100 people on board. It was then that tragedy struck, which stopped the bus in its tracks, turning it into a deathbed.

The parcel bomb, left on an overhead rack of the long-distance bus, was set off using a mobile phone, a police spokesman said.

"We have information that two people got off the bus before the bomb went off," police Deputy Inspector-General Kingsley Ekanayaka said. "We are trying to track them down. A search is underway."

Bus driver Rohana Wijesiri said he was taking about 100 passengers to Anuradhapura.

"When we were passing Dambulla there was a huge blast and the door near my seat got blown away," Wijesiri said.

“It all happened very fast. There was an explosion and I could not even stop the bus. It stopped by itself due to the explosion. My door was open and I jumped out,” he said.

The top and sides of the bus were ripped apart in the force of the blast. A severed hand could be seen among the blood-stained bags, glass and other debris strewn several yards from the vehicle.

"I do not remember what happened next, but I was running on the road. I saw my conductor fallen on the ground. He, too, got up and started running with me. People were screaming and it was chaotic," Wijesiri said.

"As it (the bus) came near me, I heard thunder. I got thrown away," said Kankeaarachige Michael, a 52-year-old businessman, who was standing by the road when the blast occurred.

"When I saw blood gushing out of my body, I realised it was a bomb," Michael said at Dambulla Base Hospital where he was being treated.

Mallika Wickramasuriya (72), was one of those travelling to Anuradhapura. She boarded the ill-fated bus, along with her sister, in Kandy.

“My ears are hurting, my chest is also hurting. There was a big explosion and I saw fire. I tried to get out of the bus, but two people fell on me. They were dead. I saw their wounds bleeding. My sister sustained chest injuries,” she said.

“My National Identity Card and all other belongings are in the bus,” she added with difficulty. She could barely hear, due to eardrum injuries.

“I heard an explosion and I rushed to the place. I saw a body lying on the ground with an eye missing. Many people were screaming for help. We found 13 bodies immediately and the casualties were taken to the hospital. There were three children in the bus. One was taken to the hospital by us,” Channa Priyantha Opatha, an eye-witness told The Nation newspaper.

The bodies were mostly burnt and blackened, with sections missing. Some had gaping holes in their chest and upper body areas.



According to police, 150 people have been interrogated in relation to the incident. Sixteen were taken into custody after searching nearly 280 houses in the Naula area, DIG Central Division Kingsley Ekanayake said.

Condemning the bombing as "an act of savagery", President Mahinda Rajapaksa urged the Sinhalese majority not to be provoked by the "brutality" of Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.

There has been an increase in the levels of violence experienced by civilians in the east, following the Sri Lankan government’s decision to go ahead with polls in the volatile region, despite cautions and warnings against the plans by local politicians and political groups and boycotts by the major opposition groups.

Late last year the Sri Lankan government announced plans to hold elections in the eastern province to elect 101 members to the Batticaloa Municipal Council and nine Pradeshiya Sabhas. The election is scheduled for March 10 and the deadline for filing nominations closed on January 24.

In July last year the Government of Sri Lanka announced the ‘liberation’ of the east and claimed that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam have been driven out and it is in control of the province.

However the continuing attacks on the Sri Lankan military by LTTE forces and violent human rights abuses perpetrated by Army-backed paramilitary groups have raised questions about the government’s claims.

Even though the ground situation is not conducive for free and fair elections, the government believes that holding elections would send a positive image of the east to the international community and attract foreign funding.

However, the United States has already expressed doubts if the upcoming local elections in district of Batticaloa would be free and fair.

"The US does not believe that free and fair elections can be held if some (political) parties are armed," US Ambassador Robert O. Blake speaking at a function organised by USAID in Batticaloa said.

He further said that if "paramilitary" groups carrying arms illegally were allowed to intimidate others, it would hamper private investment that is so much needed to develop war-affected Batticaloa.

The US believes that groups like the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Puligal (TMVP), headed by breakaway LTTE leaders Karuna and Pillayan, should not be permitted to bear arms while fighting elections.

However, Sri Lanka’s ruling United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) has gone into an alliance with the paramilitary TMVP, which is accused of gross human rights abuses including, abduction, extortion and murder.

The largest Tamil political party – Tamil National Alliance (TNA) and the main opposition party –United National Party (UNP) have both cited the ground situation and are boycotting the election.

The TNA Parliamentary Group Leader, R. Sampanthan noted that it was easy to predict that the poll would take a violent and undemocratic turn with paramilitary groups ruling the roost.

Terming the elections as a ‘political fraud’ Sampanthan said: "We believe in the democratic process and elections are a vital part. But there is no chance of people electing their representatives of their own free will. The show is run by armed thugs."

The paramilitary TMVP, which has in the past killed TNA supporters and abducted relatives of TNA parliamentarians, has threatened to kill any TNA parliamentarians from the eastern province if they returned to their constituencies.

Sampanthan believes that non-contesting would not cause the TNA to lose electoral ground simply because the TMVP has appeared on the scene.

"The Tamil people won’t be fooled. The community since 1956 has voted for a certain political stance. That has not changed. The TMVP is not likely to change it, with or without guns," he added.

UNP General Secretary Tissa Attanayake said his leadership has serious concerns about the deteriorating security situation in the area. He added some armed groups operating in the area were also posing threat to the conduct of a free and fair election.

He further added that the election is simply geared towards conferring legitimacy upon the TMVP for overtly and covertly supporting the government.

"The conditions are not conducive. There is widespread violence, a breakdown in the law and order situation and political unrest. This is an attempt to hold a poll in an area that is yet to begin true resettlement," Attanayake observed.

The Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) has fielded candidates in five councils. However, with attacks on its candidates and supporters, it has already complained about harassment and violence by the TMVP.

Two weeks before nominations closed, M. Hisbullah, a senior member of SLMC was attacked by a group of unidentified men and a van belonging to him was torched.

SLMC Leader Rauf Hakeem reacted angrily to the attack and demanded that the government plays its role in protecting candidates and ensuring normalcy.

"We predicted a blood bath. We also said there were different warlords ruling different areas of territory in the east despite the government’s rhetoric about conducive conditions for polls. The SLMC is the key party in the fray and our candidates are getting attacked," Hakeem remarked.

According to latest reports, with continuing attacks, the SLMC is also considering boycotting the elections.

The SLMC General Secretary told The Nation newspaper that unknown men have emerged suddenly in Batticaloa to harass SLMC candidates. He said these strange men might be from the underworld.

“We do not know who is behind this. But we are targeted,” he said.

He said his party will not like the candidates face such high risks to contest elections in areas, especially where militants operate with state assistance.

“So, we might take a decision to withdraw our candidates if the situation turns out to be too bad,” he said.

Under heavy pressure from the international community to put forward a credible political solution to the long-drawn ethnic conflict in the island, the Sri Lankan government finally unveiled its proposal to devolve power – a recommendation to go back 20 years.

After meeting 63 times and deliberating for over 250 hours, the All Party Representative Committee (APRC), which was set up by President Mahinda Rajapkase to derive a political solution to the conflict essentially proposed the implementation of the 1987 13th Amendment to the Constitution.

The APRC, which include neither the main opposition United National Party (UNP) nor the third largest political party in Sri Lanka, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) nor the largest Tamil political Party in the parliament, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), was simply ordered by President to restrict its recommendations to the implementation of the 13th amendment .

Any proposal based on the 13th amendment would maintain the unitary framework of Sri Lanka and not devolve any meaningful power to the Tamils, keeping the President’s hardline allies the Sinhalese Marxist JVP and the JHU (Buddhist nationalist Jathika Hela Urumaya) happy, whilst allowing the President to buy time with the international community for his military agenda.

However, the APRC recommendation for ‘the full and faithful’ implementation of the 13th Amendment conveniently leaves out some of the powers vested in the province under that amendment, such as police and land in addition to health and education.

This is ‘nothing short of a massive political fraud perpetrated on both the Sri Lankan people and the international community’ The Sunday Leader, a Sri Lankan newspaper, noted of the whole exercise.

Under pressure

The Sri Lankan government’s unilateral abrogation of the Norwegian sponsored Ceasefire Agreement and increasingly worsening human rights violations, together with the absence of any political solution had resulted in increased pressure on President Rajapakse to do something.

The international community, lead by the Co-chairs to the peace process, were threatening to freeze aid, while international rights organizations were becoming more vocal about the need for external human rights monitoring on the island.

In these circumstances, President Rajapakse assured the diplomatic community that a political package evolved through the APRC would be released before the end of January.

Further pressures was added when the visiting Japanese Special Envoy, Yashushi Akashi, hinted that his country too would have to reconsider any further financial assistance to Sri Lanka – though he later denied that was the intent of his statement.

The Prime Ministers of India and the UK also called on the government to put forward a credible devolution package, ruling out a military solution, in a joint statement they released on January 21.

Inherent in the British and Indian statement was a call for something more than what is already in the statute books.

Reaction

Lakshman Kiriella, a leading member of the UNP said the proposal by the APRC was only made to the liking of President Rajapakse. “The APRC did not consider recommending the full implementation of the 13th amendment (of the constitution) before the president requested it to do so,” he pointed out.

The TNA also dubbed the APRC recommendation to stick to the 13th amendment a 'farce'.

Rajapakse had arm-twisted the APRC to submit a report suggesting the implementation of the existing 13th amendment of the constitution and not go beyond it, Mavai Senathirajah, a senior TNA MP, told IANS.

“The idea was to create confusion in the political sphere and buy time. Otherwise, what was the need to make the APRC do this, when it was well on its way to drafting a new (quasi federal) devolution package?” Senathirajah asked.

“It was meant to satisfy the JVP and JHU,” he said.

By talking of implementing the 13th amendment, the president was trying to “hoodwink” India, Senathirajah charged. He alleged that Rajapaksa would not implement even the 13th amendment. “Ours had been a history of broken promises.”

Even the pro-government Tamil parties like the TULF, PLOTE and EPRLF-P were disappointed with the APRC proposal, saying the proposal could only be a 'first step' and that a final solution to the ethnic issue would have to be a federal constitution.

“The 13th amendment of 1987 was a treatment for ulcer. But 20 years down the line, the ulcer has become cancer. We now need a medicine for cancer, not ulcer,” said Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF) president V. Anandasangaree.

India’s Surprise Endorsement

Whilst Tamil political parties of all hues denounced the APRC proposal, India hailed the truncated devolution package as 'a welcome first step' if it contributed to a final settlement acceptable to all communities 'within the framework of a united Sri Lanka'.

Most Tamils in Sri Lanka were taken aback by New Delhi's pat for the package.

According to Indian media, Indian officials see the devolution proposals as 'a definite step forward' but are not oblivious to its limitations and the fact that it does not go far in meeting the political aspirations of the Tamil community.

“We are not looking at what has not been done or what could have been done,” IANS quoted an informed source as saying. “The fact is what has been suggested is a definite step forward, not a step back.”

Maavai Senathirajah commenting on the Indian reaction said he was disappointed with India for coming out in support of the APRC proposal, especially since it envisaged separate provincial councils for the northern and the eastern provinces. “The TNA will take up the matter with the Indian authorities.”

The proposal

The 13th Amendment, focus of the interim report of the APRC, followed the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord in 1987. Among other steps it envisages province as the unit of power and devolution of powers between the centre and the provinces as a solution to the ethnic crisis.

The amendment was rejected by all sections of the Tamil community when it was first proposed in 1987 and even the minimal sharing of power proposed in it were not implemented by the then President J R Jeyawardane. Successive Sinhalese government uninterested in devolving any power to the Tamils stayed clear of implementing the 13th amendment.

Presenting the report, the Committee said it was mandated by the President to prepare a set of proposals that would be the basis for a solution to the national question.

“After 63 sittings over a period of 11/2 years the consensus document is being finalised and it should be possible to hand it over to the President in the very near future.”

Buying further time for the President and dragging the process, the committee added that its recommendation for the ethnic conflict would require amendment to the constitution and that would require favourable climate to be established. And therefore it said it was proposing an interim proposal.

“Under the circumstances, the APRC taking into consideration its own proposals, has identified a course of action to achieve maximum and effective devolution of powers to the provinces in the short term.”

“The emphasis would be on meeting the aspirations of the Tamil speaking peoples, especially in the North and East. This would be done within the framework of the present Constitution, that is, the 1978 Constitution.”

“The course of action proposed by the APRC would be implementable with immediate effect, and envisages an interim arrangement pending the restoration of democratically elected Provincial Councils in the North and East.”

In its four-page report titled, “Action to be taken by the President to fully implement Relevant Provisions Of the present Constitution as a prelude to the APRC Proposals,” the Committee said: “The Government should endeavour to implement the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in respect of legislative, executive and administrative powers, overcoming existing shortcomings. Adequate funds should be provided by Government to facilitate effective functioning of the provincial councils. The centre should hereinafter route all finances in respect of special projects undertaken by the centre in the Provinces, if they are on subjects under the purview of the Provinces, through the respective Provincial Administrations.”

Ensuring it towed the president’s line on the eastern province, the APRC announced that the conditions in the eastern province was conducive for elections and recommended that elections be held immediately.

“The APRC is of the view that conditions in the Eastern Provinces are conducive for holding elections to the provincial council and that elections should be held immediately. Conditions in the Northern Province are far from being peaceful. A free and fair election in the North will not be possible in the near future. Hence an alternative arrangement is required in the Northern Province to enable the people of that Province to enjoy the fruits of devolution.”

“As it is not possible to hold elections in the North, the President could make appropriate order to establish an Interim Council for the Northern Province in terms of the Constitution. It may be necessary for such an Interim Council to make statues. The interim council of a province will aid [and] advise the Governor in the exercise of his executive powers, and will function until provincial council elections are held in that province. The interim council should reflect the ethnic character of the province.”

Violence against Tamil civilians continues to escalate in the Sri Lanka military controlled Jaffna peninsula with 10 people killed and 15 injured in the last week alone.

Most of the killings were carried out in southern Jaffna peninsula, Thenmaraadchi, close to the Forward Defence Lines at Muhamaalai. In each case unidentified armed men who carried out the attacks escaped through Sri Lanka Army’s (SLA’s) High Security Zones and checkpoints without being challenged.

Last Saturday night gunmen riding a motorbike pursued a Tamil man, who was riding his own motorbike, along Raja Veethy, Koppay, towards Jaffna town. The gunmen sprayed the victim with bullets near the LTTE Heroes Cemetery in Koppay and fled from the scene. The man killed was identified by his wife as Francis Rohan, 26, from Chulipuram, who had been paying a visit to relatives in Kopay East when he was gunned down.

After the victim’s body was recovered by the Grama Sevaka officer (Village level Administrator), Koppay police were notified and later handed the body to Jaffna Teaching hospital for post mortem examination.

The previous day armed men shot and killed two civilians in Kodikaamam unleashing panic among the people in Thenmaraadchi.

Friday morning around 7:30 a.m, a 24-year-old female was shot and killed at her house on Jaffna-Point Pedro-Kachchaay road and a 26-year-old male was gunned down, 1 km away, around 10:00 a.m on Allarai-Kachchaay road in Kodikaamam.

The young woman killed was identified as Sivarasa Suki, 24, an unmarried woman living with her parents. The killers forcibly entered her house, near a Heroes’ Cemetery, and sprayed her with bullets, while her mother was watching. Suki's mother, who fainted in shock, was rushed to Chaavakachcheari hospital in critical condition.

The male victim was identified as Uthayan, a family man.

Two days prior to that, on Wednesday 30 January, Kodikaamam witnessed a massacre of three siblings by a motorbike squad allegedly operated by the SLA. Around 8.00pm, armed men on motorcycles shot and killed three siblings at Choalaiyamman Koayiladi in Manduvil in Thenmaraadchi. The attackers, alleged to be members of the SLA Field Bike Squad, surrounded the house, ordered the members of the family to go inside a room for inquiry and sprayed bullets on them, killing two, including a mother of two children. The children narrowly escaped from the bullets.

The victims were identified as Palasundaram Baskaran, 30, Thushyanthan Paleswari, 21, mother of two, and Palasundaram Parthipan, 19. Baskaran and Paleswari were killed on the spot. Parthipan succumbed to his injuries hours later, due to the inability to get him timely medical assistance.

The killings took place in the same area where recently three bodies of youths abducted and shot dead had been dumped by the killers.

Whilst the killings have spiralled, abductions too have been on the riser. In the latest incident, on Monday 28 January, the families of two men lodged complaints with the Sri Lanka Human Rights Commission (SLHRC) in Jaffna.

A young family man, Balasingam Yasotharan, 21, was forcibly abducted at gun point from his house in Oorelu on Friday afternoon by two men on motorcycles, according to complaint made by his wife with SLHRC.

Further, Selvarajah Gajendran, 31, an Internally Displaced Person (IDP) who was a labourer by profession, living in IDP camp at Oadakkarai, Changkaanai was feared abducted Thursday after leaving for work in Jaffna town, his family members noted in a complaint registered with the SLHRC. Gajendran was displaced from Kaangkeasanththurai in 1990 due to SLA offensives.

Whilst the spate of killings and abductions have terrorised the locals, a bomb explosion on Thursday 31 January around 10:30 a.m on Aadiyapaatham Road in Thirunelveali, Jaffna, killed four civilians and injured at least fifteen.

The injured were rushed to Jaffna Teaching hospital. There were no SLA troopers or vehicles at the spot when a claymore mine attached to a bicycle exploded, civilians in the area said.

Three of the dead civilians were identified as Ponnuththurai Krishnakumar, 32, of Koandaavil, Sankarappillai Muththukkumar, 60, from Urumpiraay South and Thirunavukkarasu Pagnchaadcharanathan, 44, of Koandaavil East. The fourth body, in a charred and disfigured state, was proving difficult to even identify. The bomb, believed to be a claymore mine, was attached to a parked bicycle, and exploded with a deafening noise.

The explosion took place when people travelling on the nearby Palaali main road were standing on the sides, ordered there by SLA troops who had suspended all traffic on the main road. Aadiyapaatham Road is rarely used by the SLA.

Following the bomb blast the SLA intensified security measures, suspending traffic for hours Friday while SLA convoys used the main roads in Jaffna peninsula.

All traffic on the main roads from Jaffna to Palaali, Point Pedro and Kaangkeasanththurai were suspended many times while all vehicles and persons entering Jaffna town were subjected to strict security checking.

Normal procedure of allowing people to cross the roads when the SLA convoys passed was done away with Friday causing people to wait on the sides of the roads for many hours.

SLA troops ordered all passengers out of the vehicles in the pouring rain and checked all of them meticulously.

The safety of journalists in Sri Lanka is in serious jeopardy as several serious attacks and anti-media statements by government officials demonstrate a lack of respect for the value of media freedom in the country and international media watchdog said this week.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (JPJ) said it is alarmed by Sri Lankan Defense Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa’s brazen public call Sunday to censor the media and reintroduce criminal defamation laws.

Gotabhaya, who is the brother of Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa, told the Sunday Lankadeepa that he advocated press censorship, harsh punishments for “critical” reporting on the military and military expenditures, and a criminal defamation law.

“I told the President that we need to exercise press censorship from the beginning. I have been telling him that we need to bring in laws that stipulate harsh punishments for such reporting,” he said.

“If I have the power I will not allow any of these things to be written,” the defence secretary said in reference to reporting on the military.

“This is an open intimidation of the media,” said CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon. “The Sri Lankan press sorely needs space to report independently on the escalating instability in the country, free of government intimidation.”

Also protesting Gotabhaya’s threats, the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) said Sri Lanka’s democratic stability was being eroded by attacks on journalists.

“Continuing attacks and harassment are intended to send a message to the media community and to spread fear,” IFJ Asia-Pacific Director Jacqueline Park said.

“Media freedom requires respect for the right of differing and critical opinions to be voiced, particularly in times of conflict. Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of any civil democracy, but attacks on journalists are eroding Sri Lanka’s democratic stability.”

The international groups joined local groups the Free Media Movement (FMM), the Sri Lankan Working Journalists’ Association (SLWJA), the Federation of Media Employees Trade Union (FMETU), the Sri Lanka Muslim Media Forum (SLMMF) and the Sri Lanka Tamil Journalists’ Alliance (SLTJA) in condemning all attacks on journalists in the country.

Ever since President Mahinda Rajapakse came to power in late 2005, intimidation and harassment of the media, not unusual in Sri Lanka, has steadily worsened.

In July last year, the International Media Group (IMG) noted that since August 2005, eleven media workers have been killed, including Subash Chandraboas of the Tamil monthly, Nilram, and Selvarajah Rajivarman, of the Tamil language Uthayan newspaper. Both men were murdered in Sri Lanka government-controlled areas.

“Pressures on the media have multiplied over the recent months with increasing fears for the safety of journalists, especially those operating in the embattled North and East”, the IMG said after visiting Sri Lanka in June 2007 to discuss issues related to media freedom in the country.

“There appears to be complete lack of progress in the investigation of cases of murdered and attacked journalists, and no suspect in such attacks has been taken to court since the current president came to office,” the IMG report noted then.

Sri Lankan journalists are going through a trying period. Government leaders are taking a hard line on media freedom, with even senior media persons facing death threats and murderous assaults.

Media watchdogs, both national and international, have publicised serious incidents of intimidation by the state and other agencies directed against media organisations. But President Mahinda Rajapaksa denies any repression.

'The media here is free. Newspapers are full of criticism against the government,' Rajapaksa pointed out recently. However, incidents of intimidation abound.

The latest scary case was the stabbing of Suhaib M. Kassim, the associate editor of the state-owned Tamil daily 'Thinakaran' at his house here Monday.

The watchdog Free Media Movement (FMM) said the attack on a senior journalist like Suhaib demonstrated the 'vulnerability' of journalists in 'highly militarised' Sri Lanka.

Last week, two unidentified men stabbed journalist Lal Hemantha Athula Mawalage of the state-owned TV station 'Rupavahini' while he was on his way home.

Mawalage had come into the limelight when he delivered a fiery speech against the controversial Deputy Labour Minister Mervyn Silva, who had stormed into the TV station and assaulted news director T.M.G. Chandrasekhara Dec 27.

Angry TV station staff then beat up minister Silva. The incident was shown on all TV channels to the embarrassment of the Rajapaksa government.

While the minister went scot-free, Chandrasekhara was transferred to the post of director of research. The media reported that Chandrasekhara sought the transfer 'citing threats to his life'.

The FMM said that on Jan 7, three leading journalists with MBC TV and Radio Network that covered the Rupavahini episode were threatened with death by the underworld.

MTV head Chevaan Daniel, Sirasa TV director Kingsley Ratnayake and its news director Susil Kedelpitiya lodged complaints with the police about the threats.

Earlier, a young journalist with 'The Sunday Leader', Arthur Wamanan, was arrested for exposing the minister's alleged corruption.

Two top journalists of the Jaffna-based Tamil daily 'Uthayan' are too scared to go home because they face threats. The resident editor and the news editor have had to practically live in the office since May 2006.

'I can go out only with police escort,' news editor Kuhanathan told IANS. He would not identify the source of the threat.

Tamil journalists who get into trouble are routinely suspected of being supporters of the Tamil Tigers. Over all, critical journalists, no matter what the ethnicity, are dubbed 'traitors'.

Indeed, some Sinhalese journalists have been arrested for suspected links with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), leading to a new term 'Sinhala Koti' or 'Sinhalese Tigers'.

In a letter to President Rajapaksa this month, the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said the charge of 'traitor' was made against Tamil TV journalist Sri Ranga Jeyaratnam by Tamil cabinet minister Douglas Devananda.

Army commander Lt.Gen. Sarath Fonseka told the state-owned media Jan 2 that a few scribes were indeed traitors and that they were the 'real obstacles' in the war against terror.

Last year, the defence ministry's website had for many days carried an article making insinuations against Iqbal Athas, the defence correspondent of 'The Sunday Times'. Athas was accused of 'assisting in the psychological operations of the LTTE terrorists'.

The CPJ told President Rajapaksa: 'Verbal, written and physical assaults on journalists are attacks on the very fabric of a democratic society. We call on you to make sure that members of your government desist from such acts.'

This has had no impact.

Prime Minister Ratnasiri Wickramanayake said Monday that sections of the media were 'taking a sadistic delight in denigrating their motherland'.

And in an interview to the Sinhalese daily 'Iirida Lankadeepa' last week, Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa - a brother of the president - called for censorship on military news.

'I think there is no need to report anything on the military. People do not want to know the quantity and kind of arms we acquire. This is not media freedom. I will tell without fear that if I have power I will not allow any of these things to be written.
'Everything in this country has become prostituted. Like peace, even the media is completely prostituted,' Gotabhaya thundered after naming two leading media institutions as the principal culprits.

In part 1 of this introduction to the 2000 year Tamil classic on ethical living, the Kural, we outlined the structure of the work as three books: the books of virtue, wealth and love. The foundational themes that cut across the books are the primal spirit (“God Primordial”), the ecosystem and virtue. The book of virtue is split into two main parts: “the way of the householder” and the “way of the renunciate” while the book of wealth is split into “Royalty”, “Ministers”, “Qualities of a country” and a general section.

The Kural is said to be a creation of a weaver of cloth. For the Kural is a tapestry of patterns depicting the network of relationships between man and the universe. It outlines a system of ethics whose objective is harmony and balance in this network. The Kural addresses the relationships between the individual, his family, his friends, the business world, his country, other countries, nature and God, among others. The Rev. G. U Pope, one of the earliest translators of the work termed it “an integral painting of a civilization which is harmonious in itself and which possesses a clearly recognizable unity."

The book of wealth is much concerned with the wealth of nations. It is organised around the necessary group structures and leadership required for the building of “wealth”: the section on “royalty” being entirely a treatise on leadership, whereas the “qualities” of a country are the foundational characteristics of a bountiful society. Yet the personal foundations for the group relationships explored later are laid in the “way of the householder”.

The terms “Royalty” and “Ministers” must be read in historic context, the modern equivalent being leadership and advisors, experts and administrators. “Royalty” is nowhere defined to be hereditary. Equally the Kural does not presume permanence in a nation, rather it assumes these are fluid: it warns that nations may fail as a result of not following the principles and new nations may arise.

And so, in this, Part 2 of our 3 part series we will first look at how some of the personal ethics outlined in the way of the householder become institutionalised where necessary into the wealth of nations.

We take an example of the conceptual threads in the book of virtue that are woven into the book of wealth, the notion of “impartiality”.

“Impartiality” deals with justice in a personal sense and is foundational to many themes that are taken up in the book of wealth. The chapter on impartiality in the “way of the householder” starts by describing “justice” in terms of the “modern” concept of objectivity and lack of bias:

“Justice may be called good when it acts impartially
towards enemies, strangers and friends”

“To incline to neither side, like a balanced scale’s level beam,
and thus weigh impartially is the wise one’s ornament”

The Kural redefines personal integrity, including the integrity of experts (“advisors” as they will be called in the book of wealth) in terms of impartiality

“Speech uttered without bias is integrity
if no unspoken bias lurks in the heart”

And in the context of impartiality, seeks to apply to business a principle of mutual benefit to counter-parties and society:

“Those businessmen will prosper whose business
protects as their own the interests of others”

Here is also the concept that unethically acquired wealth (and investment income thereof) is forfeit:

“However prosperous it may seem, all wealth gained
By loss of rightness must be relinquished that very day”

These are modern legal concepts, but in the Kural they are treated as the foundations of personal conduct, rather than institutionalised law. And to place in context the relative importance of justice to wealth:

“Though a man is profoundly impoverished
if he remains just the world will not regard him as poor”

Whereas the above are all extracts from chapter 12, entitled “Impartiality” in “the way of the householder”, the theme of justice is taken up in a broader, more institutionalised fashion in the book of wealth.

The introduction to the section on royalty is a chapter entitled “Merits of the king”. Justice is said to be one of four key qualities:

“ He is a light among rulers who is endowed with the four merits
of generosity, graciousness, justice and care for the people”

But consistent personal virtue is a prerequisite of leadership as is the courage to maintain justice

“The noble king is unswerving in virtue, restrains wrongdoing,
and courageously maintains his honor”

“the world is protected beneath the umbrella
of an ethical leader who can endure words bitter to the ear”

The Kural, written at a time when most of the world lived under the governance of arbitrary despots whose power arose from force rather than constitutional law, spends three chapters exploring the relationship between justice as the bedrock of government. These chapters are: the just reign, the unjust reign and avoidance of tyranny.

Firstly, “the just reign” defines justice in government

“Investigate well, show favor to none, maintain impartiality
consult the law, then give judgment – this is justice”

While protection from harm is the duty of leadership and government, failure in justice leads to the fall of government:

“All the world looks to the rain clouds for sustenance
all the people look to the King’s sceptre for protection”

“An inaccessible ruler who listens and adjudicates inattentively
will plummet from power and perish ..”

It is just leadership not brutal force that is integral to victory:

“Victory is not won by the lance
but by the King’s sceptre, provided it is not crooked”

While the “just reign” tells us of the virtues of justice, the following two chapters are scathing of its failures. The “unjust reign” tells us in its very first stanza:

“More malicious than a professional murderer is the monarch
who reigns his people with injustice and oppression”

A leader who is intellectually lazy, corrupt or unjust forfeits his claim to loyalty:

“Without thinking, a King rules crookedly and thus
forfeits his subjects loyalty, together with his own fortune ..”

But for the Kural, justice is not only intrinsic to sustaining government: its failure is calamitous in ecological terms:

“If the King acts contrary to justice, contrary seasons
will befall the earth and rain laden clouds will fail to come forth ..”

Ultimately leadership that is arbitrary and unconstitutional, in short, tyrannical, is doomed to fail:

“The tyrant who causes dread in his people
will perish quickly and inevitably ..”

Other prerequisites of leadership outlined in the book of wealth are: learning and wisdom (wisdom being the practical application), the assessing and seizing of opportunities - understanding time, place and resources (a form of ancient SWOT analysis where SWOT stands for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats), the choosing and management of men, perseverance and equanimity.

But if these are the characteristics of leadership, the objective is the building and management of a “country”. This is the third theme of the book of wealth – “the qualities of a country”.

In the Kural, a country is not rigidly defined. It seems more akin to Thomas Paine’s definition of a group structure that arises organically because of man’s intrinsic social tendencies.

Says Paine in the “Rights of Man” (1791): Great part of that order which reigns among mankind is not the effect of government. It has its origin in the principles of society and the natural constitution of man. The mutual dependence and reciprocal interest which man has upon man, and all the parts of civilised community upon each other, create that great chain of connection which holds it together. The landholder, the farmer, the manufacturer, the merchant, the tradesman, and every occupation, prospers by the aid which each receives from the other, and from the whole. “

Compare the Kural’s introductory definition of a country:

“Where unfailingly fertile fields, worthy men
And wealthy merchants come together – that indeed is a country “

The Kural also implicitly assumes that one is free to choose the geographical location of one’s country and hence provides guidelines:

“Rain waters, underground waters and rivers shed from well-situated mountains,
plus strong fortresses are features of a fine country”

If the Kural considers healthy commerce as the foundational quality of a country, it also explains the importance of productivity gains, foreshadowing the economic paradigm shifts and scalability of modern technology:

“A land where prosperity comes easily deserves the name country
not one where wealth entails laborious toil“

In the “qualities of a country” the Kural considers not only the proper means of building wealth, including the building of alliances, but also the defence of wealth: the nature of fortresses, military strength and the benefits of an army. We leave the further discussion of a country for Part 3, along with more from the book of virtue.
For the Kural does not limit itself to such weighty topics.

The book of love takes the familiar Sangam poetry format of quotes: “He says”, “She says”, “She says to her friend ..” etc. By way of introduction, we leave the reader with the Kural’s equivalent of the “ man-eater” pop lyric:

(He says):

“A Goddess, a peahen or a woman
bedecked with jewels ? My heart is amazed ! ..“ [PS]

“I never knew Yama before but now I know
that it is feminine and has warring eyes …” [KK]
(Yama being the angel of death)

“She may have that feminine grace
but her look sucks life out of men who gaze ..” [NV, SB]

“Ah there goes all my might which foes dread in fight
when I face her brows beaming bright! “ [KV, GU]


Unattributed quotes are from the Himalayan Academy publication “Weaver’s Wisdom” (Reference 1).

Attributions are as follows
GU - G U Pope
NV – NVK Ashraf
KK - K Kannan
KV – K Krishnasamy and V Ramkumar
PS - P. S Sundaram
SB - S Bharathiar

References

1. Weaver’s Wisdom, Ancient Precepts for a perfect life. American English translation By Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami and the monastics of the Saiva Siddhanta Order (Kauai, Hawaii), Himalayan Academy Publications (http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/weaver/)

2. The Sacred Kural of Tiruvaluva Nayanar by Dr. G. U. Pope, Laurier Books Ltd (available at amazon.com)

3. (Internet resources) http://www.thirukkural2005.org/
International Thirukkural Conference 2005 (Washington)

4. (Internet resources) Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirukkural

5. (Internet Thirrukural Browser) http://www.cs.utk.edu/~siddhart/thirukkural/

6. (Interent resource) Comparison of translations at http://www.geocities.com/nvashraf/kur-eng/closeindex.htm

The author identifies four dominant themes that seriously impact on the sustainability of resettlement in the Batticaloa district. These are:

1. Lack of consultation and clarity
2. Lack of Preparedness and Planning
3. Restriction of Access and Mobility
4. Protection Concerns of the Displaced and Resettled Communities
This first part looks at the first three, while the second and third parts of this article (to be published in the next issues) look at the fourth theme.

Introduction

The East is ‘liberated’. It has been so since last June when the government requested it to be celebrated with ‘patriotic joy’. Over 300,000 civilians were displaced in the process and a majority have been ‘resettled’ since then. But a significant minority still remain in the IDP or transit camps with uncertainty hanging over their future.

This report, based on short visits and a series of discussions with a number of people in the area – including some of the displaced people themselves – is to communicate some pressing issues and concerns in this process. It aims to highlight aspects of the human rights and humanitarian situation in the District with a specific focus on the internally displaced persons (IDPs) and the newly resettled villages in Vaharai and West Batticaloa. In doing so, it hopes to inform and influence concerned policy makers and practitioners to think through solutions.

This is not a general analysis of the political and security situation in Batticaloa. The military and STF are consolidating their recent gains, the LTTE is intent on destabilizing, the security forces are retaliating, the multiple splits in the Karuna faction and their overall ‘control and influence’ of communities by coercion, their simmering confrontations with the Muslim community and the impending local government elections - all make up for interesting times ahead.

What happens in the next few months could have serious ramifications for the future peace process. The situation urgently calls for a thorough social, political and security analysis. But that is not the purpose of this note or the visits. Neither is it a compilation of the severe hardships and harrowing stories.

This is primarily a collection of articulated concerns, observations and reflections of and about the ‘displaced’ and ‘resettled’. It is evident that there are several pertinent issues that need a rapid, effective response by protection and development actors advocating on behalf of these communities that are struggling to cope with simply living in the ‘liberated’ East. Several complaints and concerns were reported.

1. Lack of consultation and clarity

There are several plans doing the rounds in Colombo – but IDPs in the ground are completely unaware of them. Despite repeated requests the government is yet to come out with a clear policy and guidelines on what each resettling family is entitled to. Not a single family whose members have been killed or injured in the conflict in 2006 or 2007 have been given compensation (compared with the prompt dispensation of compensation to the civilian victims of the Nugegoda blast). It is absolutely essential that at least now the government clearly articulates through effective public information campaigns the entitlements of the displaced who have been resettled.

The most precarious situation is that of the families displaced from Muttur area whose villages have been declared High Security Zones. Despite the unreasonable disproportionateness of the demarcated areas and dubious intents (where some accounts say that it is to be an economic development zone) what is most appalling is that the displaced villagers have not been told what their fate is going to be. They live in complete limbo. Similarly there have been several instances of military occupying public and private property without providing any alternatives or compensation in the ‘liberated; areas. This type of insensitivity on the part of the Government which cannot be explained by the ‘fight against terrorism’ leads to further alienation of the Tamil population.

It was also noted that despite agreement and repeated reminders about the guiding principles for internally displaced people – the process of resettlement often fell far short of the minimum required standards. After the flagrantly forced resettlement of the Vaaharai area, the military and the STF did improve their conduct for the subsequent rounds of resettlement – but still fell short of the agreed upon standards. The hasty endorsement of some phases of the resettlement by UNHCR was also pointed out by some people as having set a bad precedent. One of the common sense suggestion by a displaced community members was – “if the return is voluntary, all they have to do is arrange for regular bus service. We long to go back to our homes. If we know public transport is available, we will go, see the place ourselves, if satisfied, come back prepare, pack and leave’. Whereas in almost all the phases of return the families never got a chance to assess the place – they were dumped there.

The most egregious aspect was that the families returned to find that their houses had been vandalised and looted to the core. Since the LTTE fled without even taking their heavy equipment, the blame is squarely placed on the military that captured and remained in control of the area till the people returned. The list of items lost due to this looting runs into thousands of complaints in the newly established Vaaharai police station.

Now that a majority of the people have been resettled, looking back, it leaves a bad taste about how the process was handled by the military and the civil authorities (who always are relegated to taking orders from the military).

2. Lack of Preparedness and Planning

It came out clearly that the Government was not prepared for this scale of displacement or for the subsequent logistics of resettlement. It could have been. Displacement is never voluntary. The displacement in the Batticaloa District was principally caused by the military operations of Sri Lanka Army in a majority of cases and LTTE in some instances, who also used trapped communities as human shields. It seems to have happened in an environment where the International Community, the UN and others had resigned to the fact, and at times condoned, that causing displacement as a by product of the ‘fight against terrorism’ is the sovereign right of the Sri Lankan Government. In this backdrop massive displacement caused by areal bombardment, relentless shelling and blockades was seen as a necessary evil and as overriding international norms on protection of civilians in armed conflict and principles of proportionality.

But the concern aired by many was, if the Government had resolved to pursue the military strategy, it must also have been prepared to take care of its citizens who were sure to be affected. There were no such plans or resources. The military agenda of the Government matched by the counter strategies of LTTE always creates displacement and misery for civilians. In almost all the cases in the East the Government was terribly under prepared and it was left to the UN and other NGOs to rush to fill in gaping holes in the response to IDP situation. If Government is clear on its military strategy of ‘defensive offence’, ‘retaliation’ or ‘pre-emptive strikes’ they must also have a clear strategy and preparedness to take care of its own citizens who are displaced as a direct result of their action. Time and again the Government failed and left it for the external agencies to fill significant gaps. Similarly even when it came to resettlement, the Government was woefully under provided moving back people without even the basic of needs in place. More on this later, but suffice to say that the people see, and justifiably so, the state more as ‘military liberators’ than as one caring for their needs and looking after their welfare.

It appears that civil administration mechanisms (the GA and DS) are caught off guard most of the time regarding the timing of displacement and resettlement, making it difficult to prepare in advance. In the current context it is imperative that the resettlement/reconstruction plan is completely owned, lead and coordinated by the civil authorities headed by the Government Agent and the Divisional Secretary. In the current context the civil administration in the district – mostly Tamil – seem as marginalised and helpless as the communities they support.

3. Restriction of Access and Mobility

Normalcy cannot return if there is undue restriction on access and mobility. Sustainable resettlement is meaningless if access is arbitrarily refused or restricted. While the security imperative does warrant some protection procedures what is currently prevalent in the East is beyond reason. Recently resettled villages in Vaaharai and Batticaloa West are subjected to layers of restrictions. There are several aspects in this that deserves mention

Firstly, free access of goods, services and people is a sine qua non for sustainable resettlement –given the geographic and settlement characteristic of the Batticaloa district – with highly concentrated human settlements in the Eluvankarai area and vast cultivation land in the Paduvankarai area. To mark out people based on DS divisions and to have different registration process, different identity cards (in addition to the national ID) and to set in place security procedures to move from one DS division to the other is causing severe impediment to thousands of people whose daily living is dependent on crossing these boundaries. The lack of clarity as well as the constantly changing procedures brings in a great deal of uncertainty and misconception that limits mobility. In effect it traps them in ‘Bantustans’ with heavy military and paramilitary presence (and the inevitable harassment) is creating more misery. The security gains from such a hassle and harassment is not clear. The growing frustration though is very evident.

A full six months after ‘liberation’ and capture, now to demarcate areas and to consider formerly LTTE-held territories as restricted or no-go areas defies logic. It did make some sense to stringently regulate movement across borders when some areas were controlled by the tigers. But, not any more. To restrict access into these areas for humanitarian agencies, Sri Lankan civil society and for even ordinary citizens of the district now is beyond reason. Given that the whole area is now under the control of the military, to claim that access is denied to ‘prevent infiltration’ sounds strange. Infiltration from where? Isn’t the rest of the district under the military control any way? The other reason given is to ‘prevent assistance getting into the wrong hands’. Aren’t these places cleared of ‘wrong hands’ and even if any one still remains having survived the long period of blockade, he sure must have figured out or is being sustained by other supply routes. The point is that the demarcations and restrictions do not seem to have a compelling security logic which could not be managed by the other military architecture like check points and cordon and search operations. What it ends up doing is frustrating the resettlement and humanitarian work and delaying the integration with the rest of the district and country.

Even more baffling is when humanitarian agencies had been denied access ‘for protection reasons’ to very places where the ordinary people were resettled – some of them forcibly. The delays in access contributed to the lagged response to the resettled and more often than not the agencies were presented with crisis situation – lack of shelter, lack of water, lack of food etc- which could have been easily avoided with easy access and adequate time for suitability and needs assessment. Bureaucracy and red tape are commonplace and many agencies continue to face problems of access. Clearance procedures, when they are clear, are said to take anywhere within 48 hours to a week and only agencies working on ‘development’ are allowed access to West Batticaloa – as a result, addressing protection issues of IDPs and the resettled has become a serious concern. Access to humanitarian assistance in areas like Vellaveli, Paddippalai and Vavunatheevu was severely delayed and agencies are still subjected to cumbersome procedures in order to obtain permission for access. Having permission is no guarantee for access which also depends

The plight of our people has been steadily reaching newer levels. And, after being an observer with a hands-off approach, I decided to do something about it. I became proactive - in small ways. As a mother of two young children living in Sydney, Australia and having many commitments, it was not easy to change my inaction - but I did. I firmly believe now, that if we all do our little part and started working towards a common vision, that vision will and must materialize. I realise there’s spiritual element to this as well, and of course some people are skeptical when it comes to these things. But I still wanted share my simple suggestions at the end of this article, with other ordinary people who, like I used to be, are a bit lost when it comes to how they can help.

It all began in 1983 for me. Following the horrifying experience of the riots, I remember the first time my family settled in Jaffna. I remember the 3 day ship journey to Jaffna, the light blue waters of the KKS harbour and the village school where my family was given bread and potato curry. How lovingly the senior students – my people - served the food to us. How good the food tasted, especially after being in a crowded ship for 3 days and having experienced sea sickness.

Children are resilient and if given the chance they bounce back. I soon forgot and overcame the bad memories thanks to my people and Jaffna. I was just a little girl and I was swept away by the simple beauty of my hometown Chavakachcheri – the lush paddy fields, the tall palmyrahs, the mango groves and the hot white sand that made me hop and jump when I tried walking barefoot to the kovil close by. Jaffna healed me and my horrific memories of the riots. Jaffna saved me in many ways. Jaffna taught me culture, the beauty in living close to nature, the importance of an ecologically sustainable living and embedded in me deep spiritual beliefs.

Then I remember how the war started. Little by little and then all in a rush. The many atrocities that happened. I remember the first time a loved one got killed. I remember a friend who was arrested and disappeared. I remember a childhood acquaintance who was later gang-raped and murdered by Sri Lankan soldiers – became to be known as the Krishanthy Kumarasamy case.

I remember proudly waving at Indian soldiers only to be terrified of them a few months afterwards. What a betrayal by India! But more was to come. I remember how stupidly and naively I voted for Chandrika Kumarutunga when I moved back to Colombo, having just turned 18 and got voting rights, trusting the South to deliver peace as they promised. Instead, the war intensified under Chandrika’s regime and I lost a beloved cousin of mine who had just entered University - her body blown into pieces in one of the many aerial bombings by the Sri Lankan Air Force in the North. How naïve I was in hoping that a Sinhalese government would deliver peace to the Tamil people.

Then, now in a new millennium and in another country, I got sadder and angrier as I read the latest news or heard from people who visited Sri Lanka. I could almost feel the terror that our people are experiencing on a daily basis - It was almost palpable. We cannot trust our enemy one little bit nor should we let them get away with what they have done to us. Let our fighters carry on with what they are doing but meanwhile, I decided that I need to do my part – in whatever small ways I can.

When we look at the Tamil Diaspora, some of us still lay our hopes on the International Community - I am not saying it’s a bad thing but it should not be the only thing. Some of us wait for some sort of miracle to happen. Some of us feel absolutely hopeless and pessimistic. Some of us feel tortured to live this way – reading the news of our homeland, feeling angry and depressed – then only to get distracted by trivial things in daily life. Only a rare few Tamils undertake the weight on their shoulders and do more than their part in helping our homeland. They are the dedicated people who though living abroad have not forgotten their duty. These people of the Tamil Diaspora are true leaders and beacons of hope.

However, most of us do nothing. I have friends who simply sigh and change the topic or don’t talk about it anymore. Even worse, I have friends who don’t even give it a second thought. They like to believe that they have lots of rights in Australia. They thrive in the small things of daily lives and happily chat in English with their kids. One part of our future generation is being utterly traumatised in Sri Lanka, while the other part (or to be fair, the majority of other part) is growing up oblivious to what’s happening to their brethren back home.

So I put together a simple plan on how I (a housewife and a mother) can change my habits, and then I acted on it. It was a very liberating experience for me. Small things can make a big difference. Hence, I share my thoughts with and for the people who might have adopted a “hands-off” approach (like I did before) or “looking the other way” approach.

Act 1 - Get in touch with the North East. Help relatives and friends in North East.

Almost all of my close relatives are living abroad. But I took some trouble to get contact details of distant relatives in Sri Lanka. I contacted my mother’s second cousin’s family in the North, whom I met only once in my life when I visited them as a child. They were just so happy that I remembered them and called. Now we are in touch at least via mail. I called a long lost relative in Batticola. For two decades, the people of the East have experienced the worst of Sinhalese brutality in terms of large scale massacres. This is due to geographical proximity as well other factors which has made them more vulnerable. My relative in Batticola was ecstatic that I called. As far as I am concerned, a two way communication was helpful to both parties. I feel connected. Also, sending a small amount of money goes a long way. In these horrific times, they need all the help that they can get. Initially, I felt ashamed that I didn’t contact these people before. But better late than never.

Act 2 - Help the charities that do work in the North East

About 5 years ago, I realised if I can afford to spend $20 a month on McDonalds, I can sponsor a child. So I sponsored this little girl through Foster Parents Plan. The country they chose was Bangladesh. 5 years on, I still felt so happy of my decision whenever I got a letter or picture from her. So later, I started to donate to the orphanages in Vanni directly through a friend who is personally involved with the orphanages. I allocated a small percentage of my salary for this purpose. I also started contributing in Tamil events and through Tamil organizations using common sense and a bit of trust. In doing so, I brushed aside a long felt concern - “I really need to know how and where my money is going”. A quote from one of my favourite writers comes to mind.

“You often say, ‘I would give, but only to the deserving’.
The trees in your orchard say not so, nor the flocks in your pasture.
They give that they may live, for to withhold is to perish” – Kalil Gibran

I felt that if we don’t give now (our time, money and energy) to our people back at home, our culture and our nationhood might perish eventually. Once I started giving my time, money and energy in small ways, I felt more confident in terms of futures results.

Act 3 - Boycott Sri Lankan goods

Self explanatory - just check the label of whatever you buy. For example, I stopped buying MD brand that I used to use a lot.

Act 4 - Write to local MPs, NGOs and to the media.

Get details of your local MP and engage them. Write to them regularly or schedule a fact to face meeting so that after a while, they get to know you and a relationship can be formed. I started writing to NGOs and the media, and was amazed at some of the responses that I got. They really like to hear from ordinary people. I feel that I doing my part educating people. This takes maybe 1 or 2 hours of my time per week. And I do believe, if many people start doing this, it could be a powerful factor.

Act 5 - Teach our children Tamil language. Teach them the ancient and recent history of Tamil homeland.

This is a very important point for two reasons. The next generation of children needs to be aware. They will have to carry on the struggle of rebuilding our nation once we are no longer here. Also, teaching our children our language and history is not only beneficial for our people back home, but also good for our children’s self concept, self image and identity (regardless of age).

Act 6 - Don’t imagine the worse or NOT try something out because of an assumption.

I have a friend who says with gloom “even if Tamil Eelam materialises it’ll be a bad state. We will destroy ourselves”. Would you give a 10 months old child a can of coke just because “he’s going to be doing that anyway when he is 18” (I actually heard a father say that and I feel sorry for both him and the kid!). This kind of logic is flawed. We can’t give up on things by imagining a bad future. You nurture and nourish a plant so that it’ll be bear good fruits. We’ll just have to heal with love and hope.


Act 7 - Think collectively and truly identify with North East as Tamil Eelam.

We need to think collectively and truly identify with North East as Tamil Eelam. Our thoughts and actions stemming from this identity will have far reaching consequences. Freedom is ours to take - not something that we need to ask from somebody else. Once we start believing in Tamil Eelam, it will materialize. Meanwhile, I feel better when I introduce myself as a “Tamil from the North East of Sri Lanka now referred to as Tamil Eelam by us” – a rather long winded answer to the simple question “where are you originally from?” But I still feel good saying it. I used to say “Sri Lankan”.

We might have a few dilemmas. For example, we might not have a flag and song that is recognised by others. Recently, the Principal of my daughter’s school had a bright new idea. In order to reflect the cultural diversity at the local school, he wanted to display the different flags of the different nations the children’s families were coming from. It was an extremely nice thought! But I did not feel like giving the Sri Lankan flag nor could I give our flag with the Tiger emblem on it since it may not be perceived as a national flag. I felt really troubled and at the end had to tell the Principal that we didn’t want any representation by flags. So we do have road blocks in this area and we need to work on that but I still rather identify with our unborn nation than to be identified with Sri Lanka - even for formalities. This was an important psychic change.


Act 8 - Positive visualisation

Positive visualisation is not just day dreaming or just hoping, but actually visualising the final goal in mind so that we can work towards it. I have practiced this in my personal life with good results. Once I drew a picture of a goal that I wanted (a seemingly impossible goal at that time), put it in my study room, and every day reflected on it for couple of minutes. This clarified things in my mind. This helped and kept me in focus on what I wanted to achieve and what needs to be done on a daily basis - all the small steps that I had to do in order to achieve this big goal.

Nowadays, I also visualise visiting my hometown (now the home of a big army camp) and see what has to be done from my part in order to achieve this. This last point (positive visualisation) kind of encompasses all of the above points: Visualise -> Get Proactive -> Act; Visualise -> Get Proactive -> Act. I visualise my family visiting my mother’s cousin’s family in Jaffna and having lunch with them. I visualise my kids playing together with theirs! This may seem a bit far fetched but I truly believe that the Universe will respond to my thoughts as well as my actions. I believe we can create our own future if we really want to. We just have to start off this process by being proactive first. The rest will follow.

Some skeptics might call me a dreamer. But I rather dream than despair. I rather believe than be cynical. I rather pray and plead to the Universe, than to turn the other way and pretend everything is fine - as the Tamil saying goes “Prayers that are said for the common good always work”. I rather act and consequently feel good about myself for the small yet powerful deeds that I am doing in helping out my people. It’s all worth it in the end.

Sri Lankan military’s Deep Penetration Unit targeted a bus ferrying children from a sports event in Vanni killing 20 people including 11 children.

A critically injured boy receives treatment.

On Tuesday January 29, 20 civilians, including 11 school children, a teacher of Thadchanaamaruthamadu Roman Catholic Tamil Mixed School, the driver, conductor and two hospital workers were killed and 14 wounded when a Deep Penetration Unit of Sri Lanka Army triggered a Claymore mine targeting the bus carrying school children in Madu division of the Liberation Tigers of Tamileelam controlled territory. Eight school children were among the wounded.

Dr Vettinathan, a local medical official told the BBC News website: "There are about 20 casualties (in hospital)...four or five of the victims are in a serious condition. There is one doctor in the hospital."

Bishop Rayappu Joseph told the BBC that the bus travelling near the town of Mannar was hit by a claymore mine in an area controlled by the Tamil Tigers.

The bus was 1 km away from Madu church, after having picked up the children at Thadchanaamaruthamadu and was on its way to Paalampiddi from Madu.

Bishop Joseph said victims of the attack had been taken to Pallamadu hospital, south-west of Mannar.

The principal of the displaced Chinna Pandivirichchaan school, S.M.G Lambert, 46, was one of the 12 critically wounded, transferred to Muzhankaavil. He was one of the seven severely wounded patients who were later transferred to Kilinochchi hospital. Two of them succumbed to their injuries on the way. Dead bodies of the two victims were handed over to Akkaraayan hospital.

Rev. Fr. Emilianus Pillai, from Madu Church, told TamilNet that tension prevailed at the attack site as SLA started firing artillery shells after the explosion, causing panic among the civilians who were helping the victims.

The head of the rebels' peace secretariat, S Pulithevan, told the BBC that the children were returning from a sports meeting.
He said that seven adults, including teachers, were among the dead and blamed the Sri Lankan military for planting a roadside bomb.
The Sri Lankan military, however, denied any involvement.
In a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, B. Nadesan, head of the political wing of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), said the army's Deep Penetration Unit had "deliberately" targeted the school bus.
"Since the present president of Sri Lanka took office in November 2005, 2,056 Tamil civilians, including 132 Tamil children, have been massacred by the state forces," he added.

He said the government had not only abrogated the truce it signed in 2002 with the LTTE but had "adamantly" refused to allow UN human rights monitoring in the war zone.

Nadesan claimed that the LTTE had cooperated with Norwegian peace brokers and declared its commitment to the truce pact "100 percent".

"It should be obvious to the international community that there is only one path open to regain the rights of the Tamil people and that is for the international community to recognise the sovereignty of the Tamil nation," Nadesan said.

This is the moderate position on Eelam: Eelam is your right. It is not a gift, not an act of charity but something that is already yours. As with all things, you can claim it or lose it. Others can try to take it away from you but that would constitute an assault, a theft.

When the founding fathers of America made the case for their nation, they did not rely on a cultural identity that had evolved over thousands of years. They did not rely on a common language, let alone a few thousand years of a shared literary heritage. They did not even rely on the concept of a traditional homeland. For, they had none of these on their side.

They relied instead on something more intrinsic and universal. They relied on the rights of man.
And so to quote from Thomas Paine, who articulated the concept most clearly in his seminal book of the same name:
"The fact therefore must be that the individuals themselves, each in his own personal and sovereign right, entered into a compact with each other to produce a government: and this is the only mode in which governments have a right to arise, and the only principle on which they have a right to exist …"
It follows that, by these principles, the nation of Eelam, can have and does need only one form of legitimacy: a compact entered by the people who choose to belong to that nation.
Of course, those of us, who have a few thousand years of historical cohesion as a "civilisation", a common culture and heritage, and more recently a shared history of oppression and injustice, to bind us together, may not feel the need to explicitly enter into a "compact" with each other; we may take it for granted that it exists and that it has done so implicitly for millennia.

Nevertheless it important to remember that this "compact" or agreement is all that is required. Think of it as similar to saying "I do" in a wedding ceremony, except there is no officiating priest, only ourselves.
Eelam exists because we do.

Furthermore, according to the principles of Paine, where a government arises which contradicts the compact, it is illegitimate. So if the Tamils of Sri Lanka have an agreement with each other to form a government, then any claim by the Sinhalese that they are the "appropriate" government for us is illegitimate.

Eelam exists because we can.
It follows that one nation cannot be "given" to another. So for example the British colonial administrators could not have "given" the Tamil nation to the nation of Sri Lanka. It was not theirs to give. Neither can the International community, today, give us Eelam. It is not theirs to give. Neither is it theirs to deny.
Thomas Paine went on to elaborate on why he believes this right to form a government exists. He argues that in their natural state, humans are social creatures; that it is in their best interests to congregate in societies.

One reason for this is the diversification of talent: it is in man's best interest to specialise in his area of talent and to rely on the different talents and abilities of others. So a social structure where each person contributes something useful to society: a doctor, a priest, a teacher and so forth arises naturally. It is in man's best interests to trade with each other and to regulate trade in some manner.
In fact that governments are hardly required except to fulfil certain duties that might in exceptional cases be otherwise neglected.

And so he says: "The more perfect civilisation is, the less occasion has it for government, because the more does it regulate its own affairs, and govern itself."
And from here, we can see that those geopolitical actors who do not benefit from the existence of Eelam, but whose own forms of government, and in the case of the United States, whose very existence is based on the principles enunciated by Paine, have only one line of attack:
They can say that the Tamils, do not really want Eelam. We can call this the "Only we know what you want" argument.

They can say that the Tamil "civilisation", to use Thomas Paine's formulation, is not ready to govern itself, that we lack 'capacity'. We call this the "you are too primitive" argument.
But because the second argument cannot stand on its own, the first is the foundation to their attack.
For the international bureaucrats, the foreign secretaries, ambassadors, ministers - the Robert Blakes, Kim Howells etc - of this world know, that the basis of their own legitimacy, the legitimacy of their states and governments arise from Paine's principles.

Hence they also know they have no right to deny the people of Eelam their right should they wish to claim it.
However, in pursuit of their own selfish interests, they tell us that we don't really want Eelam. They tell us that the "moderate" Tamil has entered into a "compact" (to quote Paine) to be governed by the brutal Rajapakse government, the Wickremasinghe government or in the past the Jeyawardene government, the numerous Bandaranaikes (SW, Sirimavo, Chandrika) and so on.

They then point out all the disadvantages of Eelam. Junior minister Kim Howell told the British Parliament last month that partition would be bloody, for example.

Some roll out a number of other issues: the borders are too long, the future will be unstable (as if it could be any more unstable than it currently is); there will be anarchy because "you" do not know how to run a government (as if it is easy to form a government worse than the current, un-chosen Sinhala chauvinist one); it will not be economically viable (as if the current semi starvation in Jaffna or chronic displacement in the East is a state of economic well being).

There are other ways in which they tell us that the "compact" for Eelam is a bad idea. They say that the pro-Eelam position is "extremist".

Extremist? Holocaust denial is extremist. The denial of some Israelis of the Palestinians` right to exist in their own homelands might be extremist. A belief that we should all live under a new global "caliphate" or Islamic government with Islamic law, the Al Qaeda position, might be extremist. The belief that one may arbitrarily invade another people's land and take control of their resources, otherwise known as the "Bush Doctrine", might be taken as extremist.

In short, what is extremist is to take away from others what belongs to them.
But asserting the rights of man? The same rights asserted by the founding father of the United States of America? Claiming a right which according to all the current norms belongs to us already? This is extremist?

Well even for a propaganda war aimed at a "primitive" people incapable of forming a government, this is a little disingenuous.

And further, in line with the "too primitive" argument, they tell us that the Tamils do not have a feasible government in waiting. They say that the LTTE is "authoritarian", that it will be too unacceptable to the international community.

But, the point is that the Tamils have a right to choose their own government and they will exercise that right once Eelam is declared, perhaps even making mistakes along the way. But that too is the prerogative of the people of Eelam.

Meanwhile, the 'extremists' can be subject to ruthless violence. The international community is silent as the Sinhalese silence those who speak for Eelam: journalists, members of parliament, rights activists, aid workers. They may support the stationing of an occupying Sinhala army in Jaffna so the people there can understand what good governance is.

Yet for all their dissembling, the "international community" know they have no right to deny the people of Eelam their right should the people of Eelam stand up to claim it.

For Eelam is not a gift. It is not something one begs for or pleads for, or lobbies for. It is an agreement between a people. A right cannot be granted or revoked, but it can be exercised. Eelam is a decisive act.
Consequently, the United Nations cannot "give" us Eelam. They can merely decide, after the event whether they will "recognise" it: by this is meant whether they will allow it to vote in their resolutions, or sit on their committees such as the Human Rights Committee on which Sri Lanka, laughably, has a membership.
So there is only one answer from the moderate Tamil to the international community, which cuts through the fog of deception:

"We understand that Eelam is our right and the right of our children. We decide to claim it, on behalf of ourselves, and our generations to come. We and only we decide its existence. We will not be deceived by 'compromises' or cowed into not claiming that which is ours. We, the people, are Eelam. Accept it."

Sri Lanka has received six tenders from three foreign companies for oil exploration in its northwestern offshore Mannar basin, the country’s petroleum resource minister said on Thursday.

The blocks being put up for bids are estimated to contain 1 billion barrels of oil and would significantly alter the country’s energy sector and economy.

According to the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, the country imports about 15 million barrels of crude each year, and also buys about 15 million barrels of oil products from abroad annually.

"We have got six tenders. They are from Cairn India (CAIL.BO: Quote, Profile, Research), ONGC Videsh (ONGC.BO: Quote, Profile, Research) from India and Nico Resources from Cyprus," Minister A.H.M. Fowzie told Reuters.

"All three companies have bid for the first block, while Cairn India and Nico Resources have bid for the second block. The third block has received only one bid from Nico Resources."

The first block is the smallest out of the three with 3338.1 square kilometres, while the third block is the largest with an area of 4126.5 square kilometres.

Sri Lanka has eight exploration blocks in the Mannar basin, three of which are to be given for exploration once the government decides on a successful bidder.

Two have been assigned to China and India on nomination basis and the government plans to delay bidding on the last three blocks to get higher revenue, Reuters reported.

Oil and Natural Gas Corp (ONGC), which was offered the block nominated to India said in September it was not interested in the assigned block, citing low prospectivity and the fact that Sri Lanka was asking for a big signature bonus.

The Sri Lankan government later said it would negotiate with ONGC for a new oil block. The outcome of the negotiation has not yet been revealed.

The bidding process was closed last Thursday and the government expects to select the best three bidders by April 2008 and to start the oil exploration process by August.

Last year the United States awarded a grant of US$474,000 to Sri Lanka’s ministry of Finance and Planning to develop the country’s oil and gas sector.

The non-oil producing country expects its first commercial crude oil production by 2010.

Prior to the bidding, the Sri Lankan government had said oil exploration licences would be awarded to firms that can provide most advanced technological and economic benefit to Sri Lanka.

A 35 percent tax from net profit, 10 percent royalty fee of annual production revenue, and allowing the planned National Oil Exploration Company to invest 10 percent in exploration activities were the conditions put forwarded by the government.

Signature bonds, production bonds, and profit sharing ratio are to be considered in selecting the best three bidders.

Roadshows to attract investors were held in London, Houston and Kuala Lumpur in September last year.

The government says seismic data shows more than a billion barrels of oil lie under the sea off Sri Lanka's northwest coast, though no reserves have yet been proven.

If proven, the reserves would be a major boost for the war-torn country, which produces no oil and imported $2.2 billion worth in the first 11 months of 2007.

In addition to developing the oil and gas sector in Sri Lanka India and China are also assisting development of other energy sectors by building coal-fired power plants.

The Chinese government is helping Sri Lanka build its first coal-fired power plant at Norocholai, north of capital Colombo, as the island seeks cheaper electricity.

India's largest power company, in December 2006 signed an agreement to build a 500 megawatt coal-fired power plant in the northeast of Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka marked sixty years of independence from Britain this week. As such, February 4th was truly representative of this ethnocracy's sordid state of affairs. The highlight of the 'multi-ethnic' country's anniversary ceremonies was a parade by the all-Sinhala military which President Mahinda Rajapakse and his commanders reviewed amidst tight security. Elsewhere, the island was wracked by armed conflict, extra-judicial violence and humanitarian suffering. Quite appropriately, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) wasn't even invited to the state celebrations. The main opposition Sinhala parties refused to attend, though this has more to do with their envy of President Rajapakse's near messianic standing amongst the majority community than the protests of poor governance they cited. The main Muslim party, the SLMC, also stayed away: their community is now bearing the crushing deprivations of majoritarianism.

Sri Lanka's quagmire has been aptly described as 'a crisis of the state.' But what is not easily accepted by the international community, in its impatience to bring peace to the island, is that this crisis is the cause and not the consequence of three decades of conflict. Today's abysmal state of affairs is merely an intensification of chauvinist dynamics that, having developed beneath the surface before the colonial handover, erupted into the open soon after the British left. This is not to blame 'ancient hatreds' but to argue that Britain's concentration of power in Sinhala hands enabled a chauvinist project to masquerade as nation-building.

In discussing this, we quote here, with utmost respect, from the work of numerous scholars, whose disparate writings over the years on Sri Lanka's crisis, have largely been ignored in the ahistoric, formulaic and ultimately futile international efforts to re-impose, as 'peace', Sinhala domination of the island and the Tamils.

To begin with, the state is a colonial construct: whilst there is scholarly disagreement as to pre-colonial history, the imposition of a single administrative structure for the entire island was incontestably a British colonial decision, one which came after centuries of incremental (Portuguese, Dutch and British) conquests of its parts. Nonetheless, at independence in 1948, Sri Lanka, with high human development indicators and well-developed infrastructure, was expected - by the colonial power - to become a model democracy. Sri Lanka instead descended into ethnic strife, crisis and vicious conflict.
As such, today's abysmal state of affairs is merely an intensification of chauvinist dynamics that, having developed beneath the surface during colonial handover, erupted into the open soon after the British left. Which is why in 1956, Sinhala leaders were readily able to seek election by appealing to Sinhala chauvinist sentiment. What is important about the introduction of 'Sinhala Only' in 1956 is not its discriminatory effect, but how it was emblematic of the mindset of the Sinhala majority, exemplified by the popular support it enjoyed.

It is noteworthy that it was democratic logic of the 'will of the majority' that legitimised this and subsequent acts of discrimination. The justification was, as the chauvinists still insist, the Tamils were 'privileged' by the colonial power - though it is not clear why the British should have loved us more than the Sinhalese. Meanwhile it is quietly forgotten that the missionary schools (which turned out the English-speaking natives for the colonial administration) were readily accepted in the Tamil areas and resisted in the Sinhala south.

It is in the first three decades of Sinhala majoritarian rule, rather than in the past thirty years of armed conflict, that the present-day impediments to building a 'liberal peace' in Sri Lanka became entrenched. Even by the mid seventies, before the armed conflict had begun, Sri Lanka 'had regressed to an illiberal, ethnocentric regime bent on Sinhala superordination and Tamil subjugation.' A policy of recruiting only Sinhalese into the military was introduced in 1962, the beginning of today's ethnically pure army. And it was state-sponsored Sinhala colonisation that led Tamils to fear 'they may become a minority in their own provinces.' That the demographic dilution of Tamil-majority areas 'would render any devolution of powers as a solution to the ethnic conflict less effective' was not lost on the Tamils, even as they agitated, peacefully, for an end to the discrimination. This is why the slogan of 'traditional homelands,' is first and foremost a political claim meant to ensure the security of the Tamils and is integrally linked to our demands for autonomy and independence.

The passing of the republican constitution in 1972- apart from changing the name from 'Ceylon' to the Sinhala-preferred 'Sri Lanka' - removed the safeguards of the previous British- supplied constitution, gave a pre-eminent position to Buddhism, in addition to the Sinhala language, and most importantly, concentrated power further in the Sinhala-dominated legislature. As such, amidst contemporary international insistence that Tamil demands must be pursued through democratic mechanisms, it should be remembered that it was the failure of democratic processes, for reasons that have become more entrenched today, that both the demand for independence and later armed conflict emerged.
Thus, while antagonistic ethnic mobilization was not an inevitable outcome after 1948, 'what ultimately transpired went beyond what any self-respecting minority would tolerate.' Moreover, the period since independence has been 'punctuated by bouts of annihilatory violence directed against the Tamils in 1956, 1958, 1977, 1981 and 1983' in which thousands of Tamils, including women and children were massacred, Tamil property was destroyed, and hundreds of thousands made refugees.' These periodic explosions of violence against Tamils represent efforts to put them back in their places on grounds they have become too assertive and need to be taught a lesson, as President J. R. Jayawardene bluntly stated in 1983.

It is the insistent ignoring of this post-colonial history that has resulted in the abject failure of international efforts to encourage, foster and ultimately impose a 'solution' on Sri Lanka. 'Decades of potent socialization through familial, religious, educational, and media practices have resulted in a Sinhala Buddhist nationalist hegemony that spans the political, socio-economic and cultural landscape of Sri Lanka.'
However, the international community continues to insist on abstract and manifestly untenable characterizations of the now intractable conflict. Rather than recognize the resilience of entrenched racism within the centralized and fortified Sri Lanka state, sporadic and laughable efforts to knit 'ethnic harmony' amongst people in parts of the island are combined with much pontification on the appropriateness or not of various constitutional models and, more importantly, 'what the extremist Tamil Tigers will settle for.'
As for the Tamils, our ambitions, like tho-se of any decent people are to live free and peacefully with our neighbours. We seek not to restore some ancient glory or fulfil some manifest destiny. We seek not the subjugation of another people or assertion of any racial supremacy. Our demand for the independent state of Eelam is not a quest for 'ethnic purity' but for the irrevocable and irreducible est-ablishment of our security and dignity. After 60 years of unending oppression and violent repression, we are convinced more than ever of this truth. And, whatever suffering the Sinhala state and its international allies inflict on us, we are not going to give up now.

Tamils Rehabilitation Organization (TRO) condemns, in the strongest possible terms, the gruesome, terrorist attack by a Sri Lanka Army (SLA) Deep Penetration Unit (DPU) on a civilian bus travelling to Paalampiddi from Madhu at 2:25 on 29 January 2008. The attack killed 20 people, 11 of whom school children, and injured 14, eight of whom were children.

As the victims are buried, TRO wishes to convey our condolences to the victims and their families. This attack has plunged the population of the entire region into mourning and is a grave breach of the most fundamental tenets of humanity. Such targeted attacks on civilians are forbidden under international humanitarian law and are never acceptable. The Government of Sri Lanka must stop any direct or indiscriminate attacks on civilians.

It is unfortunate that the Co-Chairs (United States, Japan, Norway, European Union), international human rights and humanitarian organization and Sri Lankan Civil Society have chosen to remain silent and not vociferously condemn this attack. The international community seems to have given the Government of Sri Lanka carte blanche to prosecute its war against the Tamil people.

This is the 7th Claymore mine attack by the SLA DPU’s on civilians in the LTTE controlled areas. These attacks have in total killed 40 persons and injured 22. Amongst the dead there have been 18 school children, one priest, 1 doctor, 2 nurses and a TRO humanitarian worker. The attacks, which are described below, have targeted ambulances (twice), humanitarian vehicles (twice), a mobile medical health service (twice) and a civilian bus.

SLA DPU Attacks:

27 November 2007: Seven school girls, three male volunteers and the driver of the van who were providing rural first aid service, were killed in an Claymore mine attack carried out by an SLA DPU unit while travelling on the Kokkaavil - Thunukkai Road

25 November 2007: An ambulance from the Muzhangkaavil hospital was the target of a SLA DPU Claymore attack at Mudkompan. The driver of the ambulance, Thavaseelan (29), was seriously wounded in the attack. The ambulance was engaged in providing medical service to displaced civilians.

26 September 2007: Rev. Fr. Nicholaspillai Packiyaranjith, 40, the Mannar district coordinator of Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) was killed by a SLA DPU Claymore attack the Mankulam - Vellankulam road. The Reverend was engaged in humanitarian relief work and was transporting baby milk and other essential humanitarian supplies for displaced children.

09 August 2006: The SLA DPU attacked yet another ambulance killing a medical doctor, his wife, two nurses and the driver. The ambulance, from Nedunkerni hospital, was hit by three Claymore mines in a row.

08 June 2006: Four health officials, including a nurse and the driver of the vehicle, from the Tamil Eelam Health Service Mobile Medical Service, were wounded at Akkarayan when an SLA DPU team exploded a Claymore mine.

24 March 2006: TRO humanitarian worker Muthuraja Aruleswaran, was killed and 3 TRO directors, including the Assistant Executive Director of the TRO, Vadivel Ravichandran, 38, were wounded in the attack.