In its latest report, entitled, 'Sri Lanka: Tamil politics and the Quest for a Political Solution', the International Crisis Group (ICG) criticised the Sri Lankan government's refusal to negotiate seriously towards a power sharing agreement, arguing that such a refusal was "increasing ethnic tensions and damaging prospects for lasting peace."
Highlighting the "sustained assault" against "Tamil political power and identity" in the North-East, the ICG said the government's military and economic policies were "institutionalising" a Sinhala nationalist thinking that "explicitly rejects a privileged Tamil character".
Arguing that the "de facto military occupation" and "biased economic development policies appear designed to undermine Tamils’ ability to claim the north and east as their homeland," the ICG said that "for many Tamils, this confirms their long-held belief that it was only the LTTE’s guns that placed their concerns and need for power sharing on the political agenda."
In a list of recommendations to various parties, the ICG called on the international community, including China, India and the US to ensure a range of actions that it argued "pave the way for a lasting political solution" are met. These included fulfilment of the March 2012 UNHRC resolution and a credible northern provincial council election by early 2013. The ICG went on to urge the Secretariat and member states of the Commonwealth to insist that the Sri Lankan government fulfils these tasks, "and agree that in the event it fails to do so, the October 2013 Commonwealth heads of government meeting will be moved from Colombo to an alternative location."
See here for full report.
Excerpts from the executive summary reproduced below:
"The Sri Lankan government’s refusal to negotiate seriously with Tamil leaders or otherwise address legitimate Tamil and Muslim grievances is increasing ethnic tensions and damaging prospects for lasting peace. The administration, led by the Sri Lanka Freedom Party of Mahinda Rajapaksa, has refused to honour agreements with the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), broken promises to world leaders and not implemented constitutional provisions for minimal devolution of power to Tamil-speaking areas of the north and east. Militarisation and discriminatory economic development in Tamil and Muslim areas are breeding anger and increasing pressure on moderate Tamil leaders."
"Many believed that the end of the war and elimination of the separatist Tamil Tigers (LTTE) would open space for greater political debate and moderation among Tamils, while encouraging the government to abandon the hardline Sinhalese nationalism it had cultivated to support its war efforts and agree to devolve meaningful power to the majority Tamil-speaking northern and eastern provinces. While there has been an increase in democratic and moderate voices among Tamils, the government has failed to respond in kind."
"Even as the government refuses to respond to longstanding demands for power sharing, Tamil political power and identity are under sustained assault in the north and east."
"The de facto military occupation of the northern province and biased economic development policies appear designed to undermine Tamils’ ability to claim the north and east as their homeland. For many Tamils, this confirms their long-held belief that it was only the LTTE’s guns that placed their concerns and need for power sharing on the political agenda."
"The situation is likely to remain difficult, with major negotiating breakthroughs unlikely in the near term. Nonetheless, the international community – especially India and the U.S. – should increase pressure on President Rajapaksa to significantly reduce the numbers and influence of the military in the north and hold credible northern provincial council elections in advance of the March 2013 meeting of the UN Human Rights Council. The president should also be pressed to agree to the TNA’s reasonable terms for joining the PSC and begin implementing the thirteenth amendment meaningfully. Effective and lasting power sharing will almost certainly require forms of devolution that go beyond the current unitary definition of the state."
