groundviews » The needs of the hour

The needs of the hour

April 1, 2009 at 3:46 pm · Categories: Colombo, Peace and Conflict, Politics and Governance | by Michael Roberts

Groundviews has raised a critical issue: “what is the most important issue facing the peoples of Sri Lanka in a ‘post-LTTE’ context and how can the State address it?” – an issue that I have, in a spirit of unwarranted optimism, converted from RED to BLUE.

It may be possible to quarrel with Ahilan’s phrase, “Post-LTTE context.” The LTTE in the diaspora will still remain a player. The LTTE as guerrilla force will be weak in the immediate future and may lack even the capacities they possessed in 1983-86. But to press such points is to be pedantic. The LTTE as an armed group with de-facto state powers, and thereby the Sri Lankan Tamil goal of an independent state, is in tatters. It may be resurrected of course – if the government and Sinhala chauvinists impose Sinhalese settlers within the northern reaches and if they pursue other draconian Israeli-style programmes.

So, with those caveats let me respond to the thrust and spirit of Ahilan’s terminology and the Groundviews question. We face complex terrain. But, here, as one starting point, I advocate some simple principles. I do so through the words of two knowledgeable and well-placed individuals, Dushy Ranetunge and Rohan Gunaratna.

Let me quote Ranetunge of London and Colombo first:

“Sinhala nationalism needs to be bludgeoned with the same ferocity used against Tamil nationalism, the minorities need to be made to feel secure with an equal stake in the republic and an honourable peace needs to be sued” (Island, 8 March 2009).

Then take Gunaratna’s response to a reporter’s question “What are the chances of a resurgence, if the LTTE is completely wiped out from Sri Lanka?”

[The] possibility of a resurgence of the LTTE depends only on one factor: The Government must make Tamils feel that they have the same rights and privileges of Sinhalese and the Muslims.

The Government must commence a process of reconciliation with those Tamils and offer an amnesty and reintegrate LTTE surrendees. Similarly Government must develop the North and the East and build a super-highway between Jaffna and Colombo.

Government must develop North and East to an extent where the Tamils who have been indoctrinated by the LTTE for more than two decades will feel Sri Lanka as their home. In parallel with the military process, President Rajapaksa must commence a political process.

In this conflict Muslims have suffered as much as Sinhalese and Tamils. However, if we are to remain a united Sri Lanka we must identify ourselves as Sri Lankans. We must think and act as Sri Lankans. To forge such an identity, there must be a visionary leadership.

These contentions have to be taken up and pursued. I speak here from outside Lanka as a dual citizen and Sri Lankan patriot, a cricket tragic who has defended the multi-ethnic and multi-religious Sri Lankan cricketers from the verbal assaults of f…g Australians for some 20 years. In earnest hope I request someone, Dayan perhaps, to place Gunaratna’s advice on a silver platter and to present this platter, respectfully in ehemai manner, before the brothers Rajapakse.

Amen.

What Next?
This submission is in response to a question posed by Groundviews posed here that asked readers to opine on a war ‘over in 3 weeks’ and a ‘post-LTTE’ Sri Lanka. Please visit this original post to read a rich spectrum of opinion and commentary on the nature of post-war Sri Lanka.

1,058 have read this this article so far. You may also find these articles interesting:

The Muslim question and resettlement of Muslim IDPs in post-war Sri Lanka: Two comprehensive interviews The question of Muslim identity, displacement and forcible evictions during war and their enduring socio-political impact in post-war Sri Lanka is often underplayed in the media and mainstream politics. Muslim IDPs in the East are amongst those who have been in IDP camps the longest, often in conditions no better than Tamils interned in Manik... Groundviews, March 18, 2010
From Akkaraipattu This video clip contains a brief interview with A.L Thavam – Chairperson of Akkaraipattu Pradeshiya Saba (local government). It is presented here as is, without analysis or comment. Summary of the interview. Feels that Batticoloa election was successful because of the lack of incidents, and says therefore Government has been successful in liberating the Eastern Province. Acknowledges there... sam, March 30, 2008

Permalink | Share this article on Facebook

Dayan Jayatilleka said,

April 1, 2009 @ 4:27 pm

I surely would oblige if only Prof Roberts, diligent researcher that he is, can find a single shred of evidence that I ever addressed anyone in “Ehemai” fashion. Roberts’ pathetic autumnal attempts to re-brand himself if not jump the bandwagon after decades of trashing Sri Lanka, are amusing to those of us who are not amnesiac. I am glad however that he delivered himself of this supercilious aside because it reminded me to include in a planned anthology of Mervyn de Silva’s Daily News articles, the ’70s exchange in which he soundly cuffed Michael Roberts. ( I recall the phrase ” bounce the ball boogie”…)

Austin Fernando said,

April 1, 2009 @ 5:18 pm

As quoted by Michael Roberts both Dushy Ranetunge and Rohan Gunaratna highlight the need to respect all communities alike. I agree with them.

But peace cannot be achieved through infrastructure development or economic enhancement alone. There are other demands (i.e. political, constitutional, sociological, psychological etc) that have to be addressed if the affected communities are to tow the government and southern political lines of maintaining peace won with large sacrifices.

Then only the Tamils will “feel secure with an equal stake in the republic” (Ranetunge) Then only the Tamils will “feel that they have the same rights and privileges of Sinhalese and Muslims” (Gunaratna). If one asks some Muslim sources they will speak of discriminations against them as an ethnic and religious group committed by the governments and Tigers. These too have to be addressed if peace is to be retained and Tigers to be a part of history and to prevent a Muslim Tiger being born!

Expecting this to happen in a chauvinistic, segregated and fractured political environment may not be the best one could expect. Why not pursue a course of cooperation, show of magnanimity and understanding of the issue as a “national issue” and not act and think in parochial terms?

saman said,

April 1, 2009 @ 9:09 pm

recently i saw a TV programme on how the SL flag was formed – in 1948 when the flag was flown, at independence we didnt have the two minority stripes or the bo leaves – but subsequently SL recognised the minorities –

looking at other world falgs, interesting to see how many countries have been so inclusive… (oh yes.. british, india, malaysia…???)

point is, lets not go rushing to be too accomodative…….. tamils dream of a statehood is shattered and should be crushed once and for all,,,

Michael Roberts said,

April 2, 2009 @ 6:01 am

My last few sentences were not intended to be an aspersion on DAYAN. The whole of that paragraph with some satire intertwined was directed by my belief that it is those liberal-moderates in and around the present regime who have the best chance of persuading the authorities to adopt a balanced settlement.

So it is of strategic value to all Sri Lankans that persons such as DAYAN and RAJIV are aligned with the govt.

The ehemai note arises from my writings on the ASOKAN PERSONA in Sri Lankan politics and affairs – found as it is in most govt departments, universities and even merc-corporations. Given its widespread prevalence it is always wise to present one’s plans respectfully.

I cannot think of anyone less EHEMAI than Dayan.

It is nevertheless significant that he should respond in this manner. [“bounce-ball boogie” was my characterisation of Mervyn his father if my memory serves me right]

That spat and this little one is of little moment. Sanjana’s question is THE ISSUE. Let’s focus on fundamentals in the interests of the country. DAYAN you have a key role to play.

Joanne said,

April 3, 2009 @ 4:19 am

Nowadays SL government is founding to propagate many ways to weaken the Tamil self path. Most of the blogs and www pages are run by Sinhalese academic ( I think) trying to twist the Tamils path of self determination . Creating many unwanted confusion around Tamil diasporas, with the smart wording and giving advice or explanation to their own view.

Also if you go to YouTube, more video news about SL forces are winning news more than actual situation. They are wording our forces, brave SL solders and many more. They also include in the wording “LTTE” so search engine will bring up SL government propaganda more than any other.

They can keep doing it,

One thing for sure whatever happens the stronger the SL forces fight or propagate against the freedom of Tamils, the faster the Tamil Eelam will form.

“Adnka Tamilani adka mudiuma…”

Keep trin……

Sarwan said,

April 3, 2009 @ 2:37 pm

Tamil desire for state hood can never ever … ever be put down. Grant Tamil Eelam and be at peace.

Hela said,

April 3, 2009 @ 2:51 pm

Tamil Eelam is no guarantee of Tamil liberation! Tamil Eelam, under LTTE, is nonsense. Tamil self-determination under the government also nonsense, I feel. So we really are at cross roads again. How can Sinhala people agitate for Tamil rights? They are also being killed today. I think most important issue Sanjana is for Govt to stop calling everyone terrorists. When everyone is a terrorist, no one can talk. If no one can talk, then there is no peace? Why talk about peace if we can’t talk about getting people to just talk. No violence. No terrorism. Just talk. Let citizens decide who must be listened and who must be ignored.

lakmali said,

April 3, 2009 @ 4:54 pm

the need of the hr is for all tamils to stand and say if they still want a seperate state or if they will remain as SL citizens? that would be the starting point as there would be not much to talk if the answer is the 1st….

Dayan Jayatilleka said,

April 6, 2009 @ 4:38 am

Sarwan writes “Grant Tamil Eelam and be at peace”. Am I missing something or shouldn’t it be “Forget Tamil Eelam and be at peace”?

Dayan Jayatilleka said,

April 6, 2009 @ 4:42 am

Joanne writes: “the stronger the SL forces will fight the faster the Tamil Eelam will form”.

Looks like the stronger the SL forces fight the faster Tamil Eelam will shrink (or dissolve).

Dayan Jayatilleka said,

April 6, 2009 @ 6:09 pm

Dear Michael,

Thanks. Point taken. I think your pioneering studies of the Ceylon National Congress and of ethnicity in Sri Lanka are of considerable and enduring value, undertaken at a time when the topics themselves were hardly faddish.

Nicolai said,

April 6, 2009 @ 11:29 pm

Please humour ill informed and illiterate me.
Who or what is “ehemai”?

Michael Roberts said,

April 13, 2009 @ 3:39 pm

Thanks DAYAN

NICOLAI

“EHEMAI’ is an obsequious “yes” from menial to manorial lord in the world of Sinhala speakers. In other contexts –a student at Peradeniya responded thus to me — It immediately signals hierarchical reespect in contrast to “Ovu” — the standard YES.

There will be Tamil equivalents of course. Both peoples share SO MUCH!

PS: i am agreeably surprised that people are s =till logging unto this old memo by someone who, it is said, is a “triumphalist” (Bopage) and “chauvinist” (Vasantharaja)

Michael Roberts said,

April 13, 2009 @ 6:44 pm

Apropos of Dayan’s last remark about the 1970s and set against a disparaging remark about an “old professor” from a commentator in http://www.transcurrents.com, let me refer to tan important non-event (little noticed that is) in October 1973. Some of us lecturers involved in the CEYLON STUDIES SEMINAR at Peradeniya organised a one-day conference on THE SINHALA-TMAIL PROBLEM in Colombo at the Anglican Cathedral hall (available gratis). This was for u a massive logistical exercise and we went ahead despite a protest from another lecturer [and rising star in SLFP] who affirmed “There is no Sinhala Tamil problem” –since apparently the problems facing SL were in economics – oil prices etc.
That gathering (featuring V Karalasinghma, Bishop Lakshman and Neville Jayaweera among others) only confirmed the pessimism that had induced me to launch the conference in the first place. This pessimism then entered the work in the book Dayan is referring to. More to the point, this pessimism permeated provided the concluding note to an article I wrote while in Germany in 1976. This essay was published in Modern Asian Studies in 1978 (two years was about the time then for n article to go through the vetting and publishing process). I ended by indicating that SL would go the way of Lebanon, northern Ireland and Cyprus.
Well that prediction was both right and wrong. Right in the direction I was pointing at. WRIONG in its measurement – for Lanka ahs gone through a thirty year period that has been far more calamitous and atrocious than the other “exemplars” I cited.
That said, social science should be cautious about prediction even in surmise. But surmise is the stuff of all analyses, be it that of historians surveying the past or political scientists deciphering the present (which is to say the immediate past). Alas the overwhelming presence of conjecture in our work is often obscured by the definitive language adopted by way of convention.

Dayan Jayatilleka said,

April 14, 2009 @ 6:10 pm

Mervyn de Silva’s July 1st 1972 editorial and this Ceylon Studies Seminar of a few months later sounded the early warning. It is striking that apart from Michael himself, those few who were sensitive to this emerging question were those of the same generation and liberal arts/humanities education; indeed were university batchmates. It is they and not the Left intelligentsia who were the most perspicacious. Here’s another irony. As someone who had just entered high school and the Left movement at the time, I recall that Michael and others were reviled by the Marxist academics of the day (not just the pro SLFP populists), later the pioneers of the Social Scientists Association, as “reactionaries” and “imperialist agents” with a dubious agenda, because they were talking about “ethnicity” – doubtless with a diversionary intent–when they should have been talking about “class” !

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI