groundviews is a Sri Lankan citizen journalism initiativeregister here.login.find out more
inicio mail me! sindicaci;ón

Saying ‘No’ to Mum and Finding Our Post Colonial Identity

Baron Naseby is a British Conservative Party politician. He has visited Sri Lanka many times, including most recently with the British all-party delegation. Watch him in this clip explaining to a partly hostile diaspora audience his position against international intervention in Sri Lanka.

He has got it right. The focus of the international attention at this juncture should be weighted towards getting the Tamil Tigers to release civilian hostages, as opposed to pressuring the government to agree to a ceasefire. As these two articles, one in the Canadian National Post and the other by DBS Jeyaraj, point out, the voice of the Tamil diaspora has been hijacked by a minority and the wrong message is blackening their name in the international arena.

The Tamil diaspora focus should be on negotiating an LTTE surrender and demilitarization. The LTTE faces inevitable defeat. They should be pressured to admit it and lay down their arms. Which other modern conflict has come to this stage, where an obvious defeat is being postponed at the cost of huge prolonged suffering to the side the loser is meant to represent? It’s a joke. Fighting to the death to the last man went out with Sparta, I had thought.

I inherently have something against the idea of international intervention in our country and I think other Sri Lankans should feel the same way too. Even though I come from a family of Brown Sahibs, it always made me uncomfortable to think that some of our citizens so readily welcome Western examples as superior. The Portuguese, the Dutch and British succeeded in colonizing Sri Lanka by exploiting our own conflicts with eachother. We invited them in to help us fight each other. And this process of intervening in a country for one stated reason and then staying to control and exploit it for some other reason still happens today. Iraq is an obvious case in point. Many of the US bases around the world, the backbone of its imperialist infrastructure, are built on the bones of regional conflicts all over the world.

I am glad that the government said thanks, but no thanks to Britain. Recently, there was some anti-British communication which compared Britain to a mother keeping her kid in line. This is not a bad analogy, because in a lot of ways, Sri Lanka is growing up. For better or for worse, our problems are our own and if we are ever to discover a mature post colonial identity, we have to be left to sort out our own problems. This conflict has its roots in colonialism, and the reactions and counter reactions that stem from the imbalances and distortions within our society that colonialism created. We have handled it badly – true (seemingly much worse than countries like Malaysia that have dressed their colonial wounds with bandages of economic prosperity) but the chain of cause and effect that has led us to this day when the an army stands powerful surrounding a huddled group of terrorists, ready to destroy them, has nevertheless had its origins in the experience of colonialism.

Today, it isn’t just the army that surrounds the LTTE. Today, one idea stands powerful, ready to destroy the other. This is not just about a fight for land, water or freedom – it is also a fight about ideas. The two ideas that are fighting each other are two different views of what post-colonial Sri Lanka looks like and what the post-colonial Sri Lankan identity is. Should Sinhalese be the only national language? Should there be two separate states? Should there be regional autonomy within a united Sri Lanka? These are some of the ideas that have violently fought each other in the years since independence.

The first idea grew, reached adulthood in 1956 and then became old and died over the past two or three decades. As a result, now Tamil, Sinhala and English are all official langauages in Sri Lanka; they are all taught to kids in school, and the Civil Service, after a certain rank, requires its employees to have knowledge of both languages. No one calls for a Sinhala Only policy anymore – not even the most extreme nationalist. So, this is not fated to be our post-colonial identity, even though some people used to want it badly and a Buddhist monk even killed a Prime Minister for it. Similarly, some Tamils have been talking about a separate state from before independence. This idea grew powerful and became embodied in the LTTE,  who killed off all similar but slightly different ideas, and fought for this idea for three decades. That idea too is now on the verge of dying somewhere in North of Sri Lanka, under siege from the powerful idea surrounding it that says this country is never going to be split into two different states.

So this is how it is going to be. I have faith that whatever solution the government puts forward now, it will be one which offers some degree of autonomy to the people who reside in those areas, whether it is through the full implementation of the 13th Amendment or through a federal solution and constitutional reform. (I suspect the former). But, whatever solution is arrived at, it is likely to be a permanent statement about what our post colonial identity is going to be. Wars help galvanize identities and they help people rally around and accept ideas. The nationalities that participated in World War II were never the same afterwards. Europeans were never the same. British women were never as feminine. The Japanese were never as proud. It changed them, and the generations after them, from the inside.

Similarly, Sri Lankans will never be the same. This is our identity. This is who we will be. It is being decided right now on a little sliver of land to the North of Mullaitivu. And, it isn’t going to change. Because, these people – these people that control these things – they’ve got the guns and the men to defend their ideas. And the rest of us have nothing but a dwindling bank balance and the hope of a better day.

Jehan Mendis writes, teaches economics and runs Colombo’s only pub quiz. You can find his stuff at www.ravana.wordpress.com.

Print this post
1,807 have read this this article so far. You may also find these articles interesting:
  • For a Sri Lankan Nationalism From time to time at various forums and speeches the idea of promoting a single Sri Lankan identity has been put forward as a factor in finding a solution to the conflict in Sri Lanka. Rarely though, these sometimes passionate pleas to build a common Sri Lankan identity have proven to be anything more than... Deane, December 26, 2006
  • Strengthening democracy in Sri Lanka: An open invitation to generate fresh ideas How can we strengthen democracy in Sri Lanka? From blue sky thinking to tried and tested ideas at the grassroots that need to scale up or be better recognised and supported, Groundviews invites you to create a unique catalogue of ideas on how post-war Sri Lanka can strengthen democratic governance. Groundviews, as well as other online fora and... Groundviews, March 15, 2010

| Share this article on Facebook

Samantha Fernando said,

May 14, 2009 @ 6:56 pm

How pray, can the International Community ‘pressurize’ the LTTE who’s facing elimination in a tiny god-forsaken area?

AJ Perera said,

May 14, 2009 @ 9:42 pm

This is absurd.

Govt says LTTE is contained within 2 sq. km with, say, 20 – 50 thousand civilians. Let them be. What is the threat such marginalized LTTE posing to the rest of the Island? SL can guard against LTTE getting out – but you don’t have to bomb the civilians. I am sure 20-50,000 civilians can find a way to neutralize the 500 LTTE cadres if they want to get out. Isn’t it possible that they are getting out only because of the SL bombing. The view that SL wants to either kill or trap all the civilians in the concentration camp seems more credible than the view that 500 LTTE cadres areable to keep 20-50,000 civilians hostage. SL also has an incentive to kill or trap them – that way the rest of the world will never know what really happened in this black-hole of democracy.

Jehan said,

May 14, 2009 @ 10:19 pm

By strongly communicating what Lord Naseby has communicated (see link above) in similar terms. By removing the expectation of international intervention and by expressively recognising and upholding the right of the Sri Lankan government to end this war. (See Michael Roberts’ essay http://www.groundviews.org/2009/02/10/dilemmas-at-wars-end-thoughts-on-hard-realities/)

The LTTE is holding on for international intervention. That is it’s only hope. Clearly emphasize that that is never going to happen, and you take away that expectation, and any reason to prolong their suffering and date of surrender.

ddm said,

May 15, 2009 @ 12:18 am

interesting piece Jehan. I do however feel that there is another aspect to external intervention.

my concern about the post military conflict situation is the power vacuum in terms of articulation of minority aspirations (largely in terms of preventing constitutional majoritarianism). Successive Sri Lankan states have been very reluctant to concede any degree of Central power to the regions. just one example is finances. even with a full implementation of the 13th A with land and police powers, the PCs are completely dependent on the centre financially – 82% of sri lankan PC expenditure is based on central transfers, the bulk of which are to fund recurrent expenditure, giving the PCs little power to engage in independent development activity. there needs to be more mandatory revenue sharing, particularly of development activities to give the regions some perceived control over their destiny. there are many more examples (concentration of power within the president, creation of central bodies that erode the power of the regions eg. road development authority, national schools, national hospitals and the domination of policy in almost all aspects by the centre etc.)

so i think for a meaningful step away from the current constitution’s allowance for majoritarianism, there needs to be some substantial changes, over and above what is entailed in the full implementation of the 13th A. but who is going to negotiate this? there is little or no effective political representation of tamils other than those within the current government. so there seems to be almost necessarily a requirement for some external influence – how did the 13th A come about in the first place? indian influence. i think something similar will have to take place for a long term viable solution to occur. unless, the government takes the very progressive steps to go beyond the 13th A – but this i fear is very unlikely given the general discourse that has been coming forth from gosl. how this external influence is to be manifest and how successful it will be is beyond me – but i have a hunch it will be required.

AJ Perera said,

May 15, 2009 @ 1:40 am

I think this is correct -”The LTTE is holding on for international intervention”. While the IC, UN etc have extensively given lip-service to Early Warning systems and R2P, despite undeniable local warnings and alerts, the world let thousands after thusands of innocents to be scarificed before they would lift a finger to intervene to provide the freedom in Eastern Europe, Africa and Eastern Asia. If the World had the foresight and the will to bring fairness, this need not have happened. It is easy to blame LTTE for everything. The State and the world have the responsibility to protect protect and provide for innocent civilians – what is the logic in shifting that responsibility to a banned organization? That is just a convenient excuse.

Dayan Jayatilleka said,

May 15, 2009 @ 3:31 am

Bloody brilliant.

Mohan Mendis said,

May 15, 2009 @ 9:31 am

You have got it right and put it across so lucidly. The latter, (putting it across business) unfortunately is what is lacking making us all look very bad in the eyes of the world. It is important that gifted persons like yourself, who only deal with truth, join the frontlines of the battle we are now faced with. The propaganda war as evil as the one that gave birth to it.

niranjan said,

May 15, 2009 @ 11:03 am

Niranjan Bandaranayake said:

That was an interesting article Jehan. However, I feel that the Sinhala only issue has not died after 3 decades. It is still very much alive. I have met quite a few people who want “Sinhala Only.” They dislike English even more so than Tamil.
English is a link language and not an official language. Only a tiny minority of Sri lankans can speak or write it. Less than 1% I think. The Public Service works chiefly in Sinhala and to a lesser degree in Tamil, but not in English. Proper English is not taught to children in schools even today. That is the saddest part.

Idealist? said,

May 15, 2009 @ 11:31 am

You talk about the death of the idea of ‘Sinhala Only’… but the idea that Sri Lanka belongs to Sinhala Buddhists is, I’m afraid, alive and kicking… in high places too! So your optimism about what Sri Lankans’ post-colonial identity is going to be seems rather rose-tinted.

chamath said,

May 15, 2009 @ 11:44 am

Excellent piece Jehan that tackles the often ignored post-colonial aspect that is nevertheless one key reason this conflict has lasted so long, and is still being played out.

MJD said,

May 15, 2009 @ 12:13 pm

Yet another Sinhalese (perhaps a Buddhist), yet another bigot.

When would you Sinhalese ever begin to concede that the island is the property of all of its people and not only that of you majority bigots.

You blame the colonists for your problems as is though your country was the only country colonized by the Europeans. The fact is you bickering idiots don’t have the skills nor the wills to discover solutions problems. Instead you all seem to prefer to kill one another as did the barbarians. It has taken one thug in Rajapakse to knock down the other thug in Prabakaran – I guess it takes one to know one.

The Sinhalese deserve the Tamils and vice versa – you both are the two sides of the same coin. With hardly any contributions to the world at large, failed states like yours are a menace to the world. With the kind of vision that is setforth on this piece for a future national identity, it is clear that you guys – Tamils and Sinhalese – won’t be coming down from your trees for a very very long time.

Jehan said,

May 15, 2009 @ 2:32 pm

Niranjan and Idealist – When I say the idea of Sinhala Only has died, I do not mean that there aren’t the occasional stragglers who continue to believe in it. What I mean is that this idea is no longer actionable. There is no political or public appetite for it, as far as I am aware, not even within that bastion of Sinhala Buddhism, the Jathika Hela Urumaya. Correct me if I am wrong.

Secondly, Niranjan, what you say about English is partly correct, but it IS an official language according to the constitution. It is NOT a national language. Of course there are problems in the quality of English education, but knowledge of English is improving. Yes, there isn’t widespread use of Tamil in government institutions, but it is improving, and there is a prevalent belief that government institutions should be multilingual, hence the move to make knowledge of the other national language necessary for promotion in the civil service. Besides, with a constitutional guarantee, if you don’t like it, you have legal recourse. That’s important.

AJ Perera – Clearly, you and I have very different ideas, but I think we agree that the suffering of the civilians should be minimised. After all these years, I am surprised that you think that can be achieved by keeping the LTTE alive. I am even more surprised that you think it can be achieved by keeping them restricted indefinitely to such a small area in the hands of the LTTE, without food, water, medicine or shelter. As for your proposed solution of hoping the LTTE is overthrown by a bunch of unarmed civilians… I am sorry… I thought your intention was to minimise deaths?

In this PR game the civilian hostages are like God. Each person speaks in their name, but actually they are merely speaking for themselves, expressing their own interests. Your opinion does not give me much cause to think that you are any different. If the government changes its strategy to what you espouse, I think the civilian deaths would be far greater.

DDM – I will post the reply I sent you via email in a few hours.

Mohan – Thanks, dad.

madhatter said,

May 15, 2009 @ 2:45 pm

Thoughtful analysis but I strongly object to the fraudulent byline at the bottom. What pub quiz ??!!!

Good work all the same and let’s hope we soon have, at least a bit of respite, from all the madness for a while.

Jehan said,

May 15, 2009 @ 5:23 pm

Emailed reply to ddm:

“OK, so if I understand you correctly the basis of your argument is that for Tamil aspirations to be satisfied there needs to be a greater devolvement of power with regard to taxation and without this aspect any solution would fail, yes? This means that there needs to be constitutional reform and that constitutional reform can only be motivated by some form of international intervention?

I don’t think I am in disagreement with you, in theory, with the first part. I would like to see a greater degree of autonomy for the regions, and I support a federal solution. However, I am not sure whether the 13th Amendment solution is doomed to fail without this. To clarify what I mean by fail: I do not think that the dissatisfaction of the Tamil people at the insufficiencies in the 13th Amendment would lead to an armed uprising again. This is largely because I think that as long as we have this experience of war (and I do not mean the memory of suffering here, I mean the actual military skill base necessary to effectively prosecute a military solution) exists that there will be no room for those grievances to raise their head in an organised and violent way. Our military is too powerful for that now – they will nip it in the bud. That is unless there is a significant downsizing of the military in the coming years to pre-war levels, something I don’t think will happen.

I cannot see a way in which the motivation for constitutional reform would happen without a radical change in the status quo. With their immediate post-war popularity, the government might be able to raise the necessary 2/3rds support in the House, but I don’t think there is a framework on the table, and even if the government is willing, this will take too long and the proposed legislation would only be ready in a year that the government is far more unpopular. (It is upsetting that MR wants to have presidential elections now. This indicates that he is insecure about his popularity in 2011. That’s depressing – how bad does he think things will get by then?)

Even with international pressure, the government still needs a 2/3rd majority in parliament, and I fail to see how any government or any form of international pressure is going to bring about that, unless of course, we have a situation where the opposition party decides to be magnanimous, abandons realpolitik and refuses to use anti-devolution as an election campaign stance.”

Nicolai said,

May 15, 2009 @ 6:38 pm

Idealist, you say that Sinhala only ideals are alive and kicking.

Well you probably know a heck of a lot more about this than I. However, in my demographic, there are some developments that I find hopeful. My demographic is the IT sector and I did attend the BMICH conference on “2009, the year of IT and English” Keynoted by the very impressive Narayan Moorthy.
As an aside, he was supposed to be the guru who would help implement it here, but in the end turned it down probably because he was threatened with his life (the Tamils were protesting) and he high-tailed it back to India as fast as he could.

I did however, leave the conference feeling very positive about the efforts being made to promote IT and English. This sector, granted it is a “white collar” and represents a very small percentage of the population but one which has a very highly motivated group of young individuals from all walks of life. They know that English coupled with IT is their way out. They have to learn English and they know it. Let the old die-hards die off. Let’s look to the young and what they want.

I saw Aravind Adiga of “White Tiger” fame recently on TV saying something like “the only way out for the regular guys in India is to either get into politics or into crime”. This definitely also applies to Sri Lanka as well. Just look at the two-bit Yakko 3rd level ministers in their first ever car, a BMW accompanied by Defender Jeeps as they practically run you over while they take a trip to their local cade for a condensed milk infused morning tea. Ooops sorry guys Elitist Alert!!

But I think you can add IT professional to that list, but they need English with it and these young folk know it for sure. In the end surely economic ideals should prevail over racist ideals.

Hey maybe I should change my name to IDEALIST and you change yours to REALIST?

kichchi said,

May 15, 2009 @ 7:31 pm

“it will be one which offers some degree of autonomy to the people who reside in those areas, whether it is through the full implementation of the 13th Amendment or through a federal solution and constitutional reform.”

All the above ideas combined is in the APPEAL given below:

Probably the BEST possible POLITICAL solution might be
An earnest APPEAL to all those who strive for sustainable peace in Sri Lanka
“The lack of engagement and communication, in turn adds to the sense of estrangement. This is not in the interests of either side, particularly the Sri Lankan people who yearn for peace, a just solution to the ethnic conflict and the hope of prosperity at least for their children.” – so said Jehan Perera, Executive Director of the National Peace Council.
With the above end in view please spare a part of your valuable time to ABSORB the meaning of the views submitted below.
Too much of time has been wasted in discussing the origins of the problems and the paths taken by various real patriotic and peace-loving persons to solve the problems in the ways they sincerely believed as the best. The problems have grown and evolved and had been twisted by many to suit their way of thinking.
So, it is high-time we start re-thinking in terms of a solution that would address NEARLY ALL THE PROBLEMS rather than continue to criticize other people for their “faults”.
Failures are the pillars of success. We have learned a lot of things through experience. With the experiences gained we will have to work for a change of heart not just a change of mind of all the people in the country.
“People who value democracy, equality and equity, needs to pressure the Sri Lankan state to take immediate action towards a meaningful and just power sharing arrangement. That is the only way to ensure security and the dignity of the peoples of Sri Lanka.
If peaceful coexistence through power sharing is not achievable, the only other solution that would be available will be secession” so said Mr. Lionel Bopage, former Secretary of the JVP.
There is a vast difference in the policy and thinking of the ORIGINAL JVP to which Mr.Lionel Bopage belongs and the policy of the present JVP.
A new concept that moves towards a meaningful and just power-sharing arrangement based on real democracy, equality, equity and a great deviation from the usual thinking of the meaning of the word “devolution” is given below for the perusal and comments of concerned people.
Many, who call themselves as ‘moderates’ and advocating a “Unitary State” in principle, are not willing to consider this NEW concept which gives a certain degree of ‘power’ with ‘responsibility’ to everyone including the poor and voiceless silent majority in the country and not excluding the so-called “minorities” and still maintain the “character” of a “Unitary State”
Now, one word, for those who are actually and sincerely interested in fostering a unitary-state by supporting “devolution” as a means to achieve sustainable peace, please avoid thinking in terms of “devolution” and instead please try to think in terms of “sharing” of powers, rights, duties and responsibilities that cannot be taken back at any time by any government or individual by any method.
The best political solution to address many of the problems faced by many sections of the Sri Lankan society – particularly the poor, the politically weak and the “minorities” who do not carry any “political weight” – would be to DILUTE the powers of all elected representatives by separating the various powers of the Parliament and empowering different sets of people’s representatives elected on different area basis to administer the different sets of the separated powers at different locations.
It has to be devolution HORIZONTALLY where every set of representatives would be in the SAME LEVEL as equals and in par and NOT VERTICALLY, where one set of representatives would be above (more powerful than) the other, which is the normal adopted practice when talking of devolution, in this power-hungry world. It is because of “devolution” being evolved “vertically”, we have all the trouble in this power-hungry world. So, for sustainable peace it should not be the present form of “devolution” but “dilution of powers” or “sharing of powers” in such a way that no single or set of peoples representatives is superior to another.
This system would eradicate injustice, discrimination, bribery and corruption – the four pillars of an evil society – and help to establish the “Rule of Law” and “Rule by ALL” for sustainable peace, tranquility and prosperity and a pleasant harmonious living with dignity and respect for all the inhabitants in the country. Everyone must have “equal” powers, rights, duties and responsibilities and most importantly everyone should be deemed “equal” before the law not only on paper but also practically – be it the Head of State, The Chief Justice or the voiceless poor of the poorest in the country.
Since all political and other powers flow from the sovereignty of the people, it is proposed herein that these powers be not given to any ONE set of representatives but distributed among different sets of people’s representatives (groups) elected on different area basis (village and villages grouped) to perform the different, defined and distinct functions of one and the same institution – the Parliament – like the organs of our body – heart, lungs, kidneys, eyes, nose, ear etc. – performing different and distinct functions to enable us to sustain normal life.
A detailed version of the concept, which is quite long is available for discussion by interested individuals with an aim to change the hearts not just a change of mind of the citizens of this country who aim to preserve a UNITARY form of Government with every section of people from every part of the country PRACTICALLY PARTICIPATING in the GOVERNANCE OF THE COUNTRY in a meaningful way. In a way it may be termed “participatory democracy”. In this system the COUNTRY IS NOT DIVIDED but the “powers of governance’ of the Parliament is separated and administered COLLECTIVELY by different sets of peoples representatives.
The system suggested is neither for a federal state for which “Thanthai Chelva” worked hard through non-violent means for nearly thirty years nor the “Two State Solution” for which the LTTE is fighting through violent means for more than thirty years. It is a combination of both and is between both.
The solution advocated can be compared to the policy of the EPDP – a partner in the present government – “self-governance at Regional Level and collective governance at the National Level”. The main difference between my suggestion and that of the EPDP is that my suggestion is for sharing of power horizontally and EPDP’s suggestion is for sharing power vertically. EPDP’s suggestions are for addressing the aspirations of the Tamils and my suggestions are for addressing the aspirations of the PEOPLE OF SRI LANKA and not of any political party. A careful perusal of my suggestions in FULL will convince the truth.

Give and Take is the best policy. Rule or control your “self” and allow everyone to rule themselves.

LIVE AND LET LIVE

IF THERE IS A SINCERE WILL to treat all inhabitants with dignity and as citizens enjoying equal rights in this country, then THE ABOVE IS A WAY

The above suggestions are by a voiceless member of the silent majority who wants all voice to be heard.

Anuruddha Fernando said,

May 15, 2009 @ 8:29 pm

Jehan,

I feel I couldn’t agree with you more – the nature of socio-economics within the framework of the elusive post colonial identity has engendered this prolonged conflict, I fear is inherent to the nature of most of our fellow Sri Lankans (30 years of war can do that).

What I find particularly galling is the fact that certain empiricists that first created the problem now claim to have the solution (or at least a handle on things) to the results of their initial intervention.

However, it is truly sad that so many fellow Sri Lankans are caught between two ideologies (now, perhaps, one is dominant over the other: almost), and are paying for that coincidence with nothing less that their lives; and even worse, their psyches.

But we still have hope, as utopian as it may be, that this avoidable war will end, and finally every Sri Lankan, everyone, will find their voice and a collective identity that is ‘Nation’.

Brilliantly elaborated upon my friend: CHEERS!

Anu

The Underdog said,

May 16, 2009 @ 1:15 am

Jehan: excellent article and excellent point that the nations that participated in WW2 were never the same afterwards. Though the warmongering Germans and Japanese came out of it slapped and shamed into pacifists, the U.S., U.K., and Russia came out of it more belligerent than ever (especially the U.S.). In other words, the losers became lovers of peace, the winners walked around stepping on anyone that dared look at them. What does that predict for us? Who won this war? Was it the Sinhala? Was it the southern (non-Colombo-elite) ruling class? Was it the vastly expanded and influential army? Or…was it Sri Lanka? How we answer that question will probably define our identity, and I anticipate a dangerous tussle to claim ownership of the laurels of victory.

Ramani Gunatilaka said,

May 16, 2009 @ 12:31 pm

This is an excellent article, Jehan.
However, I have never subscribed to federalism as a solution to the conflict. This is because as an economist myself, I believe that an electoral system based on territorial units goes against the agglomeration forces of the market, and in the long run exacerbates rather than mitigates economic inequalities which give rise to conflict.
How this happens is explained by the new economic geography literature on which the World Bank’s most recent World Development Report is based. Its overview alone is well worth a read. The report’s main message is that economic growth WILL be regionally unbalanced. To try to spread out economic activity is to discourage it. But development can still be inclusive, in that even people who start their lives far away from economic opportunity can benefit from the growing concentration of wealth in a few places. The way to get both the benefits of uneven growth and inclusive development is through economic integration with people moving where the jobs are and jobs being generated in geographical locations which have comparative and competitive advantages.
Therefore we need to concentrate on developing people and removing the barriers they face to mobility, whether in terms of skills or places of residence rather than trying to develop all areas equally. This will also look after the needs of Tamils and Muslims, and admittedly, poor Sinhalese living in the suburbs of Colombo, whose problems will not be solved by greater devolution of powers to the provinces anyway. It will also help Tamils currently living in the North and East who wish to move to other parts of the country, which I am sure they would like to do in search of better opportunities.
A political system based on spatial units simply creates a peripheral ratchet, forcing the distribution of resources thinly on the ground and distributing poverty rather than prosperity. It would make more sense to reform institutions so that people can move freely as opportunities occur, wherever that may be, rather than keeping people in whatever backward region they may be in, and trying to give them the opportunities available to those living in Colombo. A federal structure cannot deliver this. We need to get real about what we can and cannot do.

Jehan said,

May 17, 2009 @ 2:47 am

Ramani,

Thanks for your comment. I understand the need to have greater mobility of labour and capital across all regions of the country so that, for example, a Tamil Sri Lankan may have the right and opportunity to invest where he thinks will give him the most return, and a Sinhalese Sri Lankan would have the ability to work wherever she may choose to do so. This would result in greater economic growth and prosperity for all, and is the basis for founding of common markets like the European Union. The other side of the coin is India, where the federal structure has manifested itself in different taxes in different states which makes it a nightmare for any investor who wants to do business across states, even if it is just to produce in one state and transport his goods across the country – a process that would require him having to figure out and pay a complex myriad of different taxes in each state, each with their own peculiar economic structure.

This conflict definitely has roots in economic alienation. The Sinhalese unemployed became the JVP, and the Tamil unemployed became the LTTE. So, it is important to make sure that in the post-war period we try to bring economic prosperity to the groups that have so far been marginalised.

However, this is not the only thing and I am not at all sure that it what matters most. Security is paramount. It is crucial that Tamil Sri Lankans feel secure and are able to some extent at least protect themselves by providing security for themselves. While the LTTE had its roots in feelings of discrimination and experience of economic alienation, the conflict was exacerbated in 1983 when the actual security of Tamil Sri Lankan property, homes and lives were threatened. This is the strongest memory for most Tamil Sri Lankans at home and abroad. ForTamils at home and abroad to feel confident about investing, spending and working in this economy, it is a crucial condition that they feel secure that something like 1983 will not happen again, when they felt there was nowhere in their own country where they could have the protection of the state. I would like to see a police force in majority Tamil regions that is made up of and controlled by the ethnic make-up of those areas. This is an insurance against any future central government negligence with regard to the security of Tamil Sri Lankans.

I don’[t know whether we require a change in the constitution and a new federal system to make this happen, or whether it is possible under a full implementation of the 13th Amendment.

niranjan said,

May 18, 2009 @ 4:01 pm

jehan-Sinhala and Tamil are the two official languages of Sri Lanka. English is a link language under the constitution. In the 13 amendment 2. (b) English is given the status of a link language. The 13 amendment was a result of the Indian intervention in 1987. If the Indians had not intervened we would not have had English even as a link language.

However, a good standard of English needs to be taught at all levels of education beginning from pre-grade in all schools. The problem is to find good teachers. At least the President has started a programme to train our teachers in India and for them to come back to Sri Lanka and teach other teachers.

I can also tell you that I know people who have a superb command of the English language both written and spoken who still insist that a good standard of English is not necessary and that we can progress without it. Quite a few of them belong to the older generation, but they are most certainly around.

Nicolai-I know that the IT sector and BPO’s need people who know English. That is the very reason we need to encourage the teaching of it. But a farmer or a fisherman does not need the language. They can get by without it. A majority of people in this country are farmers. Agriculture is still the dominant vocation even though it is a small percentage of GDP.

There is no huge demand for Englsih outside of Colombo City and Kandy City perhaps. If you look at Vijitha Yapa bookshop they have English books for sale in all their branches in Colombo and Kandy. But they do not sell English books in other parts of the country simply because there is no demand for such books. To put it simply people in those parts of the country cannot read, write, speak or understand English.

If you take Colombo University arts faculty there are loads of graduates passing out without a command of written or spoken English. They have done their degrees in the Sinhala medium and when they pass out they find it difficult to get employed.

This country needs English educated people badly. There is no question about that. But the question is how are we going to get there. Is massive state intervention the answer ?

Niranjan

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment

This is a moderated forum. Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. Please do not post comments that are off topic, defamatory, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Comments are automatically scanned for spam and obscenity.

Comments are only approved if they are in line with the site guidelines. Those that do not will be edited or deleted without prior intimation. Comment approval may take up to 24 hours.

Thanks in advance for your civil and constructive engagement.

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free