By Under Dog

Amidst the bombs, the war, the white vans, and the checkpoints, I look back with fond memories of the ceasefire. It brought four glorious years of peace and prosperity, and also did what the naysayers said could never happen—it split the LTTE in two. Karuna, the LTTE’s fiercest combat commander, and an incessant thorn in our side during the ill-fated Jayasikurui operation, decided he wanted out. Perhaps he wanted a bigger share of the spoils from the LTTE money machine, perhaps more authority, or perhaps he had a lover’s quarrel with Prabhakaran (when the Dear Leader asked ‘do I look fat in this?’ he shouldn’t have recommended changing the uniforms to vertical stripes). Anyway, the truth is we will never really know, but then rumours of internal strife within the LTTE have been rife for years: Tamilselvan vs. Prabhakaran, Pottu Amman vs. Prabhakaran, Tamilselvam vs. Pottu Amman etc. No smoke without fire, so we can assume that the LTTE hierarchy wasn’t the united brotherhood of hunky-doryness they projected to the world.

So that leaves me to think that if the ceasefire continued for a few more years, internal strife within the LTTE might have tamed the roaring tiger into an impotent pussy. Alas, it was not to be. The LTTE wanted war, perhaps to unite the squabblers with the war cry of ‘Eelam or death’ (mostly death these days), or perhaps they knew the LTTE would dissolve into the blissful oblivion of peace if the ceasefire continued. The Sinhala-Buddhists wanted war because…because they are Sinhala and Buddhist and they want to keep it that way (and everyone just loves a good war—especially when we think we’re winning). But then what about the Tamils in the north? Did you want war? Was the ceasefire too peaceful for you? Did you miss the checkpoints and the harassment and the refugee camps so much that you wanted it back? Did you miss the exercise of running away from artillery and MBRL’s and the aerial bombs?

No, I’m not trying to be cruel. But I do miss the ceasefire, and I am against this pointless war. That supposedly makes me a traitor to my Sinhala ethnicity and an LTTE sympathizer. So be it. There’s something about young boys and girls killing each other, coming home limbless and scarred for life that doesn’t quite compute. There’s something about Tamils being dragged off in the night because they look ‘suspicious,’ or bussing them out of Colombo because this isn’t their home that makes my stomach turn. There’s something about bombs on buses and trains, and claymores in the streets that makes me retch. But I put my Sinhala vote where my views are by voting for Ranil in the last presidential election. I thought ceasefire good, war bad, so I voted for the ceasefire guy. What about the Tamils in the North? Why didn’t you vote? Yeah, I know the LTTE told you not to, but you didn’t have to listen to them. Whatever they threatened to do to you then, could it be any worse than what is happening to you now?

WHY DIDN’T YOU VOTE?!

• Bus bombs
• A question to the government and the LTTE
• Is it a crime to be a Tamil in Sri Lanka?
• ‘I want a decent Education’ – A twelve year old’s plea
• From Akkaraipattu

I don’t want to end up being a stupid old man
Just look at what they have done to our world in vain
What’s the big deal in going to the moon
As he yet settles score by inflicting pain
War on terror, crusade or witch hunts
Stupid old men run scared to ruin
Peace on earth has little chance to shine

I wonder whether it’s the testosterone drain
that give men the jitters when age is on the gain
I need to wise up and control this mind game
Or else I will end up a stupid old man

Dig not my heals in the old men’s club
When science of Descartes takes the quantum leap
Calling it mumbo jumbo quackery they oppress
The new magic of now you see and now you don’t
Prophesies are fulfilled with the power of belief
Believe love and happiness, we get well
Believe hate and sadness, we get sick

The new science says we are all joined at the hip
The birds, trees, stones and oceans of hope
Effects have a cause so it is all linked up
So I better be mindful of what I say and do
Compassion and love for everything too
Or I will also end up a stupid old man - hell no !!

In our desperate search for truth, we cling on to explanations supposedly scientifically proven and then anchor our beliefs on them.  Once we decide on such a truth, it becomes gospel and we defend it at all cost.   When we are certain, we invest in this truth, build infrastructure and create empires.  When we invest our time and wealth, we are entrenched and then defend this truth at all cost. 

Such is this truth that matter and mind are separate.  We have had 500 years of this truth and shed much blood to defend it.  Now we see our folly, yet reluctantly, as we have invested too much in it.   We are still shedding blood for it, like we see in the middle-east and other wars that are going around in the world.

The mind - matter separation undeniably destroys our environment and society, as we are not looking at our universe as a part of one system.   As long as we live on the truth that the human is supreme, we will continue this destruction. 

Yet, we have now a new generation of humans who have a more balanced view.  The old truths are being questioned, especially in the industrialized world, who will be most impacted by any change for the larger good.   Call them ‘cultural creatives’ or ‘tempered radicals’, they will no doubt have to and many are willing to give up a certain lifestyle they have been used to through this change. 

Yet, the wealth and power lies in the hands of the ‘old men’ who cling to the old truth.  The arms, oil industry and the medical establishment are their pillars. 

Say to them, oil destroys the environment and they fight back.  Say to them ayurveda and homeopathy is more holistic, they condemn it. 

By the time we change all this it may be too late for us. The establishment maybe old but they have a lot of life in them yet.

So how do we get these old men to question these old truths?

How do we nudge them to think about this world as a part of one system ?

How do we help them to get out of their Cartesian slumber ? 

Ideas are welcome !!

• Brotherhood Bloodshed Again?
• Treachery, Egotism and Myth in our politics
• Until the Guns are silent
• Peace in the playground
• Views of the Periphery - A presidential candidate with a transitional programme

The idea that economic sanctions might be an alternative to the use of force received attention after the First World War, largely owing to President Woodrow Wilson’s advocacy. Since World War II, Economic sanctions have been employed to promote democracy and human rights, to end civil war, to stop drug trafficking, to fight terrorism, to combat weapons proliferation, and to promote nuclear disarmament. Since the creation of the United Nations in 1945, the Security Council has imposed sanctions in fifteen cases: Southern Rhodesia (1966), South Africa (1977), Iraq (1990), former Yugoslavia (1991), Liberia (1992), Libya (1992), Somalia (1992), Angola (1993), Haiti (1993), Rwanda (1994), Sudan (1996), Sierra Leone (1997), Federal Republic of Yugoslavia/Kosovo (1998), Afghanistan (1999), and Ethiopia and Eritrea (2000). The UN charter explicitly allows for the imposition of sanctions.

We are now faced with the possible withdrawal of GSP+, a trade preference allowed to us by the European Union which has contributed largely to our garment exports to the EU. Its withdrawal we are told will lead to the shutdown of several garment factories and loss of employment for about 100,000 women workers whose livelihood depends on it. Ranil has offered to support the Government in its efforts to prevent it.

Is it ethical to deprive the livelihood of so many workers? The EU will say the remedy lies with the Government of Sri Lanka. The present regime has a pretty atrocious human rights record. Whether the Armed Forces and the Police are directly involved or not, it is the duty of the government to see that such violations of human rights like abductions, disappearances and extra-judicial killings are properly investigated and the culprits brought to book. We cannot forget Father Jim Brown. Whenever some incident of abduction, a disappearance or killing is reported in the media the government promises to investigate and bring the culprits to book. But there are no results to show for any such investigations. Some people think the Government merely repeats the promise of investigation as a mantra until the people and the media forget the incident. Hardly anyone has been caught and punished. Even the Presidential Commission of Inquiry has come in for criticism. The International Observers- the IIEGP under Justice Bhagwati has left expressing their disappointment at the lack of political will to enforce justice.

Is it ethical to withdraw trade preferences to punish a state for failure to comply with human rights? Can we blame the EU? We are reminded of the saying of Our Lord “Man does not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God”. God wants freedom for the individual and he instituted the rulers to ensure that they enforce justice fairly between citizens. So there is a moral obligation on the government to see that it protects the freedom of the individual and that he is not made subject to arbitrary punishment by other citizens. He must be dealt with according the law and the Rule of Law must be upheld. The present government cannot claim to be doing so at least in respect of the Tamil population. Our government is rightly criticized as a violator of human rights. It is a pity that the vulnerable population of women workers should suffer for the sins of their political masters. It would be more just if coercive pressures could be more selectively targeted against decision-making elites, rather than vulnerable populations. But then as long as the culprits are protected by the regime there is no way to do so.

“Vigorous economic development leads to independent thinking. People hope to be able to fully satisfy their free will and see their rights fully protected” said – Lee Teng-hui, Taiwan President.

Although the general rule for governments should be non-interference with free trade, governments often cite several cases to justify economic sanctions.

(1) Sanctions would be legitimate in preventing trade that would directly enhance an enemy’s military capability.

(2) Sanctions would be legitimate in preventing a country from profiting from the use of slave labor. Because individuals have property in their lives and labor, selling goods made by slave labor is akin to selling stolen property.

(3) Sanctions would be legitimate in preventing the exporting and importing of goods produced by political prisoners who have not violated anyone’s rights to life, liberty, or property. (4) Sanctions would be legitimate in protecting the rights of minors. (5) Sanctions would be legitimate in safeguarding intellectual property rights. In the case of the EU it insists also on protecting trade union rights and enforcement of fair labor standards.

Depriving the country of GSP+ is also a way for the EU to dissociate itself from the present regime and this fact should also be borne in mind by the Government. We are living in a globalized world where every nation is dependent on others not only for trade but for many other matters. Remember how the EU came to the support of the country after the recent tsunami. The EU has given us over $ 1 billion since the tsunami in humanitarian assistance and concessionary loans for development. Fighting the terrorist war can and must be done without violating the human rights of the people. If a government were also to resort to the same terror tactics as the terrorists what then is the difference between them? Won’t we get bracketed with regimes like North Korea or Iran? The USA may get away with violations of human rights in its war on terror but can we? The EU is our friends and the Government  should bear that in mind. They mean well and it is up to the Government to make some positive gestures in the matter of human rights enforcement and the Rule of Law.

We call upon the Government to set right its record on the enforcement of human rights and the rule of law. The first step to show its bona fides is by setting up the Constitutional Council and allowing it to provide protection to Heads of Departments like the Police to discharge their duties according to the law. The independence of the Judiciary must also be protected and the Attorney General and the IGP should be called upon to charge all those politicians who have violated the criminal law or resorted to corruption as reported in the COPE Report. 

• Notes of a Citizen Journalist
• Doing Business with Myanmar
• Journalist Pakkiyanathan Vijayashanthan who went missing reported to Badulla Police station
• Too tired to say ‘human rights’
• The Government must uphold the Rule of Law

I took it upon myself to follow and stop the bus and to give the driver some feedback on his bad behaviour.   Unfortunately, my temper had got in the way and I could not string my words together coherently, so I left the scene.  The bus driver decided that I had no business pulling him up, so began chasing me further down the Galle Road.  His behavior became more erratic and dangerous trying to catch me, so I decided I should lose him by speeding further.   I then wondered whether I should have left all this alone in the first place and continued on my way, minding my own business. 

This is our biggest dilemma.  Should we just turn a blind eye to this kind of unsociable and dangerous behavior or escalate it, even at the risk of further problems, hoping that the perpetrators will learn?

Having experienced many of these encounters with not much success in changing the general behavior, I now think we should look at the root cause of this problem, rather than take the law into our own hands.

I was deep in tought the rest of that journey wondering “what motivates such unsociable behavior, especially from people who are serving the public ?”.   My mind went to public transit systems in countries such as Singapore, Kuala Lumpur and London, Toronto and realized how they take this public responsibility for safety and good service so seriously.

What has gone wrong in a nation where our traditional social values are based on respect for each other, generosity and hospitality ?

I also wondered whether the driver had a family and children and how he would react if they were subjected to that kind of danger.

Does this behavior arise from liberal economic policies and privatization where competition and money making is the order of the day ?.  

Why have we allowed such a free fall system to take root without rules based on ethics and discipline ?

Is money becoming the ultimate form of power in Sri Lanka ?

Where are all the good people and why are they silent ?

These are questions we all need to ponder on.

In my work with organizations both public and private as a leadership trainer, I come across hundreds of people every month who are concerned about all this.  They feel helpless in a system that seems so politicized and dangerous, so they go about their lives suffering silently.

How can Sri Lanka advance as a nation when its people are suffering these finds of indignities in the hands of a few ?   Where is the justice ?.

A nation without justice is a nation with low social esteem.  A nation with low social esteem will remain poor and disadvantaged in a globalized world.

Do we want to remain as such or should we speak out ?

Over to you.

• How high is our Social Esteem in Sri Lanka?
• Terraffic
• Meditation for a divided nation
• “I need to move out of this camp and have a place of my own”
• Stanley Rd Closure Affects Traders In Jaffna

First they said that they would allow us to go to our village with in a month. Then they said after 06 months. Finally they said that they would resettle us when The Defense Ministry would give an order only they would allow us to go. We still remain IDPs unable to go back to our villages.

Since we engage in fishing at Achankullam Nannattan, we temporarily settled down there. On 22.04.08 our sons Mr. Rongalin age 20 & Mr.Sutherson Peries age 22, went to Nannattan to take photo graphs for navy identity cards around 3.30 pm.

While they were returning from Nanattan to Achankullam at 5.30 pm, unidentified men, who came in a motor cycle shot them with a pistol at Karrunkamurrippu which is located between Achankullam & Nanattan. An army sentry point is just one km from this place.              

My son Mr. Rongalin was the bread winner of my (Mr. Justin’s) family. As I am a paralyzed patient I could not do any work. My family faced untold hardship. There are no words to express my untold hardship.

Mr.Sutherson Peries was the only son in Mr. Susaiappu’s family who has 03 daughters, who are yet to be married.. And the family was dependant on his earnings. We lost their properties & wealth when we were displaced. We can bear the loss of property and other materialistic things, but how are we to bear the loss of these two children. This never ending war is plucking so many youngsters and leaving the older generation in despair and worthless. When will this suffering end?

Narrated by two displaced fathers from Arrippu Mannar, Musali IDPS

• BATTICALOA CONSORTIUM OF HUMANITARIAN AGENCIES FACILITATING TO THE BATTICOLA IDPS
• Abandoned War Displaced People From Border Villages
• A veteran internally displaced person (IDP)
• Homeless in one’s homeland
• The cost of liberation…

Restrictions, guidelines and best practices

• For text, we request that you send us documents in Word, RTF, ODF or as plain text. 
• We accept photos, but may reduce the size of images to fit the design of the site. 
• We accept audio and video up to 25 megabytes. We prefer MP3 recordings for audio and MP4 recordings for video. 
• When leaving a voicemail message or sending us an audio recording, please say who you are (or want to be called) and where you are calling from / located. We have no way or desire to check whether what you say is true, but strongly encourage you to be as forthcoming as possible as it helps foster discussions when others can identify you with a name and location.
• There’s no time limit for voicemails, but we encourage you to be short and to the point. 
• For textual content, please let us know the name you wish to be published under - whether you own or a pseudonym of your choosing.
• With all submissions, we encourage you to send us an email of your choosing, so that we and others can get in touch with you if necessary. 
• Groundviews reserves the right to edit, as it sees fit, any content sent to us before publication. 
• Content that does not meet the site guidelines will be deleted. 

To send content via email or though MMS on your mobile phone:
groundviews@drop.io

To leave voicemail messages:
+1-646-495-9201 x 38888

Dial the number above and when the service asks you for the code, punch in 38888. Use Skype if you are not in the US and don’t have, or can’t afford, IDD.

To send us a fax:
International
To send us a fax, please prepend this coversheet and send it to +1-856-632-1999 or +1-856-632-7000. Faxes without this cover sheet will not reach us.

From Sri Lanka
Send c/o Groundviews to +94-11-4714460. No cover-sheet necessary, but it would help if you sent one with sender details.

Direct Upload
Simply click on Add, navigate to the file(s) you want to send us, and hit Upload.

• Groundviews back online, with new features and enhanced for mobile phones
• Tamilnet banned? - How to continue to access the site from Sri Lanka
• Groundviews on Twitter
• New email subscription service and Facebook integration
• Scheduled downtime for Groundviews

Firstly, the SF/PIRA and the British Government recognised the existence of a military stalemate.  

Most protracted conflicts by their very nature are stalemates, but conflicting parties are unwilling to recognise this. In NI however both SF /PIRA and the British government did finally recognise that the ‘troubles’ had become ‘a flat unpleasant terrain stretching into the future providing no later possibilities for decisive escalation or for graceful escape’.

At the outset of the conflict, the PIRA believed that its guerrilla campaign would force the British to withdraw from NI quite soon. They didn’t account for fierce resistance from unionists to ending partition and British policy to fight what was seen as terrorism.  The war prolonged. The PIRA did attempt to break this deadlock in 1985 by way its own tet offensive, but the plan went awry and a long stalemate again seemed inevitable. Britain increasingly recognised that the kind of warfare fought by the PIRA could not be beaten or even suppressed except by means which were not acceptable in a democratic state or to international standards of human rights. The PIRA did not have similar constraints but it became more difficult to inflict casualties on the British military and prevent British intelligence infiltration of its cells. In 1990s, the PIRA compensated by bomb attacks mainly in the UK from department stores to rail lines, but both parties were forced to conclude that the war could not be won or lost by either party, which meant that they had to reassess their options.  

Secondly, the Sinn Fein (SF), the political wing of the PIRA was willing to move away from armed struggle and pursue a political solution.

The twin pillars of PIRA ideology at the outset was Irish union and armed struggle as the only way to achieve that goal. As it happened, given the stalemate and the ascendancy of Gerry Adams within SF, much of republican strategy came to be driven by SF, facilitated by the fact that Adams enjoyed membership in the PIRA Army Council. In the 1980s a leading faction within SF led by Adams had come to believe that military force alone might be insufficient to achieve their goal, and the decision was taken to complement the armed struggle with politics. The aim was to become the voice of Catholic nationalism in NI in order to put pressure for British withdrawal through both the ‘armalite and the ballot box’.

This change of policy had enormous implications for the organizational shape and ideological direction of republican politics. It transformed SF from a poor cousin of the PIRA into a political organisation in its own right. Of course, once SF set out to capture and hold pubic support at the electoral level, it had to do so in a democratic context which proved to be a challenge. Despite long standing Catholic grievances, Catholic support for PIRA’s violent tactics oscillated. With the ascendancy of John Hume’s moderate Social Democratic and Liberal Party (SDLP) in 1980s, SF could never eclipse the SDLP at the polls.

It is in this context that the SF began questioning the efficacy of armed struggle in achieving its goals and whether or not politics might provide a complete alternative to the armed struggle. In the mid 1980s, Adams began to explore an ‘honourable exit’ in a way he could carry the republican movement with him. Following secret negotiations with the British government in Dec. 1993, he got Britain to declare that 1) it had no strategic interest in NI, 2) that it was prepared to allow SF into negotiations provided violence is renounced, 3) that it is willing to convene a conference without imposing its will on the deliberations and implement any settlement in legislation, even though 4) physical withdrawal from NI was not possible. On these grounds, SF could secure the first PIRA ceasefire in August 1994, although it is only able to participate in multi party negotiations following a second ceasefire declared in June 1997.  He also entered into a dialogue with the Irish Republic, the SDLP and the Irish American diaspora with a view to developing a pan nationalist axis for Irish unity.

The remarkable achievement of SF and the Adams’ leadership is that it secures a ceasefire without seriously splitting the organization. The total decommissioning of PIRA arms and a final end to the armed struggle however came much later following changes in the international security context following 9/11 that further tilted the power balance in favour of SF.   

Thirdly, Britain (which had sovereign authority over NI) and the Republic of Ireland (whose cooperation was necessary for a solution) had the political will to find and the political authority to implement a solution.     

Following partition of NI, Britain did not want much to do in NI. However once it sent troops and imposed direct rule, successive governments were forced to contend with a part of Britain which seemed increasingly unbritish. Withdrawal was briefly considered, but rejected as a solution. British policy from then focused on 1) Remedying the discrimination against Catholics through legislation; and 2) finding a political solution.

It helped that NI never became a party political issue either in Britain or in Ireland, even though the major parties, Labour and the Conservative party in the UK and Fianna Fail and Fine Gael in Ireland had their preferences. In Britain, it was possible because neither Catholics nor Protestants were significantly represented in the UK electorate outside NI, and governments were free to make decisions based on ‘national interest’. Even in Ireland, it did not become a party issue despite being an emotive issue for many people.     

A number of developments which led to the PIRA ceasefire in fact occurred during consecutive Conservative regimes first headed by Thatcher, and later John Major. The first PIRA ceasefire was secured by Major, although unionists’ insistence shared by the British government at the time, that the PIRA had to begin to disarm delayed the commencement of talks, and the PIRA responded by breaking the ceasefire in February 1996.  It was the election of a Labour government with a substantial majority in parliament and the election of a Fianna Fail government in Ireland that made it possible to move the peace process forward with SF participation. Once SF joined the talks, they were able to proceed in confidence that the British government had not only the commitment but the political authority to implement any agreement reached by the political parties.  

Finally, the NI peace process and its culmination in the GFA was helped by changes in the broader regional /international context.    

The end of the cold war and increasing political and economic integration of Europe had enormous implication for the conflict. No longer was it possible for the republican movement to argue that Britain had a strategic interest in preventing a united Ireland due to its need to secure NI for NATO. It also opened the opportunity for US involvement, pushed by a new coalition of influential Irish Americans known as Americans for a New Irish Agenda (during the cold war due to security concerns, the US was obliged to treat NI as an internal affair of the UK. By opening diplomatic relations with SF in January 1994, the Clinton administration showed the republican movement the kind of political legitimacy and support they could get if the path of violence was renounced. It also strengthened Adams’ leadership in his own negotiations with the hardliners within the movement to give up the armed struggle. Once the negotiations commenced the US also played the crucial role of an ‘honest broker’ in the form of Senator George Mitchell.

Furthermore, the US brought political leverage with it to NI. The personal efforts of Mitchell and Clinton in convincing the various parties to accept the terms of the agreement have been widely acknowledged. It was also responsible for resolving the most contentious issue that emerged following the GFA - the issue of decommissioning of PIRA arms. It was US pressure that eventually led the PIRA to formerly end its armed struggle in July 2005.

A number of scholars also show that European integration created an environment that made peace in NI more of a possibility. European unity made borders increasingly irrelevant, redefined the notion of national sovereignty, and created a common identity among these nations. Membership in the EU changed British / Irish sovereign claims over NI. Britain recognised the importance of Irish cooperation to deal with republican violence. Ireland, as its economy boomed under European unity became less inward looking. The Irish nationalist project to unite Ireland became less relevant. This new cooperation between Britain and Ireland was embodied in the Anglo - Irish Agreement of 1985 which forced the unionists in particular to confront a new reality of British and Irish cooperation in which they had no place nor voice. It was the threat of continued cooperation with Ireland which finally gave Britain some leverage over the unionists.

Conclusion

The negotiated settlement in NI was the result of a convergence of a number of circumstances. Or in the words of Seamus Heaney an instance where ‘hope and history’ rhymed to produce a unique accord between two conflicting parties. Even a few years before the GFA, many did not believe that this was possible. What lessons can we draw from the circumstances that made the GFA and its implementation possible?

• Sri Lanka’s Dirty War
• SRI LANKAN DEMOCRACY IN PRACTICE: 1997 - 2007
• Post-CFA politics, war and peace in Sri Lanka: A few thoughts
• The Abrogation of the CFA
• Lionel Bopage: Reflections on the Current Situation in Sri Lanka

The fundamental cause for this conflict is the perception by one race that the other race was privileged; there was a general perception racial inequality was prevalent. How did this perception arise? The origins lie in the 19th Century; the American missionaries established a wide network of schools in the Jaffna peninsula that molded an educated, English speaking group of people. The British then tapped into this ready pool of resources in order to fill posts in the Civil Service. Another reason for this was the British colonial policy of “divide and rule”; in fact, there is evidence that the British actively discriminated in favour of Tamils when allocating senior positions in the Civil Service. Hence, the Civil Service became dominated by Jaffna Tamils; their often arrogant attitude and simply the fact that this small minority held vastly disproportionate power was a cause of great resentment on the part of the Singhalese. This was amplified by the fact that Tamil’s were often able to use the administrative system more effectively; for example if a non-English speaking Tamil went to a government department the Tamil civil servants there would aid him in filling up the necessary forms etc. and explain the process in the vernacular. However since most of the Tamils did not speak Singhalese, those belonging to the Singhalese majority would not be able to do the same and hence felt resentment against the Tamils.

Economic success was another reason for the Singhalese antipathy of the Tamils. The Jaffna Tamil originated from an extremely harsh, dry environment where existence depended on careful planning and investment combined with frugal consumption. The Jaffna Tamil applied these experiences when conducting business; and was content to operate on small margins, live thriftily and ruthlessly plough back profits as investment. Therefore, a state arose where a small minority, the Jaffna Tamils, controlled a large proportion of wealth and power in Sri Lanka; the Singhalese naturally resented this modus operandi, however the power of the British Raj prevented them from actually responding.

After the bestowing of independence in 1948 the relative peace that prevailed in Sri Lanka in the preceding century was steadily eroded. The process began with the venting out of popular Singhalese umbrage against the Tamils by electing S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike for his “Sinhala Only” (a policy of making Singhalese the sole official language) policy in 1956. The treachery of S.W.R.D with regard to the Bandaranaike-Chelvanyagam Pact of 1957 amplified increasingly strained relations between the two races. These reached a boiling point in May 1958 when riots broke out in Colombo and the provinces; the most notable implication of these pogroms, besides the greater level of antagonism between the races, was that the Tamils began to lose confidence in the Government of Sri Lanka to safeguard them and treat them as equitable citizens. The primary reason was for five days the government had stood aside and had done nothing. This perception was intensified by the riots of 1977 (where the government again failed to protect Tamils from Singhalese gangs), the burning of the Jaffna Public Library (a symbol of Tamil culture and an important repository of original texts relating to the origins of the Tamils).

The role of standarisation must not be forgotten; the Jaffna Tamils depended on education for economic advancement. The introduction of standardization in 1973 meant that Jaffna Tamils would lose their niche position in the Civil Service and private sector.  In 1969, the Northern Province, which was largely populated by Tamils and compromised 7% of the population of the country, provided 27.5 percent of the entrants to science based courses in Sri Lankan universities. By 1974, this was reduced to 7%. This is repeatedly cited as evidence of State discrimination against Tamils, and hence contributed in undermining the Tamil’s confidence in the State.

In conclusion, by 1983 the Tamils were treated as second-class citizens; their language not recognized, advancement in the civil service limited, discriminated against in terms of education and not protected by their State.  Furthermore, they were considered aliens in their own land. This general perception was dominant at even the highest levels of government:

“If there is discrimination in this land which is not their (Tamil) homeland, then why try to stay here. Why not go back home (India) where there would be no discrimination. There are your kovils and Gods. There you have your culture, education, universities etc. There you are masters of your own fate”

- Mr.W.J.M. Lokubandara, M.P. in Sri Lanka’s Parliament, July 1981

This can be considered with ease as a lucid breach of the social contract; the Tamils then felt it their right to rebel and restore their rights. The Vaddukoddai Resolution of 1976 had firmly placed this restoration in terms of a separate sate. A guerilla movement emerged from those dissatisfied and brought the conflict into a new phase.

 One must not fail to note that the riots of 1983 were caused by Tamil militants viz the LTTE. Tamil militancy, by this time, had already developed to the extent where attacks of this nature ( 13 soldiers were killed) could be successfully completed; this revealed that 1983 did not instigate the ethnic conflict but was a manifestation the extent to which it had developed and that events were increasingly reaching an ever higher crescendo of violence and hatred.  The widespread backlash, the killing of thousands and the governments repeated failure to protect its citizens convinced the Tamil population that its rights would not be respected and that they would be classified as second-class citizens if they remained within the Sri Lankan state.

The next 25 years was fraught with greater violence, hatred and oppression. Both the LTTE and the government committed numerous human rights abuses. The LTTE repeatedly attacked civilians, such as the massacres at Anuradhapura in 1985 and repeatedly at border villages such as Thiripane, not to mention the bombing of busses. Government forces too have committed many violations of human rights e.g. thousands of disappearances, the killing of aid workers, and the rampages of soldiers are but a few of the many instances. The mutual animosity that existed before 1983 has deepened and matured into a state of utter mistrust and bitterness. Many, if not most, members of a certain ethnic group view the members of the other group as subhuman and not worthy of existence due to the above reasons. This psychological and sociological baggage cannot be ignored and must be dealt with if any solution is to exist today.  

In conclusion, the root cause of the ethnic issue is the feeling of inequality and oppression and for the ethnic conflict to be solved these must be dealt with; however this must be done within a framework considering the mutual hate and the deep rifts created in the last 25 years.

Today, 30^th April 2008, a country deeply divided, over 60,000 dead, a generation (or two) lost, children brainwashed, hatred and above all fear. What can be done?  The solution is simple yet concurrently complex. It is that the based on the cry of the French Revolution “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”; all ethnic groups must be treated as equals. How it is to be achieved? The solution lies in the creation of a modern liberal democratic structure that ensures the rights of all citizens are equally upheld. All citizens must be treated equally. A sense of national identity based on the principle of the nation state rather than ethnicity must be instilled and cultivated.

On a practical level this means that the government should not consider the race of a person for any purpose e.g. the indication of race on national identification is unnecessary and counterproductive. Furthermore, the use of a common non-sectarian language (such as English) should be encouraged. In addition, a culture of principle and policy, not ethnicity, politics must be encouraged. A firm independent judiciary with power to enforce its decisions must be developed. Finally, the state must be secular, in order to prevent discrimination from that direction.

For all of this to occur legislative, constitutional, administrative and sociological change must occur. The LTTE will not accept any system of plurality and hence it would be naïve to expect any change from the LTTE, or the brainwashed and oppressed people under them. The burden lies on the average Sinhala voter (the majority) to elect a government that will ensure that all these goals are achieved.  The perceptions of the Sinhala voter must be changed via education and exposure (and perhaps war weariness). Only when these goals are achieved and all ethnic groups feel they are equal citizens  the “voice of strife” be dumb and only then will “we march to a mighty purpose”, the betterment of all our citizens, united as one. 

• Between Eelam and War: Where’s the solution?
• Traditional solutions for modern day problems
• For a Sri Lankan Nationalism
• The Abrogation of the CFA
• A Small Victory for Human Rights

She was adamant that she will not give her other daughter to join the LTTE and thought it was best to flee Kalliyaddy with her 25 year old daughter. During the last six months in Kalliyaddy it had been at a risk that she was able to hide her daughter and to avoid enlistment. Since the LTTE too was forcing more people to join, she thought fit to escape to government controlled area. There was no direct land route to Kalliyaddi from Mannar, except Uiylenkullam entry point which has been closed since September last year. She, along with her daughter trekked through the jungle in the night to reach Viddalthivu at dawn amidst great risk and difficulties.  

At dawn they walked along the shallow seas until they were met by a fishing boat who agreed to take them to Mannar after listening to their plight. On arrival they registered themselves at the Grama Niladhari in Sinnakarishal. On registration they wished to come and live with me and her daughter who are residents for a very long period in Mannar. This was the sole reason for her to escape from Kalliyaddy. However, security officials (Navy) in  Puthukuddippu Mannar opposed to them staying with her daughter and made it mandatory to move into a IDP camp specially set up for people escaping from the LTTE controlled areas. I made so many representation to the officials of her old and feeble age where she needs medical care and peace of mind and the need to house them with her own daughter. My plea fell on deaf ears. An officer categorically stated that my mother in law and her daughter could be black tigers and they should be kept under watch in this IDP camp.

How on earth can they label my old mother in law a black tiger? Is it fair to look at all such people as having links with the LTTE? What is our plight? Even during her last stages in life if she cannot live with her daughter with the simple comfort we could provide, what is the use of us. What is the future for my sister-in-law? They came from a difficult area to get some solace but are now in a worse situation where she is worrying over her daughter and her health is deteriorating day by day in conditions which are not good for living - this is when she has a better place to live. The recent rains have caused havoc and living in the IDP camp is even terrible now.

Unless they get pass from the police they can not go out. My wife & I wanted to bring them to our home as my mother - in - law is a diabetic patient. We reported about this to all organizations and the Mannar GA. My wife goes to Kallimottai Murunkane very day from Karishal to look after her mother. Therefore I have to stay and look after my children with out going for work. Why do we have to face these calamities when we could lead a decent life?    

Name: Mr. Ponnambalam (name changed upon request)
Address: Sinnakarshial

• From the tiger’s den to an open prison
• Closer Look At Operation To Capture Thoppigala
• Forgotten IDPs from the North
• Sri Lankan refugees in India: “Are we the ones to bear this shame, are they the sacrifice”
• The divide between Muslims and Tamils: Perspective of an IDP

(please note the date-stamp on the video should read 25th April, NOT 24th April)

The LTTE are being blamed for the bus explosion. Latest reports say that 24 people are dead and 40 wounded.

• Scheduled downtime for Groundviews
• Whose “bomb” is it anyway?
• Blast Outside Eastern University Batticaloa
• Groundviews back online, with new features and enhanced for mobile phones
• Mobile Phones Connections Cut In Jaffna