US-Indian Resolution against Sri Lanka Only the First and not the Last

By Dilrook Kannangara

LankaWeb.com
February 29, 2012

When the illegal CFA was signed, there were widespread protests organised by patriotic groups against it. Their slogan was a ‘respectable peace’. Interestingly the current President participated in them. These protests were extremely popular although the then government tried hard without succuss to downplay them; so successful that the CFA UNF government was toppled prematurely just two years later. Similar protests were launched in 1958 against the illegal Banda-Chelva and Dudley-Chelva (1965) Pacts, 1987 Indo-Lanka Peace Accord and the political package of 2000. People burnt the political package inside and outside the parliament. PTOMS (2005) is another case of public anger against anti-national moves despite the fact that collapsing PTOMS meant no tsunami aid to people under LTTE control. An excellent move that proved invaluable when war broke out a year later. However, there aren’t any such protests today. Government sponsored protests are too politicised that only UPFA activists and organisers participate in them. The problem with government sponsored patriotic agitations is their contradiction. On one hand they support unpatriotic moves of the government and on the other they want to display patriotism to the rest.

What created this pathetic situation?

All potent patriotic individuals and groups have been subjugated by the government. Wimal Weerawansa, Patali Ranawaka, Ven Ellawala Medhananda, Ven Elle Gunawansa and most other patriots and the movements they powered have been totally subjugated by the government. As a result there are no patriotic forces that can function independently and objectively against threats facing the nation. This is a much bigger threat than the threat posed by separatists and their western warlords. To some extent they are good salespersons. They very successfully sold patriotism to voters to get elected. But once elected they have abandoned that which made them winners.

Their cheap antics are a disgrace to the nation and fail to achieve anything. People find these antics amusing. Barking, screaming, name calling, threatening and burning aimed at UN agencies and powerful UN members cannot achieve anything. Nothing was achieved this way. Only decisive action can achieve tangible outcomes.

When the government entertains TNA demands, there is no one to oppose them either in public or from within the government!

Where are the patriots within the government? Probably they have very complex excuses – which the public either cannot understand or rightfully, don’t bother to understand – for not opposing the appeasement of TNA!

Give into some demands and there will be more demands

It was silly on the part of the government to entertain TNA concerns in the first place, sometimes at the expense of national security and equality. Once these initial demands were met (some demands were more than met), TNA leaders like typical bloodhounds started making more demands. It should have been expected. Now the demands, grievances, aspirations, allegations and all other names for extortion have snowballed. It is too big for the government to handle now. TNA has not made it a secret. They openly declare their “little now, more later” strategy. Knowingly the government has fallen head first into their trap.

Stupid antics of some by the name of patriotism look even worse in this background.

When demands cannot be won through puppets, puppeteers directly get involved. Before agreeing to anything demanded by US, EU or India, the government must consult the people, China, Russia and other genuinely friendly nations. All their interests must be protected in any move. Giving into US and EU demands will not make them friends but it can turn our friends into enemies. Same goes for TNA. Giving TNA demands never make TNA any better. It only destroys the future of non-Tamils.

We are in Geneva because of incompetent reconciliation advisors

A new breed of go-betweens emerged after the war triumph in 2009. They are called reconciliation advisors who are nothing but election refuse. People repeatedly rejected them at elections defeating them. If they had done their job properly, Sri Lanka will not be in Geneva today. Thankfully at this very late hour the government has finally realized their incompetency and not appointed them to any key position to handle the impending Geneva showdown.

Reconciliation advisors argued the reason behind allegations of war crimes is the weakness in government propaganda campaign that was not consistent. Though it is true the government propaganda campaign was weak, it is only part of the problem. They naively argued that if western nations and India know the ground reality, they would not believe anything the LTTE rump is spreading. Assuming their naive argument is correct, what did they do about it? Nothing.

US, EU and India know very well the ground reality. A few dozen visitors from these places have visited Sri Lanka with annoying frequency. They know Sri Lanka is safe for Tamils; they know Tamils enjoy an unfair advantage in Sri Lanka in terms of land rights, Tamil own land laws, the right and ability to live in any part of the island nation, all fundamental rights and equal rights. There is nothing they don’t know about it. Yet they demand more. Reconciliation advisors kept advising to appease Tamils and TNA more and more until their demands snowballed to a level they cannot handle. If TNA demands were cut down at inception, they would not be making any demands today.

Geneva has destroyed all reconciliation efforts and as a result Tamils and non-Tamils are divided to the extent they were before the reconciliation process.

What to do now?

This is not the last resolution USA will be presenting against Sri Lanka. It is only the first in a series of resolutions aimed at creating Tamil Elam and appointing pro-US and pro-Indian TNA puppets as its supreme rulers. TNA leaders are now in India getting further instructions.

At the very least now, the government must recognize the danger of inaction. The only political solution is ethnic integration in the north where the problem is. The Indian model of ethnic segregation is not going to work in Sri Lanka. It is the Sri Lankan model based on ethnic integration that works. Reconciliation advisors must make an about turn from ethnic segregation efforts (devolution, power sharing based on ethnicity) to ethnic integration efforts (making sure the Jaffna peninsular is not Tamil only). Reconciliation must break barriers to integration by scrapping the Thesawalamei Law that very effectively prevents integration. Scrapping this has no negative impact on the outcome of any future election.

Legal action must be taken against TNA for conspiring against the Constitution and the nation. The 13th Amendment must be put before the public. War time solutions are not suitable for peacetimes. People can decide its suitability to modern ground realities. Scrapping the 13A can save billions of dollars every year that can go into development benefiting everyone.

The independent Tamil nation USA and India trying to create in the island to counter China, Pakistan, Burma, Sri Lanka, Russia and any other potential obstacle to neo-colonialism will be ruled by TNA. Eliminating TNA from the political sphere, legally, can disrupt their plans. It can make things easier for a proper political solution based on ethnic integration to be implemented. Similarly, western neo-colonial rulers have appointed their puppets in East Timor, Libya, etc. When it cannot be done peacefully, western colonials have used genocide to achieve it as exemplified in Diego Garcia. They provide useful geopolitical platforms to launch attacks on other nations. Giving into these moves to appease the puppeteer and the puppets is the worst the government can do. That will make Sri Lanka without any friends as friends of Lanka will find it a threat after puppet nations are created in its place.

Amidst this clamour there is resentment growing in the electorate against the government that is prepared to appease TNA at the expense of UPFA voters. Any power sharing deal no matter how weak it sounds with the TNA will be punished by voters at the next election. Since TNA will never be satisfied, no TNA voter will vote for the government. Even if they do the loss will be many times more than the gain. Losing the next national election will seal the fate of the Rajapaksha family in the hands of the opposition, US-EU axis of evil and the LTTE rump gunning for its blood. The government will be saved only to the extent it saves the interests of the people and its voters in particular.

This nation cannot stand on its own. The only way it can deflect interference from powerful nations is by having a symbolic military presence of China in the island. All nations big and small avoid confronting China for obvious reasons. There is no sense in putting off Chinese military presence in the island. It is a win-win situation for both nations which will be welcomed by most South Asian, African and Latin American nations. China is the centre of the new Non Align Movement. Sri Lanka has already aligned with China in development, finance of projects and credit. It is time to reaffirm this alignment economically, politically and militarily. Australia’s economic alignment with China saved it from one financial crisis after another. Singapore too avoided financial crises thanks to its very heavy economic alignment with China. Chinese military expertise will save Lanka from Indian sponsored separatists and any military threat they may mount.

President Premadasa successfully deflected Indian and British interference through his political and military alignment with China until Indian sponsored terror groups killed him. It is on record he is the only elected national leader since 1956 who didn’t offer any political solution to South Indian separatists. He surprised many by despatching the Indian invading army without any compromise. If anything came close to it, without a doubt it must be May 2009 when the Army Commander toured China with a military delegation at a time when India was expected to interfere in the island to avoid a “human rights catastrophe”. Since China is the only substantive lender and financier of Lankan projects, pro-western political parties have no future in Sri Lanka. If ever they come to power they will have to either lose their puppeteers and face dire consequences or lose the steady development support from China. That is a huge political incentive for the government to economically align with China. Economically, India is vastly disadvantageous to Lanka even without CEPA.

Indian action before Geneva has surprised many; it’s conduct during and after Geneva will shock them.

The Lion Flags say it ALL! 

Sri Lanka Prevails against Australia in ODI in Melbourne - March 01, 2012

Replying to Anandasangaree’s the desperate plea of a patriot for a permanent solution

By Charles.S.Perera

Lankaweb.com
November 22, 2011

Writing to the President of Sri Lanka Anandasangaree says, « Although both of us entered Parliament together in 1970, I am more senior to you in age and in politics. Hence I have a moral duty to tell you frankly what I feel about every one of your actions and decision. »

Although the writer  did not enter Parliament with Anandasangaree, he knows that Anandasangaree was a member of the LSSP . And as  the writer is of the same age as Anandasangaree he thinks he also has  a moral duty to tell Anandasangaree that he is the worst Tamil racist and a  hypocrite.  

 His membership in the LSSP had been bogus and hypocritical, because if he was a sincere member of the LSSP he cannot today speak in the language of  a separatist Tamil racist.  He was awarded the 2006 UNESCO Madanjeet Singh Prize for the promotion of tolerance and non-violence, which he did not deserve.

He  calls himself a patriot, and  the writer challenges his patriotism. A patriot is one who loves his country and his compatriots whatever their  race, colour or religion.  A patriot does not seek to divide the people, a patriot loves the unitary status of his country, and does not seek to divide it territorially or communally. But Anandasangaree divides people as Sinhala and Tamils, he does not work for the unity of the people, he wants federalism which is a sort of  divisionism.  Therefore he is not a patriot.

 If Anandasangaree wants to be a real patriot , he should give up his call for a Federal Constitution or an Indian model. He should not treat the Tamil Community as a different entity.  He should instead be a bridge to bring in the Tamil Community into the mainstream of the Sri Lankan people without allowing them to tear away from the fabric of Nationhood.

 Sri Lanka could progress faster if all communities  get together to give a hand .  It is the Tamils who stand on the way  of progress with their pseudo “ethnic problem” and show to the world outside a division within. It is the Tamil diaspora which has brought Sri Lanka to disrepute, accusing the President and the Armed Forces for military crimes when they know very well that the elimination of terrorism was a necessity for any progress and that the military operations were against the terrorists and not against the Tamil people. 

 If the civilians were to have died it may have been inevitable and it was a sacrifice to end thirty years of suffering, and find at last peace and security for every one.  Hiroshima and Nagasaki stand symbols of human sacrifice for the greater unity and peace of the world, at least that is what the West believes.

 Now that the terrorism is over the expatriate Tamils should if they want to be real patriots contribute to the work in progress in Sri Lanka, and join hands with all Communities to develop the country to make the people happy, peaceful and prosperous.

 Anandasangaree should help Sri Lanka not by demanding Federalism, but by getting the Tamils to fall in line with the rest of the communities to create Communal Unity.

 His statements are pungent with hypocrisy, as when he says, “ I am one who is not communal and had been always saying that I wish to have a Sinhalese family as my neighbour on one side and a Muslim family on the other. I have still not changed my views in this matter.” Is that to show that he is not communal, and is that the way to bring the Communities together ? He thinks he could fool people with that kind of trash.

 Anandasangaree as an elderly Tamil politician, living in safety amoung the Sinhala people in the South, had a greater role to play for the reconciliation of the two main Communities of Sri Lanka the Tamils and the Sinhala, if he did not try to play the Tamil Nadu game of separating the Tamils from the Sinhala.   He also  raises the GG Ponnambalam’s  out dated demand for 50-50, but in a different way.

 The permanent solution  to the so called ethnic problem in Sri Lanka is there before every ones eyes , but the Tamils including the UNESCO prize winning Anandasangaree do not want even to look at it.  The Solution is,  that the Tamils should try to forget their Tamilness and accept to be patriotic Sri Lankans à part entière  and unite with the other communities to form a larger Nation of Sri Lankans, where there would be no Sinhala, Tamil and Muslims but just Sri Lankans.  That is what the President Mahinda Rajapakse meant once when he said that there are no minorities and majorities.

 The fear of the Tamils is that the they  will be assimilated into the Majority, otherwise there is no reason for the Tamils to ask,  to be treated separately with a special devolution of power.  The whole of the  ethnic problem stems from this failure of the Tamils to give up their fear of loosing their Tamilness. 

 It is typical of the Tamils, this is what DBS Jeyaraj says on his article on  Nedumaran’s book on Prabhakaran which he says would be  Nedumaran’s magnum opus the “ hagiography “ of Prabhakaran.  DBS Jeyaraj says “……… I am very proud of being a Tamil. My pride is based on the notion so well articulated by Namakkal Ramaligampillai one time poet laureate of Tamil Nadu.” Is he a Sri Lankan or of TamilNadu ?  If he is a real  Sri Lankan he should have at least said I am proud to be a Sri Lankan Tamil.

 This stems from an inferiority complex  of the Tamils. They do not want to accept being Sri Lankans .  The black African Community in America understood that accepting to be Americans is the way out of their isolation, and became a part of the larger people of America, and that is how today a black African is the 44^th President of USA. 

 They had the intelligence to understand that they had to accept being Americans, but the Tamils in Sri Lanka and the prize winning Champion of tolerance  and non-violence are unable to comprehend that simple essential unity of people of all communities to build a Nation out of them.

 Sampanthan and his TNA cohorts were slaves of Prabhakaran and did what ever the Thalaivar asked of them, spying for the terrorists in the Parliament.  They were therefore free from the wrath of the uncertain moods of the Thalaivar the terrorist leader.

 Anandasangaree was not selected by Prabhakaran to spy for them , therefore he feared  Prabhakaran, who would have eliminated him if it became necessary.  Therefore he played a double game living with the Sinhala people in the south, but echoing Prabhakaran’s call for a homeland by harping on a Federal Constitution.  

Anandasangaree  wanted to be different from Sampanthan the proxi of Praphakaran,  therefore he did not ask for a separate Homeland for the Tamils, but he thought it was better to go step by step before he could arrive at  making the North and East the Tamil Homeland, therefore he opted for Federalism. 

 Anandasangaree  is an old political fox, who thinks he could get what he wants , by pretending to be  friendly ( tolerant and non-violent) with the “Sinhala modayas” and moving along with their ideas until the time is right to “jump the queue” to  bag in  what he wanted a Tamil Homeland, or  North and East as a separate Province under a  Federal Constitution. 

 Therefore Anandasangaree mooted the Federal theory, and when he found that the Sinhala people would not accept it, he  changed it to an  Indian Model.  He knows how to wriggle his way out of a situation, to get back to his demand to which he sticks stubbornly, when the time is ripe.

 It was the Tamils  who created the so called  “ethnic problem” to enable them to get a Tamil Homeland established in the North and East.

 There is in fact no  “ethnic problem” at all.  But it was created artificially, to divide the country to have a separate Tamil Homeland.  That is why all this Anti Mahavamsa theory of Narapalasingham, and the rewriting of the Tamil history insisting on the presence of Tamil settlements in the North and East prior to the advent of the Sinhala.

 Anandasangaree says, “  I am yearning to see the dawn of peace in its true form in this beautiful Island of ours, in which from time immemorial the Tamils and the Sinhalese had lived in peace and harmony along with Muslims and many other ethnic groups, before the country gained its independence.” 

 He does not mean a word of what he says. He is vehemently opposed to any large numbers of Sinhala people taking permanent residence in the North and East.  He will call it colonizing, which in fact what the Tamils have done in the South.

Anandasangaree says, “ What was going on in this country since independence in 1948 is not fully known to the present generation. They hardly know what a peaceful country Ceylon was in the good old days. I am one who had lived throughout this period and had witnessed and experienced all good and bad events that took place in our country. ” 

In the good old days the south of Sri Lanka was a paradise for the Tamils from the North .  The British colonialists following the divide and rule policy  pampered the Tamils giving them important places in their administration pushing the Sinhala to the background. 

 The Jaffna Tamils came to South and opened shops and boutiques.  Only the Tamil men came to the South leaving  their families home,  not wanting to socialize with the Sinhala.  The well to do vellalas came and settled down in Colombo sending their children to best of schools to  make them Doctors or Engineers.
 The North and the East was left for the Tamils to live as they want,  the majority of the Sinhala people were not interested, either in settling down or even to know about the  Northern Provinces .  

That is why Anandasangaree is  nostalgic for the old times.  If things would have been the same today North and East would have been their uncontested Homeland.  Anadasangaree knows very well that neither North or East voted for any candidate of the  LSSP the political party which stood for all communities.  There was I think just one LSSP Member  from the North in the House of Representative. Not seeing a future being a member of the LSSP  Anandasangaree changed camps.

In a way the terrorism brought some thing good in its wake, the Sinhala people of the South  became aware that the North and East are after all  part of the whole of Sri Lanka and that they have an interest in those parts of the country as well.

That is what irks Anandasangaree, North and East becoming close to the South and the possibility of more Sinhala people settling down there. Hence his demand for an Indian Model so that the North and East could be  kept a Tamil enclave as it was in the good old days.

If Anandasangaree wants a real reconciliation of the Communities and  make Sri Lanka a peaceful place as it was , the time is ripe now.  The Sinhala people are ready to make any sacrifice just to bring the Communities together.  But do the Tamils want it, and would the Tamils in the North and East forget their Tamilness to create a United  Nation of all Communities,  stepping out of their narrow Communalism ? 

This Communal integration forgetting the Tamilness does not mean that  the cultural and  religious values of each Community is to be devalued, but there is all the more reason that the  parity of status of  different Communities should  be maintained in forming a  multicultural Nation.

The Sinhala people have been inviting students from North and East to the South to stay with Sinhala people to understand more of each other.  Do they profit from the occasion ?  Has Anandasangaree gone to meet these young people  who came from the North and East and spoken to them  of the necessity to unite to  forget their minority complex and become part of the larger community of  Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim people ? 

No ! the UNESCO award winning tolerant and non-violent Anandasangaree would not do a thing like that.   He knows that if the Sinhala people in the South were to bring the whole population of Tamils from the North and East and entertain them for even for one whole year, they will go back and become once again Tamils with their racial hatred to the Sinhala people.

Federalism or Indian Model means nothing to the ordinary Tamil people,  even if every one of them  in the North and East makes their daily  morning Salaams or Namasthe to Tamil Nadu, what they want is to live peacefully, with daily amenities and  plan a future for their children. 

The Federalism and the Indian Model is the dream of the high class Tamils who want to dominate the poor low caste Tamils with ruling power in their hands  with a Parliament of their own, with their own Police and land rights.

Only means for Sri Lanka to forge ahead with peace and prosperity is by being an undivided people united to coordinate with one another for an ambitious program of development as a country of a united community of people.

Anandasangaree says, « The turning point was the passage of the Citizenship Acts and the situation got aggravated with the passage of the Act making Sinhala as the only official language of the state in 1956. » 

That is all nonsense, because it was necessary to make  a difference in an independent Sri Lanka, where the colonialists ruled the country the  way they want  by  denying the Sinhala people their rightful place, burning their villages , killing their people  when they rebelled  against these savage invaders who had continually harassed them, insulted and denigrated the culture and the religion of the Sinhala people.  That necessity was understood only by  SWRD Bandaranaike. He did what was necessary, to give back to the people what had been denied to them for  nearly 500 years.

The Tamil people did not take part in those rebellions, whether it was against the Portuguese, the Dutch or the British,  though they claim they have a long history as settlers in Sri Lanka.  How many Tamils fought along side the Sinhala Soldiers against terrorism ? In the long history of Sri Lanka the Tamils have not played any  role to defend the country  except of course few exceptions like, Lakshman Kadirgamar, Jeyraj Fernandopulle and few other Muslims and Malays.

Anandasangaree should be happy because he is there today,  free to speak out his mind because he had been with the Sinhala people in the South whose children had fought the terrorists to rid him of the fear of  assassination by a wayward terrorist.

His theme of complaint through out the long article revolves round the ethnic problem and the  advice to implement an Indian Model.  But this ethnic problem he  speaks of does not exist any more, even if did in some ways existed before.

Now with the  implementation of the Mahinda Chintanaya, even the language problem has been settled and the Tamils share all rights equally  with  all other Communities. And the Tamils like Anandasangaree, Sampanthan etc. raise a Tamil ethnic problem knowing well that no such thing really exists now, but yet  to make an issue of it merely to bring disrepute to Sri Lanka and allow interference by the foreign countries into our internal affairs, and hoping for some politically beneficial fallouts for themselves.

Anandasangaree  insists, «  A unitary system will not be acceptable to the minorities, the Tamils in particular. It will never serve as a permanent solution, since it can be meddled with, by some others when you and I are no more. I had been repeatedly saying that only the Indian Model will be acceptable to the minorities as the only alternative to a “Federal Model” if the term “Federal” is allergic to some. Otherwise it would be the best and the most acceptable one. »

What is special about the Tamils that a unitary system will not suit them.  If it suits every one else it is democratic that the Tamils accept what is accepted by everyone else.  It is people like Anandasangaree who should  make them understand  that simple  reality and bring the communities together without holding onto a separatists ideology.

 Everything is not hunky dory in India despite Anandasangaree’s eulogy of India as a Model. India which is a leading nation today claiming leadership in the South, with its own atomic bomb, preparing to send Indian men into Space, is unable to provide equality of opportunities  to all  the citizens of the country.  The low caste untouchables have still to find their place in the Indian Society. 

 There is ethnic problems in Assam, Sikh and Hindu conflict in Punjab. India still has Hindu Muslim conflicts.  It has  very racist Tamil politicians in TamilNadu.  Tamil Nadu has taken away the power of the Central Government of India which is being made to dance to the tune of the Nedumarans, Jayalalithas, Vaikos, Karunanidhis or  the We Tamil Movement of Seeman.  Is that the glorious Indian Model Anandasangaree dreams of for Sri Lanka ?

Anandasangaree goes on with his eulogy of India , «  ..A majority Hindu country has a great Muslim Scientist as Head of the State and treat him with due honour. ….Another highly respected leader is the Prime Minister of India from an ethnic group that forms only 2% of its population and the leader of the ruling Party who is a very highly respected lady is one, not born in India. This great neighbour of ours has found unity in diversity; why can’t we have powers devolved to our regions on the Indian pattern? “

But this has been made possible  by India having no divisive political parties  except in TamilNadu.  Sri Lanka could easily have the same possibilities if the Tamils come down from their  sacrosanct Tamilness and accept to be citizens of Sri Lanka  without having racist political parties for Tamils, such as the :
Tamil Eelam Liberation Army, Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization, Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal,Tamil National Alliance, Tamil National Liberation Alliance, Tamil National People’s Front,Tamil United Liberation Front.

Anandasangaree should demand that these Political parties with the Tamil Label be banned and all citizens of Sri Lanka, Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim  and others should join the two main political parties as in America, UK or France.  Then the country will select as President  the  leader of the political party  that has won the elections. It may be a Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim, Malay or Burgher.  For that to happen we need not be a country with a Federal Constitution, or a Constitution with that of India as a Model, but we should be a United Nation, without any Community demanding to be different from the rest of the Communities .

The rest of the letter need no reply as it is the repetition of the same ethnic problem, the Federalism against a Unitary system, and if allergic to Federalism requesting to opt  for the Indian Model.

Mr. Anandasangaree, you will soon be  eighty years of age. The future is short for you, but the past had been long. When the end is near we become more and more nostalgic about the past  and  forget the present and try to project the past into the future as a model for the present generation to emulate.  But the present generation has more wonderful things to do than you had been doing  through out that long past.  Therefore, do not try to make the past a model for  the future generations.

 The President Mahinda Rajapakse who you knew as a young man has matured. He has shown to every right thinking man and woman  that of the many Heads of State of Sri Lanka we have had from the Prime Ministers to Presidents, President Mahinda Rajapakse stands out as the man who did the most to this country of ours within the short time he was given the reins of leadership. 

 He had driven away the terrorists that were menacing the very existence of Sri Lanka as a Unitary State.  He has reconstructed North and East as no body had ever been able to do before.  He had brought the once poverty stricken South to an important centre of political and commercial activity.  He had built  roads and railways  as none had ever dreamt of doing before.  He has developed our country into a  middle income State.

 But all those who criticize him despite all that  he has done for this country, has done nothing.   It is only Mahinda Rajapakse who has shown to every one of these critics what, a President with a vision , determination and effort could do, within the shortest possible time to turn a dream into a reality.

 Therefore, Mr.Anandasangaree, Mahinda Rajapakse is not a “podiyen” who dropped from the last rain, and he knows what he is doing  and it is up to you to wish him well and  allow him to do what he wants to do in his own way.  From what he has done so far there is no reason to think that he will disappoint any one of us in the future.

All progressive work in Sri Lanka to develop  it economically, culturally, and socially  had been mostly the indifatigable effort of the Sinhala people .  While Sampanthan and the TNA, Anandasangaree, Kumar David, Pakiasothy Saravanamuttu, DBS Jeyaraj et al make a hue and   cry about an ethnic problem and collect international awards, the Sinhala people are at work in the North-East South and West of Sri Lanka for the betterment of the people and development of the country.

PSC coming, but for national unity Instead of Tamil grievances alone, committee will have broader mandate

By Political Editor

SundayTimes.lk
August 21, 2011

Contrary to earlier expectations of a Parliamentary Select Committee to address Tamil grievances, the Government will now appoint one “to recommend and report political and constitutional measures to empower the people of Sri Lanka as one nation.”

Thirteen Cabinet Ministers are among the 18 parliamentarians who have given notice of a motion in Parliament last week. They want it listed in the Addendum to the Order Book No 4 of Parliament. The proposed Parliamentary Select Committee, they have said, should recommend to the House within six months the initiative appropriate to achieve political and constitutional measures to:

* Enhance the unity of the people of Sri Lanka
* Further empower the people to work as a nation, and
* Enable the people to take decisions

For this purpose, the motion says,

* That the committee and its chairman shall be nominated by the Speaker.
* That notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 95, the committee shall consist of not more than thirty one (31) members.

The motion is based on three different grounds. First is that a unique opportunity has arisen for the people of Sri Lanka to unite and work together as a nation towards the economic, social and political development of the country and its citizens. The second is that to this end it is opportune to take steps to enhance the unity of the people of Sri Lanka and empower them to take decisions and engage in actions towards their economic, social and political development.

The third is that a Select Committee of Members of Parliament being a committee of elected representatives of the people is best equipped to determine the nature and scope of steps to be taken to enable the reasons stated above.

The motion, among other matters, says that the PSC is empowered to summon such persons and documents as it deemed necessary, examine on oath or affirmation persons so summoned, continue notwithstanding adjournment of Parliament from time to time and submit interim reports from time to time.

The Government had earlier planned to appoint a PSC to address issues relating to Tamil grievances. This was in fact conveyed by President Mahinda Rajapaksa when a high powered three-member Indian delegation visited Sri Lanka. It was headed by India’s National Security Advisor Shiv Shankar Menon, the then External Affairs Ministry Secretary Nirupama Rao and Defence Secretary Pradeep Kumar.

Government sources told the Sunday Times yesterday that while addressing issues related to Tamil grievance, the proposed committee will also look at broad issues that concern all communities in Sri Lanka.

Signatories to the motion are Susil Premajayantha, Champika Ranawaka, Rauff Hakeem, Tissa Vitarana, Douglas Devananda, Dinesh Gunawardena, Maithripala Sirisena, Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Rishad Badhiutheen, Basil Rajapaksa, V.S. Radakrishnan, D.E.W. Gunasekera, Muthu Sivalingam, Perumal Rajadurai, Rajiva Wijesinha and Dullas Alahapperuma.

Seeing In The Dark: Buddhism returns to its birthplace as urban Indians find in it an emotional anchor for their troubled lives

By Sheela Reddy with Smruti Koppikar, Dola Mitra, Pushpa Iyengar and Harsh Kabra

OutlookIndia.com
February 23, 2009

Why Buddhism Is Catching On In The Land Of Its Birth

    * Appeals to the rational urban Indian fed up of organised religion and its rituals
    * Provides a moral and ethical framework suitable to modern times
    * It’s highly individualistic, not requiring you to bow down to any god
    * Makes you responsible for your own happiness
    * It provides a community and support system to fill a vacuum in city life

Not perhaps since Buddhism's heyday, some 2,200 years ago, did such a power crowd gather to pay their tribute to Gautama Buddha in the land of his birth. Among the 6,000 of India's well-heeled and well-connected who assembled at the opening of the country's grandest monument in recent times to the Buddha—the Rs 100-crore Global Vipassana Pagoda, "the largest dome in the world"—in Mumbai's Gorai island last Sunday were the President, a governor, several central and state ministers, an industrialist, a media baron and the Buddha's star new-age disciple, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra.

Like Priyanka, there's a new wave of Indians—affluent, rational, metropolitan, English-educated individuals impatient of organised religion and willing to experiment with alternate spiritual forms—who are increasingly turning to the Buddha's teachings for anwers to their dilemmas. A far cry from Ambedkar and his Dalit followers who converted to Buddhism 50 years ago as a way of getting back at Hinduism and its hierarchy, these small bands of new-age spiritualists shy away from the very word 'Buddhist' with all its political baggage. Their Buddhism instead is more therapy than religion, a self-help practice that enables them to cope with the daily pressures of city life—nuclear families, generation gap, divorces, collapse of family support systems, relationships, pressures of jobs and joblessness, lifestyle diseases, teenage angst and loneliness—even as it unlocks their hitherto hidden potential.

For business executive Archana Sehgal, 32, who migrated to Delhi with her first job some eight years ago, her spiritual journey began when a friend invited her to chant nyam myo ho renge kyo, the title of the Lotus Sutra in Japanese. Desperately unhappy with her feuding family, Archana decided to give it a try, chanting for two-three hours a day for a week. It worked for her, she says, giving her the inner space to resolve her anger and start believing in her power to change "anything in my life". Today, Archana is the leader of the young women's division in her locality of the Bharat Soka Gakkai (Value Creation Society, BSG) inspired by the teachings of 13th century Japanese Buddhist monk Nichiren, adapted to contemporary times by its mentor, Daisaku Ikeda, and now flourishing in 192 countries with a membership running into tens of millions.

Archana is expected to make at least two "home visits" a week in a system that is unique to BSG: each leader being charged with responsibility for the happiness and well-being of every individual in her "block". Such a block is limited to 10 or less members to ensure that each member gets individual attention. It's a practice, Archana says, that gives her deep fulfilment by mentoring other young women like her facing job insecurity and social turmoil of other kinds. "If one person has a problem, everyone rallies around. It's a philosophy which is easy to apply to daily life. You begin to understand how your inner life works and learn to take responsibility for your own happiness."

The combination of community chanting, individual counselling and a support system that works like an extended family without its handicaps has turned the BSG into an impressive organisation of over 38,000 members in 300 cities in India in a little over two decades.

To sceptical outsiders, especially educated middle-class professionals with their horror of anything that smells of organised religion, the extreme organisation and zeal to induct newcomers into the practice, along with the strict rules of confidentiality, seem almost masonic sometimes. But within the BSG, it's hard not to be moved by members' sincerity and genuine concern for others. And it's impossible to spot an unhappy face. It's not as if they don't have their problems, some of them huge, like cancer. But as BSG head Naveena Reddi explains, the chanting works as a way of transforming negative thought into positive. More important, members are taught to chant for the happiness of those they don't like. What also keeps them upbeat is sharing their experiences—under strict confidentiality—of how the practice has changed their lives. Countless stories emerge of daily miracles wrought by individual and community chanting—improved relations within the family and at work, promotions that come without pulling strings, jobs that land suddenly in one's lap, cancers that recede, eyesight restored.

But it's not just spiritual therapy, as Reddi stresses. What the practice hopes to bring about is a change in the world through a "human revolution", leading members to fight for a world in which Buddha's core values of peace and non-violence are propagated in contemporary times, whether it is in dealing with issues like global warming, the anti-nuke campaign or greening the earth.

Other new-age forms of Buddhism arrive at the same idea of the interconnected universe through different paths, but inspired equally by the Buddha's teachings. Vipassana, which means "to see things as they really are", is a meditation practice popularised by the Buddha, and returned to the land of his birth by an Indian businessman domiciled in Burma, Satyanarayan Goenka. Having become an ardent practitioner in Rangoon, Goenka came back to India in 1969 to revive it here. Vipassana, as he points out in his talks and books, "involves no dogma, rites, rituals, conversion. The only conversion is from misery to happiness, from bondage to liberation."

When he brought Vipassana to India 40 years ago, there were about a dozen people, including Goenka's parents, willing to sign up for the meditation course. Now there are more than 55 centres in India, from Sonepat in Haryana to Chengannur in Kerala, from Jaipur and Ajmer to Dehradun and Durg. Over a million have joined up for the 10-day retreat, where beginners are taught "mental purification through self-observation". Students lead a frugal life—no talking, sex, meat, drinks, newspapers, TV, music—while they learn to focus their mind in near-total silence. Just refraining from these familiar distractions is the first step for the mind to calm down, followed by three-and-a-half days of anapana meditation focusing on your breath, followed by six-and-a-half days of a guided meditation where the student learns to observe changes in his body and its sensations as a way to gain equanimity. So popular have the courses become that the waiting lists are growing by the day.

This mushrooming of new-age forms of Buddhism is a recent trend in our cities, points out Pankaj Mishra, whose book—An End to Suffering: The Buddha in the World—is a voyage to rediscover Buddhism in the land of its birth centuries after it was wiped out. "Several members of my own family, even my landlady in Defence Colony, all with an upper-caste Hindu upbringing, have signed up with some Buddhist organisation or the other," he says. For Mishra, this second coming of the Buddha is in the fitness of things because it has found an audience similar to the one the Buddha originally aimed his message at: a modernising society and its rising commercial classes. "Buddha was conveying his message at a time of huge social upheaval when close-knit societies were falling apart, and with people migrating to cities, traditional bonds were being weakened, whether in community or family networks. For people newly arrived in cities, alone and anonymous, traditional religions were of little help."

It's only natural, as Mishra points out, that a post-liberalised India, with its "spiritual and emotional exhaustion", is increasingly attracted to a form of Buddhism that provides spiritual sustenance at such times. "The more society changes, the greater Buddhism's appeal," he says. Besides, "the idea of an individual not affiliated to any caste or community being a new one in India", the Buddha's revolutionary concept of shifting the onus of spiritual health on the individual is bound to resonate.

This hunger for a new moral and spiritual framework for how to live your life meaningfully without God as an intermediary is what is driving thousands of Indians to the Dalai Lama's teachings. Until a few years ago, the pontiff's engagement diary was almost completely booked with his tours abroad or his teachings in Dharamshala, attended predominantly by his followers from abroad. No longer, says his representative in Delhi, Tempa Tsering. There's a distinct shift, with nearly 60 per cent of his engagements reserved for his talks across India. In the last month-and-a-half, for instance, the Tibetan leader was invited to address meetings in Rajasthan, Delhi, Hyderabad, Gulbarga, Chennai, Pondicherry, Delhi again, before returning to his home in Dharamshala for 10 days, then going for a brief tour to Germany and Italy before leaving again for Bangalore and Mysore. Everywhere he goes, whether university campuses or hospitals—he was in Meerut recently to open a charitable hospital—thousands gather to hear his simple, down-to-earth teachings, shorn of all dogma.

The same thing happened when the Vietnamese Zen teacher, Thich Nhat Hanh, came to India last October. Unlike his two previous visits—once in 1988 on a private pilgrimage, and again in 1997, when he spoke before a small audience in Delhi and Chennai—the response to his last visit was overwhelming, says Shantum Seth, who runs the Ahimsa Trust for propagating his Zen teacher's Buddhist practice. "His teachings are clear, useful and timely, and appeal to a generation that was schooled in scientific rationalism." Unlike other religions, Seth points out, Buddhism encourages a spirit of true inquiry—if it works for you, adopt it without getting caught up in any ism. "Its emphasis is on personal practice and self-development, which is hugely attractive to the intelligentsia."

So will it last, or will Buddhism vanish once more as it did in the past, wiped out by a disastrous mix of circumstances, including co-option into Hinduism and ritualism, and a decline of the commercial classes? Undoubtedly it will last, according to Mishra, who hails the Buddha as "the greatest thinker India has ever produced by a huge margin". At a time when so many of our shiny modern ideologies have been discredited, says Mishra, the Buddha's teachings grow increasingly relevant as the guide to an ethical life.

There's no way out for us except the Buddha's way.

Next move: go forward or back to 1976 Vadukoddai?

By H. L. D. Mahindapala
LankaWeb.com
July 10, 2011

Wars are evil exercises that must be avoided at any cost. But history tells us that wars are also unavoidable. From time to time, wars occur to win over-ambitious goals going beyond established political and territorial borders or to eliminate or neutralize enemies that threaten national interests. This is the short term goal of wars. The long-term objective of wars is to define and reinforce national identities, boundaries and values. The Sri Lankan government launched a counter-terrorist war to reinforce the national identity, territorial boundaries and the democratic political values.

The Jaffna Tamil leadership which launched the Vadukoddai War gambled, throwing all their financial, international, local and military might to achieve their separatist goals, based on fictitious geography and concocted history as outlined in the Vadukoddai Resolution of 1976, and lost. They lost ignominiously partly because the Tamil people lost faith in their leaders and ran way from them even when their leaders were shooting at them for running away from a lost cause.

A great responsibility now lies on the shoulders of the Tamil leadership in taking the next step. The question they have to answer is simple: is there a future in going back to the failed past? After the debacle in Nandikadal in May 2009 is there any sense in dragging the Jaffna Tamil people once again to Vadukoddai of May 1976? President Mahinda Rajapakse too is under great pressure from the defeated remnants of the Vadukoddai ideology to go back to 1976 – the year in which the Jaffna Tamils declared war against the rest of the nation in the Vadukoddai Resolution. The violence unleashed by the Jaffna Tamil leadership in the Vadukoddai Resolution killed more Jaffna Tamils than any other forces put together, according to declared statements of Jaffna Tamil leaders. So what can the Jaffna Tamils gain by going back to Vadukoddai of 1976?

The Jaffna Tamil war-mongers were hoisted by their own petard when they resorted to a military solution and they have no one to blame except “the stupid Tamil leaders of Jaffna” (Prof. Kumar David) who misled the Jaffna Tamils and dragged them all the way to Nandikadal Lagoon. Mahinda Rajapakse’s forces defeated not only the Vadukoddians but also the pompous intellectuals, the theoretical devolutionists, the Marxist fossils, and “Pacha” Pereras and Silly Silvas, allied to NGOs. The tragedy is that despite the grim realities of their futile past this mob of political troglodytes are making a desperate bid to reverse the trends of the post-Nandikadal period and take the nation back to square one, as if nothing has happened between May 1976 (the start) and May 2009 (the end). The same old mob has ganged up again to deny the bloody past and, consequently, force the people to relive the horrors that the war-weary nation is determined to leave behind.

As opposed to this the post-Nandikadal period has opened up ideal conditions to re-define and reinforce the threatened identity of the nation, its geographical and constitutional boundaries, historical legacies and political values. Eliminating the political monsters that came out of the womb of the Vadukoddai Resolution was a sine qua non for peace, reconciliation and progress. President Mahinda Rajapakse removed the 33-year-old Vadukoddai violence in a swift surgical operation that lasted just three years. The vast majority of the people backed him all the way to Nandikadal and in each subsequent election of the post-Nandikadal period he was rewarded for rescuing the nation from the plague of a futile war. Now the eyes of the nation are focused on how President Rajapakse would define the identity of the nation, its geographical, constitutional and political boundaries and values.

The military solution chosen deliberately by the Vadukoddians in May 1976 was to force the will of a mono-ethnic minority of the north down the throats of the majority. The formulas proposed and enacted between 1976 and 2002 were all designed to appease only one community – the Jaffna Tamils. All formulas – from the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement to the Ceasefire of 2002 – failed because they were tailored only to address the “aspirations” of the Jaffna Tamils, dismissing the “aspirations” of the other communities. After the failure of several formulas and particularly after Nandikadal there is a growing awareness that any viable solution must address the “aspirations” of all communities. There is also a growing awareness that the destiny of one community is linked inextricably with all the others. The separatist ideology has had its day and is now lying at the bottom of Nandikadal Lagoon.

The fundamental flaw in all the formulas introduced in the past was primarily in ignoring the “aspirations” of the majority community. It is now an inescapable political fact that no lasting peace can ever work without the consent of the majority. This necessity was underlined emphatically by the International Crisis Group report written by its Colombo-based representative, Allan Keenan. He wrote in a press release to the report titled Sri Lanka: Sinhala Nationalism and the Elusive Southern Consensus (November 7, 2007) : “Lasting peace will not be found in Sri Lanka until Sinhala nationalism and the grievances that give it power are understood and addressed.”

He added:: “Recent history shows the Sinhalese are not unalterably opposed to a fair deal for the minority Tamils but competition between their major parties, the United National Party (UNP) and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), together with the violence and intransigence of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), has led President Rajapaksa to adopt a hardline nationalist approach. Until the sources of Sinhalese nationalism are taken more seriously, it will continue to challenge attempts to produce a political settlement.”
He also quotes Asia Program Director Robert Templer, who says: “Domestic and international actors should begin to fashion long-term strategies that take into account the power of Sinhala nationalist ideology, while aiming to minimize the sources of its appeal and its ability to set the political agenda”.

Both statements are absolutely relevant to find a way out of the prevailing tensions in the current political climate created essentially by the failed pundits who still act and talk as if the Jaffna Tamils have the ability to set the political agenda. They did have the power once upon a time when Vadukoddai violence was at its peak under the brutal power of the Tamil Pol Pot, Velupillai Prabhakaran. But the rag-tag army of Vadukoddians agitating in Western bases lacks the military clout to dictate terms to the Sinhala majority as they did in the six rounds of talks which culminated in Ranil Wickremesinghe caving in, on bended knees, to install Tamil Pol Pot as the “sole representative of the Tamils” in the north and the east. Wickremesinghe’s surrender to the Tamil Pol Pot marks the peak of Vadukoddian power. Mahinda Rajapakse’s greatness is in reversing that trend and regaining and restoring the power given on a platter to the Tamil Tiger terrorists by Ranil Wickremesinghe, the spineless political freak ever produced by the UNP.

The post-Nandikadal undercurrent struggling to enter the mainstream through the back door – a favourite port of entry for the likes of Mangala Samaraweera, Ranil Wickremesinghe and Malik Samaraweera who are forever ready, willing and gay to sell the nation — is pushing the President to go down the path of Wickremesinghe. If, by any chance, Mahinda Rajapakse decides to descend into the abyss of Wickremesinghe (from which the latter has never come out, praise be to the people of Sri Lanka!) then the Commander-in-Chief of the Forces cannot claim to have won the war. Then he becomes a loser like Wickremesinghe.

The people backed him all the way to Nandikadal and in subsequent elections not to go back to 1976 but to consolidate and reinforce the gains won with the sweat, blood and tears of the self-sacrificing soldiers. The forces and the people fought for their Commander-in-Chief because they trusted him to be the only leader who would stand by them. He was the only alternative to the combined forces of the UNP-TNA-NGOs whose agenda was to take the nation back to 1976 and hand it over to Tamil fascism. But the people stood with the President militarily and politically, undergoing economic hardships and serious threats to their daily lives, to fulfill the aspirations of the forces that backed him to the hilt, unequivocally.

Whether we like it or not let’s face the reality: the Vadukoddai War was launched by a minority to impose their will on the majority. It is not only in Sri Lanka but the global theatre is currently haunted by aggressive minorities trying to dictate terms to the majorities. (More of this majority vs. minority issue later). After dithering with various formulas to end violent minoritarianism the majority decided to say “enough is enough” and marched all the way to Nandikdal. The military and electoral victories confirm that “lasting peace will not be found in Sri Lanka until Sinhala nationalism and the grievances that give it power are understood and addressed” by President Rajapakse.

The NGO and academic pundits failed because they assumed that only the Jaffna Tamils had grievances and aspirations. Their strategy has been to denigrate the Sinhala-Buddhists and blame them as the mono-causal force that led to the north-south crisis. They refused to acknowledge that the majority – as in all ex-colonies – had a right to reclaim the rights they lost to colonialism. The meaning of “1956” is in the rise and enthroning of the majority that was suppressed and oppressed under colonialism. It was the historic year that opened up new vistas and institutional means to redress the historical imbalances which had, for nearly five centuries, denied them their cultural, linguistic, political, territorial and historical heritage. President Rajapakse is the crowned legatee of “1956” – a political awakening led by S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike, the greatest Sinhala-Buddhist liberal. Now it is the task of President Mahinda Rajapakse to take the heritage of “1956” forward to give meaning and honour to the historic achievements of the founding fathers of the SLFP which includes his father. 

But the anti-national gang in the UNP-NGO combo and their allies in the media and academia are still bent on promoting “minoritarianism” knowing that it was a total disaster for the minority, let alone the rest of the nation. The unmistakable lesson revealed in the bloody past is that the appeasing of the dwindling minority of Jaffna Tamils alone is not the solution to go forward. Any future formula must necessarily take into account the aspirations of the majority too.

This takes me back to the realities emphasized in the statement of ICG cited above. There are two parts to it: 1. to take into account the power of the Sinhala nationalist ideology and 2. to minimize their ability and power to set the political agenda. All the theoretical punditry propounded by various factions of anti-Sinhala-Buddhist lobby is to diminish the power of the majority. Devolution and power-sharing are two calculated strategies to reduce the power of the majority and increase the power of the Jaffna Tamil minority.

At the bottom all mono-ethnic extremism that ruled peninsular politics was the twin goals of (1) grabbing power (“little now and more later”, as stated by S. J. V. Chelvanyakam) and also (2) territory on the self-serving accusation that they were discriminated by the Sinhala majority — a myth swallowed not only by the loony left and their fellow-travellers in academia and hired NGO apparatchiks but also by the quirky and rather muddle-headed liberals in the right. Even if you concede the fiction of discrimination for the sake argument there is no cause now to blame the Sinhala majority because there has been a “paradigm shift from 1956” to accommodate the “grievances” of the minority, as stated by Radhika Coomaraswamy and Malini Parathasarathy, the Brahmin power-brokers of The Hindu in Chennai.

Besides, history of the Jaffna Vellahla elite, starting from colonial times, has confirmed that their appetite for power is insatiable. The peninsular political culture is based on the Oliver Twistian cry of never ending demands. The more you give them the more they demand – a political trait never pursued by them in foreign countries they settle down. Though they have far less rights and political status in other countries they meekly accept their second class citizenship as long as they are allowed to enjoy first class economic conditions. Nevertheless, they continue to wallow in their myths. Their ability to concoct political fairy tales can be only matched by Baron Manchausen, Hans Anderson or Enid Blyton. Take the recent myth which claimed that only Prabhakaran gave them dignity and security. Now that Prabhakaran is no more what is the plight of the Tamils? Have they lost or gained their dignity and security?

The capacity of the Jaffna Tamils to be victims of their political illusions is inexhaustible. They thrived on fictitious theories of victimology aided and abetted by half-baked theoreticians in NGOs and academia. However, they have now in their memory banks sufficient existential experience to consider seriously how the political monsters that came out of their delusional beliefs exploited them and their children to protect their bodies and families till the last day they collapsed on the banks of Nandikadal.. It is sad to see Sambandan and Sumanthiram of the TNA going down the suicidal path taken by Chelvanyakam. They know they can’t deliver their promises to the people of Jaffna. So should the Jaffna Tamils believe in their leaders now when they have nothing to offer except the same old recipe that took them to Nandikadal Lagoon?

Can the demands of this Vadukoddian rump save the Tamils by demanding (1) police powers (2) land and (3) the merged territory of the north and the east? Ranil Wickremesinghe gave them all this and more. Did it save the Tamils? Or did it lead to the most abusive oppression of the Tamils? Didn’t Prabhakaran kill more Tamils than all other forces put together? The Tamils demand more powers in the name of gaining dignity and equality. But the known historical experiments have proved that giving more powers to the Jaffna Tamils have only led to Tamil fascism, denial of human and political rights and total loss of dignity. The abuse of power by the Tamil leaders – even under Pillayan – raises a critical question: are the Tamils fit to rule themselves? They have yet to prove that they can run a better democratic society than the Sinhala majority.

Besides, international reaction to assertive minorities in Christian/Caucasian nations leads to the ineluctable conclusion that the Jaffna Tamils and other minorities enjoy a status far superior to that of the European nations. The majority/minority issue has now reached to top of their political agenda and the new trend is for the majority to impose their values on the minority. In leading Western democracies, driven by Islamaphobia, the trend is for the Christian/Caucasian majority to reclaim their power to set the agenda against the rising demographic power of the Muslim minorities. Not only are the anti-minority parties gaining ground but the heads of states also are proclaiming that they will not compromise on the established values of their majority culture. David Cameron (UK), Angela Merkel (Germany) Nicolas Sarkozy (France) are insisting that the minority should conform to the majority values.

They are even decrying the minority cultures and saying that multiculturalism has failed. “We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him,” said Nicolas Sarkozy in a television interview in which he declared the concept of multiculturalism as a “failure”. Prime Minister David Cameron last month pronounced his country’s long-standing policy of multiculturalism has failed. He is now calling for better integration of young Muslims to combat home-grown extremism. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Australia’s former Prime Minister John Howard and former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar have also in recent months said multicultural policies have not successfully integrated immigrants.

Sri Lanka has never imposed “majoritarianism” as practiced by the Western democracies. While France is legislating against the hijab Sri Lanka is distributing free head gear to the Muslims. While the Western democracies are insisting on the minorities speaking the language of the majority and assimilating into the dominant culture Sri Lanka allows all minorities to maintain their identity and welcome their contributions to the multi-cultural society. The Tamils have a status far superior to that of any Western country where they have chosen to settle down. As in other countries they will never get their separate state in Sri Lanka. And they don’t need it because the Jaffna Tamils always had a better deal living with the Sinhalese in the south (54% know it) than living in the casteist feudalism or modern Prabhakaranist north.

Finding the balance between the majority and the minority has never been an easy task in any democracy. There is no one-size fit for all conditions. In Sri Lanka, however, the pet formula touted around is devolution of power – a cry raised by only the Jaffna Tamils who have been aspiring to set the political agenda from colonial times. In fact, as stated by Sri Lanka’s foremost historian, Prof. K. M. de Silva, in his perceptive and penetrating analysis of the Ceylon National Congress in Disarray (The Ceylon Journal of Historical Studies, July-December, 1972, Vol 2), the Jaffna Tamils assumed the role of the majority and was treated as such by Governor William Manning, the master manipulator of the divide and rule policy. But the next census is bound to tell a story that would demolish, once again, the myth of their “majority complex”.

Of course, if the misguided Jaffna Tamil leaders want more they always have the option of getting a visa from their Prime Minister, V. Rudrakumaran and migrate to no-man’s land and live in it happily ever afterwards, instead of making life difficult for the war-weary Tamils whose main aspiration after Nandikadal is to live in peace. But the Vadukoddians in the TNA show no compassion for their fellow Tamils. They are bent on making life difficult for the Jaffna Tamils with promises they can never achieve. Besides, after Nandikadal they do not know whether they coming or going. They want to have one foot in Rudrakumaran’s “transitional state”, they want to have the other foot live in the Western states which are a part of Rudrakumara’s airy-fairy state, and they also want to have their head in a separate state in Sri Lanka. How many states will satisfy the needs of these Tamil Olive Twists? Isn’t it time that they got real and came down to earth and live peacefully with the rest of Sri Lankans?

Sinhalization of the North and the Tamilzation of the South.

By Sebastian Rasalingam, Toronto, Canada

What has all this to do with Sinhalization of the North, and Tamilization of the South?

 

(June 29, Toronto, Sri Lanka Guardian) Two recent articles highlight various aspects of a debate fundamental to the "National Question" of Sri Lanka. Unfortunately, it is hardly discussed in the national press in Sri Lanka, although much discussed in gatherings of expatriates. I hear of sinhalese "intrusion" into the north being discussed by my children (people in their fiftees) and their friends.

D. B. S. Jeyaraj, the well-known columnist has high-lighted the settling of some 150 "Sinhalese" in the "Tamil Village" of Kokkacchankulam, near Vavniya (click here to read). This is presented as an example of the "sinhalization" of the North.

A comment on Jeyraj's article, written by a Sinhalese academic appeared in the Sri Lanka Guardian (click here to read). According to him, the place-name Kokkacchankulam is said to be Sinhala, arising from Kok-Aththana, a type of Datura with fruits having hooks ("koku") for seed dispersal. 

Also the area is claimed to have a Buddhist past as recorded by the archeology department. All this utterly unsurprising to me. The majority of the Sinhalese (and any Tamils of that era) lived in the North of the Mahaveli river untill about the 10th century. Populations have moved north, and south, depending on the pressures of war, pestillance or peace.

The anger against Colombo doing things in the North reminds me of the anger of the Tamil parliamentarians in the 1940s. It was against the Colombo authorities building causeways connecting villages in the North. The real anger was that such "intrusions" disturb the power- and caste- structure enjoyed by the Lords who ran the affairs of the Tamils.

Reading through the blogs to Jeyraj's article, we find that some bloggers express the sentiment that this is a "land grab" of the territory that belongs to "Eelam". To others this is "state sponsored colonization" of "Tamil territory". Still others feel that any-one should be able to live anywhere in the Country, but settling these "Sinhalese families" have been done without notifying the right administrative officials etc., etc. Others, mainly Sinhala bloggers, have pointed out a massive "Tamil colonization" of the South.

The big North-South migration started in 1905, when the British opened the Jaffna-Colombo railway. Anyone who made it good moved to the south. Today moving to the South is a first step to moving abroad, preferably to Canada. I too moved from Jaffna to Mannar, and from there to Hatton, and finally to Colombo in the 1950s. Coming from a "low-caste", and having married an Indian Tamil woman in Hatton, I was truly an out-caste paraiah among the Tamils. Although most Tamils could readily get a housing loan from the "Bank of Ceylon" run by Mr. Loganathan, especially at the Wellawatta branch, I found that I could not even open an account even with a government pay cheque.

However, although I was an outcaste among the Tamils, I found that my Sinhalese mates invited me to have tea with them - a strange experience for a man who was always spoken to by Tamils in the curt "inga va" Tamil. The politics of the Tamils in the Ramanathan era was Caste Politics. Ramanathan wanted the caste system written into the Ceylon constitution. The Tamil politics put into place by G. G. Ponnambalam and S. J. V. Chelvanayagam was Race Politics vis a vis the Sinhalese. Caste politics continued within Tamil society itself. It was only the Leftists who went beyond these shackles -- but then they were considered a lunatic-fringe. Even in the 2010 presidential elections, they garnered less than a fraction of a percent of the votes.

What has all this to do with Sinhalization of the North, and Tamilization of the South?

The best thing that could happen to Sri Lanka, and the only thing that would guarantee the stifling of future ethnic discord is the disruption of in-grained ethnic enclaves which are not only racially segregated, but also caste segregated. Mr. Jeyaraj had mentioned villages including Kokachchankulam around Nedunkerny, but failed to note that even up to the 1980s, these had Caste Enclaves that even the war lords did not disrupt. The war did not destroy the segregation of Caste and Women in Tamil society, but mobilized them and hijacked them for political ends, as they were the easiest to subjugate and control.

I strongly believe that the State should have a clear program of settling Sinhalese in the villages of the North, and at least some Tamil IDPS in the villages of the south. The Sinhalese, with 75% of the population, would be demographically highly pressurized and hence the move to the sparse regions of the North and the East would be no different than the move of the White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestants (WASPS) of the US East coast to the "homelands" of the Hispanics West in the USA. Such redistribution of population, and NOT devolution of power into the hands of corrupt regional lords, is the best investment for long-term peace in Sri Lanka. Such a redistribution of population will also strongly undermine the Caste and gender discrimination endemic in traditional Tamil society with its Manu Dharma. Sinhalese society is far far less caste conscious, and accords greater power to its womenfolk.

The Sinhalese, lving in the prosperous and modern Southern Sri Lanka would need state incentives to settle in the sparsely populated North which needs labour as well as investors for its deveopment. The pro-LTTE expats have done little to help the North, and instead push their "boycott Sri Lanka" campaigne which hurts the poor Tamils more than any other ethnic group.

Instead of emphasizing divisions and differences, we need to emphasize the close similarities and common basics of the citizens of Sri Lanka.

Modern Hinduism and Buddhism have much in common. Instead of objecting that "Sinhalization" inevitably leads to the Buddhist temple and the Bo tree "invading Tamil land", we must welcome the Buddhist monks to the Hindu Temples, asking them to build the Buddha Statue and plant the Bo tree just next to the Temple itself. The Kururals and the Buddhist Sangha should be colleagues. After all, Buddhist temples in the South HAVE already integrated Hindu Gods like Vishnu, Skanda and Ganesh. Some Buddhist temples have Kururals, known as "Kapuralas", as officials. The Sinhalese and the Tamils have an enormous amount of common cultural and genetic baggage, as well as linguistic commonality. A Tamil sentence, translated word for word, without changing the structure, already becomes Sinhalese. The alphabets and grammar are very similar. Both Vivekananda and Radhakrishnan said that Buddhism is the most refined rendering of the Vedic-Hindu-Jain tradition of Indian belief.

So, Jayraj should rejoice in the implantation of Sinhala Villages in the North, and the Sinhalese nationalists should welcome the Tamilization of the Greater Colombo region, with its flourishing Hindu temples. Population redistribution is a must. As an old Tamil who has seen Tamil politics opposing the Donoughmore reforms, and finally morphing into Eelam militarism, I believe that these are the best investments for a future of peace and prosperity in Sri Lanka.

If there had been population restructing in Sri Lanka, together with the further development of the railway and road ways left by the British, we would never had three decades of civil war. So, let us plan for the future intellegently and avoid ethnic, caste or religious enclaves of any kind.

LESSONS FROM SERENDIB - A model of social achievement, Sri Lanka still lacks pluralism

By Ananda-USA

June 29, 2011

While the author of this article describes some aspects of the achievements made since Sri Lanka regained her sovereignty, he neither recognizes, nor credits, the policies of governance that led to those achievements in Sri Lanka in contrast to policies implemented in India.

First of all, he takes exception to our honoring Lanka with the prefix 'Sri' to indicate its resplendence. We children of mother Lanka recognize and value the special beauty and astonishing bounty of our resplendent island home, more than any others. We honor our country, for it is anointed by the Lord Buddha himself as the permanent refuge of his compassionate teaching. We are also the protectors of the ancient heritage our forefathers created in Sri Lanka, and are committed to make this land shine again. Is it then a surprise that to our minds, Sri Lanka is an altogether proper and fitting name for this Resplendent Land?
  
He then suffers a major  relapse and joins the chorus of ignorant critics of "Sinhala majoritarianism" as if it were alien Martians who, in his own words, "made this country what India might have been if we had got things right." 

He fails to realize that the things he praises in Sri Lanka were created by successive Sinhala-dominated governments. Does he not realize that caste, sex and race discrimination were eliminated by them? Does he not realize that enlightened policies enacted by Sinhala-dominated governments created the highly literate citizenry of Sri Lanka, and opened up jobs in government and industry to all irrespective of community? Enlightened policies made universal healthcare, public transport, and electricity, available to every citizen in equal measure. It is also not by accident that the International Labor Organization (ILO) identified Sri Lanka as a model of fair and just labor relations for developing nations.

He should walk the streets of Sri Lanka, and experience the religious freedoms and cultural diversity enjoyed by Sri Lankans, and test their hearts and minds by speaking with them at depth, before implying wrongly that somehow "Sinhala majoritarianism" denied legitimate freedoms to any segment of Sri Lankan society. He should not confuse racist discriminatory demands by some groups  for special privileges unavailable to other citizens with lack of equity. Sri Lanka does not govern by devolving power on communal bases, as India often does; that is why Sri Lankans enjoy greater social equity than Indians.

Granting political, police and land rights to various groups based on communal considerations of race, religion, language, sex, caste or wealth, as India often does to its ultimate detriment, are not the policies that led to the high level of social equity in Sri Lanka that this author praises. On the contrary, it is the refusal to grant them on communal bases that underpins Sri Lanka's success. Policies geared to creating only ONE COMMUNITY of Sri Lankan citizens irrespective of communal attributes should be preserved, and extended, as the principal means of ensuring peace, harmony, social and economic progress in Sri Lanka.

National Integration through equal citizenship blind to communal considerations should be the path forward, not National Disintegration by allocating different privileges to different people, slicing and dicing the nation into communal fiefdoms.

The National Goal should be the creation of ONE Nation, of ONE People, sharing ONE Destiny. All Government Policies should be geared to achieving that goal.

...................................

By Mukul Kesavan

TelegraphIndia.com
June 29, 2011

 I’ve spent my holiday in Sri Lanka trying to resist the conclusion that this country is what India might have been if we had got things right.

I know this is a lazy comparison, not least because India is so large and Sri Lanka so small. Delhi and its suburban satellite towns add up to 22 million people which is two million more than the entire population of Sri Lanka. On the other hand, if you were to compare India’s national capital region to Sri Lanka, the island nation would come out of that comparison very well indeed. I suppose the better comparison would be with Kerala, which is adjacent to Sri Lanka, roughly the same size, similarly literate and generally more evolved than the rest of India. But even here the Sri Lankans come out ahead: they have (or had) a world-conquering cricket team; Kerala has Sreesanth.

I’ve always known in a distant way Sri Lankans live longer than Indians do, are vastly better educated and that their country ranks nearly 30 places higher than India does on the United Nations Development Programme’s human development index. But this abstract superiority hadn’t prepared me for a) the general absence of squalor and wretchedness in Sri Lanka b) the all-round loveliness of the place and c) the civility and courtesy that marked my transactions as a tourist.

To start with, the immigration official at the airport gave me a visa and waved me through in less than a minute. The squinting plain-clothes policemen in Delhi who pretend to be immigration officers take a lot longer letting me back into my own country. Inside 15 minutes of landing, I was in Ceylon.

Yes, Ceylon. I was a teenager when this country changed its name and early socialization makes it hard for me to think of it as Sri Lanka. Radio Ceylon played Hindi film music non-stop at a time when All India Radio, in a hissy fit of high culture, banned its broadcast, so my memories of the discarded name are good. Besides, Sri Lanka doesn’t sound right. As the name of a slightly self-important person, yes. As the name of a nation, no. Why not just Lanka? Think of the Indian republic amending its Constitution to rename itself Mr India. Or Sriman Bharat. An honorific built into a country’s name? What were they thinking?

We travelled north from Colombo to Habarana to visit Anuradhapura and Sigiriya, two of the oldest sites of Sri Lankan Buddhism. In the course of a five-hour road journey, a few things stood out. First, the landscape was continuously lovely in a lush way that North Indians like me are unused to. Paddy-fields, palm trees, pineapple stalls, lagoons and little houses with tiled roofs and pillared porches, unspooled mile after mile, hour after hour. It was a little like Goa on a grand scale. The villages and little towns we passed through seemed to take the highway for granted, so they weren’t rimmed by dhabas and truck repair shops and rickety hoardings and assorted ugliness.

The non-stop prettiness of the journey became a kind of provocation. I began to look for the brokenness and poverty that I see as South Asia’s signature qualities. We stopped for lunch at Kurunegala, a little market town. The open-air restaurant overlooked Kurunegala Lake, one of the dozens of lakes that made the Sri Lankan landscape ridiculously beautiful. I walked around its edge, actually looking for plastic bags and the other detritus of tourism, but it was all perfectly clean. It was then that I realized that I didn’t have to selectively process the world around me to edit out squalor. The tourist route, at any rate, didn’t seem to do squalor.

The other remarkable thing about the world we drove through was the systematic and visible presence of the State… in a good way. In every other substantial village that we passed we saw solidly built, tended structures with clearly painted signs that indicated they were early learning centres or training institutions or small government hospitals and everywhere we saw boys and girls in the white uniforms common to all government schools in Sri Lanka. Tiny towns had substantial local assembly buildings. The welfare State in Sri Lanka, even to a casual tourist’s eye, isn’t an aspiration, it actually exists.

This Sri Lankan talent for not allowing the built world to crumble has some paradoxical results. Anuradhapura, the country’s ancient capital and home to its oldest and most venerable Buddhist sites, is at least 2,000 years old. Many of its stupas or dagobas, are so old that they make Banaras’s built heritage look recent. The Abhayagiri Dagoba, for example, was first built in the 2nd century BC. While it’s understandable that the toll of time, the vandalism of Indian invaders and the need for renovation have led to modifications of the original structures, the zealousness of the restoration is sometimes excessive.

For example, the Ruvanvelisaya Dagoba, like Abhayagiri, was built in the 2nd century BC. Except that it has been whitewashed with such municipal zeal that it looks as if it had been built yesterday.

To the tourist, Buddhism seems everywhere. There are splendid seated and standing statues of the Buddha on streetcorners, on lakesides, on hill-tops, generally painted a serene white. We passed through villages decked out with ribbons and banners for a Buddhist festival, our car crept behind Buddhist processions, the lifts in one magnificent seaside hotel, Mount Lavinia, announced special vegetarian meals for Poya, the full-moon day which is sacred to Buddhists and is marked every month as a public holiday.

It isn’t hard to empathize with Ceylon’s post-colonial impulse to invoke a Buddhist past as the foundation of the new nation. To the political leaders of a small island nation with an ancient and unbroken Theravada Buddhist tradition, off the southern tip of a sub-continent marked by the massive presence of both Hinduism and Islam, it must have seemed reasonable to consolidate a Sinhala Buddhist republic. Travelling through Sri Lanka I can see how attractive the idea of a culturally homogeneous nation can be, and how homogeneity can begin to seem to mean not uniformity, but a kind of harmony.

It doesn’t, though. The promise of the idyllic, organic homeland is always a lie, even in Serendib. I didn’t travel to the north of Sri Lanka so I can’t comment on the state of the Tamil country, but history has taught us that everywhere in South Asia, even in this island Eden, majoritarianism has always led to violence and pogrom and civil war.

If, after the end of the civil war, there has been any attempt to replace Sinhala majoritarianism with a more inclusive pluralism, it isn’t evident in the country’s newspapers. All the commentary about Channel 4’s documentary, Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields, denounced it as biased, fraudulent and intent on discrediting President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government. It’s possibly too early for the Sinhalese majority to rethink the nature of their State; the end of the civil war and their army’s victory over the monstrous Prabhakaran are too close to them. But it must happen and those of us who see in Sri Lanka’s social achievement a model for the rest of South Asia must hope it happens soon