There is no doubt that the 280,000+ IDPs deserve urgent attention. The fact that they are Tamils, or Tamil speaking, should be of no consequence. This is a humanitarian problem and those people are victims of circumstances.

The fault lines of ethnic representation have proved to be disastrous, in over sixty years of this nation’s existence. I have no doubt that the group of “Concerned Tamils” are well intentioned but I see no reason to go to ‘battle’ along lines drawn by those whose directions were neither well-intentioned or well-thought.

Nor will Ms Thiruchendran’s nostalgic appeal to go back to the ways of the “old left” lead anybody to a new dawn. They never did and never will.

The near ground zero conditions in Sri Lanka have created conditions for fresh thinking and new leadership. I’d like to think that the remaining elements of the nation’s sordid past have triumphantly robbed themselves of the very oxygen they need for their own survival. Under the circumstances, I’d rather watch them gasp for their political breath, weighed down by the 280000+ IDPs and devoid of life giving distractions from the past.

Why do we sign as ‘Concerned Tamils of Sri Lanka?’ It is not for lack of endorsement, by very many non-Tamil Sri Lankans, of every clause of each of our statements. Elsewhere, Tamil voices are heard loud and clear on our problems, but within our island, independent Tamil voices have been progressively stilled. In this crisis situation, we have a right and a duty to express our concerns collectively as Tamils of Sri Lanka. It will not do for the Tamil Diaspora or for Tamil politicians to be the sole spokespersons for the Tamils of Sri Lanka. Independent Tamil voices need to be heard… Our fears were set out in (the) First Statement: ‘The manner in which the final phase is worked out and the terms on which it is brought to a close are critical to the future of ethnic relations in Sri Lanka.’

We have already, as Concerned Tamils of Sri Lanka, called for a reversal of all ethnic cleansing over the decades, of Tamils and non-Tamils alike. We now go on to assert that the future of the overwhelming majority of the 280,000 IDPs as well as over 3 million Tamil citizens of Sri Lanka lies within the borders of this island. While we very much welcome the concerns shown and assistance forthcoming from overseas, we need to negotiate our future and to preserve our ethnic identity within Sri Lanka. We have been sharing this island from time immemorial and are committed to continuing to do so as citizens with individual and collective rights, not second to those of any other ethnicity.

Even a cursory glance of recent issues of our English-language newspapers will reveal that, regular columnists apart, Tamil voices have indeed been stilled. When I suggested to some of my Tamil friends that they should voice their concerns in public, many confessed that they were afraid to do so. Some said that they would be willing to express their concerns only collectively, in a large group, preferably multi-ethnic. Is it only the Tamil Diaspora that is able and willing to voice Tamil concerns? Are they to be the new sole representatives of the Tamils of Sri Lanka? Is that acceptable to Selvy? It is in response to this very unhealthy trend that we initiated the series of Statements of Concerned Tamils of Sri Lanka.

The Concerned Tamils have consistently taken a constructive, cooperative approach, avoiding criticizing government policy, but rather pointing out discrepancies between government policy as expressed by the President and some of what is practiced on the ground. The leaders of all political parties and all sections of the population need to work together to advance our common concerns, particularly the urgent concerns of the 280,000 new IDPs (virtually all Tamil) as well as earlier batches of IDPs of all ethnic groups, notably the entire Muslim population of the North evicted by the LTTE. In this context, does Selvy dispute the value of Tamil voices urging that there should be neither ethnic discrimination nor undue delay in resettling all IDPs?

Several of the individuals with ‘humanitarian, sympathetic, empathetic, and progressive views’ referred to by Selvy (e.g. Somapala Gunadheera in The Island of July 14, 2009) have been very supportive of the initiative of Concerned Tamils of Sri Lanka and none, to my knowledge, have questioned its usefulness. She refers to Bishop Lakshman, surely one of the great leaders of Sri Lanka of the 20th century. He was under treatment for a serious heart condition in the U.K. when the 1983 pogrom occcured. Against his doctor’s advice, he returned to Sri Lanka and visited IDP camps in the North and East. He was shattered by what he learnt from the IDPs, went on to formulate his celebrated Pastoral Address (parts of it were expressly from his perspective as a Sinhalese), and died soon afterwards- an indirect victim of the 1983 pogrom. I refer Selvy to that Pastoral Address in which he analyzes, one by one, from a Sinhalese perspective, the familiar reasons widely put forward to explain the 1983 pogrom. Did the many acts of violence by armed Tamil militants warrant violent retaliation against other Tamils? The Bishop’s response was that we need to rise above ‘tribal vengeance’ and ‘tribal morality.’ The full text of the Bishop’s Pastoral Address of November 1983 merits careful reading and re-reading.

If the Government and others (notably the commentators above) concerned do not want to practice discrimination, the least minimum they can do is to treat these Tamil IDP’s as the other IDP’s by aloowing them to go where they want to go including Wanni.

As TULF President Anandasangaree said the IDP camps might find itself EMPTY and the UN and the Sri Lankan Government can SAVE millions of dollars/rupees in cash and would also EARN the hearts and minds of the PEOPLE be they Tamils, Muslims, Sinhalese or anyone else.

What is needed now and first is not the resettlement of the Tamil IDP’s but freedom of movement of the Tamil IDP’s.

She asks why it should only be Tamil humanist who should concern themselves about IDPS and not Sinhalese,Muslims,Burghers and Malay humanists as well.

But it is divisive bigots and jackals like JAN who hide behind a pseudonym due to their inhumanity and come out with absurd inanities due to their myopic delusions……