FROM NECESSARY WAR TO SUSTAINABLE PEACE IN SRI LANKA

Interestingly of the four best pieces I have read on the first anniversary of the war, three are by Indian analyst/commentators, of whom two are military professionals: Gen Ashok K. Mehta’s Manekshaw paper No 22 for the Centre for Land Warfare Studies (New Delhi) on ‘How Eelam war 4 was Won’ (which cannot be read by any patriot or anti-fascist without a lump in one’s throat or mist in one’s eyes), the piece by Col R Hariharan in The Hindu and by PK Balachandran in the Indian Express. The fourth is by a youthful security researcher Sergei de Silva Ranasinghe writing in the respected Australian periodical, The Diplomat.

Within Sri Lanka and among Sri Lankans, the debate on the war may be differentiated into four positions:

  1. Those who condemn both the war and the voices that justify it and approve of its results (such as mine),
  2. Those who applaud both the war and its aftermath, condemning both the critics of the war and the post-war present.
  3. Those who criticise both the present policy of the state and the past of the Tigers, while either criticising or observing a vow of silence on the last war and the politico-military leadership that took it to success. This position is both intellectually dishonest as well as a-historical: it seems to assume that Prabhakaran and his Tigers were whisked away by a magician or wished away by pious preaching.
  4. Those who advocated and supported the war and still do in retrospect, refusing to allow a reversal or revision of the ‘correct historical verdict’ that it was a necessary and Just war, while simultaneously seeking and struggling for a just peace.  This stance holds that external-internal (chiefly but not exclusively Indo-Lanka) dynamics would open space for the transition from a Just War and victory—which requires consolidation– to a Just Peace.

This last position (which I hold) is hardly represented on GV and may seem unrepresentative to the GV constituency, but its fundaments (‘we supported Sri Lanka’s war and are pleased you won, but you must not waste time, and should move towards a sustainable peace based on a political settlement with the Tamils’) are shared by all those states which supported the Sri Lankan war effort by military, economic and politico-diplomatic means, i.e. the majority of states in the international system, including all of Asia. More pertinently, all public opinion surveys, including the most recent (Colin Irwin’s surveys of 2009 and 2010 for the Univ of Liverpool) reveal that in respect of its basics, this is indeed the position of the vast majority of Sri Lankans (anti-Tiger, pro-war, pro-victory, pro-Mahinda, anti-federalism, pro-enhanced provincial devolution within a unitary system). A trawl through GV archives reminds us of a 2007 MARGA institute opinion survey introduced and summarised by Godfrey Gunatilleke, revealing complete congruency with the Irwin surveys of 2009-2010. In 2007:

  • the large majority — 84% — favour a total military defeat of the LTTE and recapture of the territory presently held by it
  • While only 22 % approved a federal solution, most of the respondents — 87 % — were in favour of the provincial council system. 51% wanted the two provinces to be de-merged and continue as separate provinces

What is utterly significant is that no mainstream political formation, leadership, or intellectual tendency comes close to this binary view. The government reflected and implemented the first part, which no preceding administration did.  The CBK administration ignored the majority view on the second aspect, and toyed with the minority view, possibly under the ideological influence of the peace lobby. The Sinhala ultranationalists ignore the preference for provincial devolution, as do their targets and foes, the cosmopolitan liberals, who go for the federal model.

This brings us to the challenge of today and tomorrow. Provincial autonomy must be fought for because there is a serious danger that it will go by the board. It is a battle that can be won because there is a bed-rock of public opinion in favour and the realities of external factors and forces  pushing (or at least nudging) in this direction.  Ironically, the ‘moderate’ TNA and ‘enlightened liberal’ opinion is not for it; preferring to push for a federal or quasi-federal outcome.  The problem is that there is no significant public support for it and enormous public opposition to it.  As philosophical method cautions us, ‘Is’ cannot be derived from ‘ought’. Realism teaches us on the contrary that ‘ought’ must bear relation to ‘is’, by which is meant that in order to be feasible, the ideal aim — ‘ought’ — must not be simply a wish-list, but a projection of the most progressive tendencies and probabilities of the present.

A sustainable peace is not easy to conceptualise. For it to be implementable it must be viable and for it to be viable it must guarantee security – both ‘national’ and ‘human’ — and be in accordance with the strategic needs of the Sri Lankan state.  It is, in short, problematic and must not merely be prescribed but ‘problematized’ by public and policy intellectuals.  Years after the war, the Sinhalese and the Tamils, the two major communities on the island have lessons to learn, but are they doing so? Will they do so? It is far too late in the day to place postures of politically correct punditry ahead of the political truth, however deep one has to cut and drill down in order to get to it and however deep the truth itself cuts when expressed coldly and analytically.

Antonio Gramsci drew an important distinction between the West and the East, by use of metaphor. In the East, once you capture the main fortress, you win the war, but in the West, you may capture the fort but then you see a complex network of fortifications and tunnels etc snaking all round. This spoke to the difference between the East where ‘the state was everything and civil society nothing’ and the West, where the opposite was true. Therefore in the East you can win by war of manoeuvre and frontal assault but in the east you have to fight a long and patient war of position, capturing trench by trench, which takes time. This is the strategy of the long march through the institutions, where one accumulates intellectual, cultural ethical and moral leadership, so that you have established consensus before the final a decisive assault.

Whether they know it or not, the same experience has been undergone by the Sinhalese and Tamils. Both the Sinhalese and Tamils thought that each other resembled a relatively simple ‘Eastern’ formation (in the Gramscian sense) which could be knocked out by a frontal blow, while the reality is that both have a ‘Western’ configuration, with significant complexity and ‘reserves’.

The Tamils thought that Prabhakaran and his miraculous Tigers had punched the Sinhala armed forces into submission and always would. They did not understand that however many Mankulam ( 1990), Mullaitivu ( 1996) and Elephant Pass (2000) fortresses fell to the enemy, behind these forts and this army, were the Sinhala people who just kept resisting; refusing to give in.  Similarly when the armed forces beat Prabhakaran last year and decimated the Tigers, the Sinhalese thought that the Tamils had been decisively beaten at Nandikadal and thus it would be easy to cow them. The Sinhalese did not understand that behind the Tigers were a globalised community, the mobilised Diaspora.

In my perspective on Sri Lankan politics, especially the politics of ethno-nationalism, I have gravitated to what might be called a combination of the Realist and Prudentialist schools. While the Idealists range from Kant to Kofi Annan, and the Realists range from Thucydides, through Machiavelli, to Lenin, Morgenthau and Kissinger, the Prudentialists claim ancestry from Aristotle, Montesquieu, Pascal, and Tocqueville through to Raymond Aron. More recently the Prudentialist school became indistinguishable from the new Ethical Realist tendency (Anatole Lieven). I agree with those who consider the best post-war Western strategic and foreign policy thinkers such as Reinhold Niebuhr, George Kennan and Stanley Hoffman, to be Ethical Realists.

The father of the Realist school of political theory and international relations, Thucydides, tells us that as Athens grew strong there was apprehension in Sparta. Applying realism I conclude that the outbreak of the war was inevitable as was the LTTE’s defeat. The policies and practices of the decade extending roughly from 1973-83, pushed the Tamils to the brink of what must have seemed like eternal victimhood and servitude. This posed an existential threat. The Sinhalese gravely underestimated the Tamils. Given their sense of selfhood, deriving in part from their numbers in the neighbourhood, their global spread, and the status they enjoyed in other parts of the world, they decided to make a fight of it. That much was inevitable. What was not was the nature, the character of that war; its duration and its dynamics.

A Realist reading would similarly yield the following conclusion: Given the sheer demographic weight and the fact that the Sinhalese as a collective are unique to the island of Sri Lanka, it was inevitable that they would fight back, especially when, with the CFA, the ISGA demand and the emergence of the LTTE air arm, it looked like the Tamil Tigers would establish a dominant position on the island while raiding the South at will, murdering its leaders and keeping the Sinhalese in their thrall.

In this stage the Tamils and the West, underestimated the Sinhalese, and lost the war. That too was inevitable, given the numbers and the Sinhala sense that their backs were to the sea and they had no strategic space to retreat. Then, they morphed from lambs to lions, rose against the Tigers and devoured them.

The international targeting of Sri Lanka on this first anniversary of the victory in the war shows that the Sinhalese have once again underestimated the Tamils, who despite their military decimation, have a significant global ‘reserve army’ and international leverage sufficient to bring an avalanche down on the head of the  Sinhala leadership.

Following in the tradition of Thucydides, a Realist reading would remark that there are three strategic perspectives for and of the island. Some among the Sinhalese hold that though the island holds more than one community, given the overwhelming superiority of numbers and the civilizational-linguistic uniqueness of the Sinhalese, they must enjoy sole ownership of the island, while the minorities remain as tenants. The second perspective is that of many Tamils who hold that given their numbers off the island and their cultural-civilizational antiquity and achievements, they should have co-equal sovereignty with the Sinhalese over the island — that being the animating spirit from 50:50 to the ISGA/PTOMS.

The third perspective, which is the Realist-Prudentialist one that I share, is that given the existence of more than one community on the island, power and sovereignty must be shared between them all; given the Sinhalese specificity and huge demographic preponderance on the island  that power and sovereignty cannot be shared equally and must of necessity be unequal and hierarchical; and given the external ( regional and global)  spread and demonstrated leverage of the Tamils, that unequal sharing cannot be quite as unequal as the Sinhalese would wish.

So the Realist-Prudentialist perspective would conclude that the solution is for both communities to accept that there will be neither sole ownership nor equal partnership but there will be shareholder ship by all communities; a shareholding in which the Sinhalese will have a majority but now quite as overwhelming as they would wish. The Tamil share or stake will not be merely tokenistic but they will be minority shareholders, even in combination with other minorities.  This is the case because the domestic balance of power is such, and the Sinhalese have a much bigger stake, existentially, in Sri Lanka than does any other community. They cannot but be the major stakeholders of and in the island. This is a consociation model of sorts but I would prefer to see it as uneven, hierarchical sharing of political space and power. It is not a model of Sinhala political monopoly, but of Sinhala political pre-eminence (hegemony?) in power relations. This is not to be mistaken for unequal rights the level of citizens: all citizens must have equal rights, in law and enforcement, be they Sinhalese, Tamils or of any other ethnicity.  This is a model of equal citizenship but of unequal political power and influence; a domestic Yalta model. It is a model that is neither a hyper-centralised unitary one (1972-1988), nor a federal, still less con-federal one, in which the units have a veto (union of regions package, ISGA). It is a strong state, unitary not federal, centralised but not hyper-centralist, with a degree of autonomy that is sufficiently broad to be authentic and centripetal, but sufficiently circumscribed not to be centrifugal.

After the war, the only serious conversation should be about negotiating the degree of unevenness in a necessarily, inevitably hierarchical of power relations in a structure of shared power and sovereignty among the citizens of our common island home. My personal perspective is that the deliberation should take place somewhere within the square constituted by the 13th amendment (1988), the draft Constitution of August 2000, the APRC Experts Committee ‘majority report’ (2007) and the APRC proposals of 2009.

Some may observe critically, that mine seems an ethnic if not primordial perspective, and that this is not the way things are in other parts of the world. However I am a universalist who has grown to respect the Aristotelian contribution of focusing on specificity and particularity, in historical time and geographic space. For instance, India has many nationalities and is thus multi-polar while Sri Lanka’s demographic and power distribution is bi-polar, if not strictly on the island, then in a sub-regional frame. Our problem is to prevent the bi-polar distribution from becoming a perpetual zero-sum game. Singapore has four national languages, but its communities (Chinese, Malays, and Indians/Tamils) have a regional or global presence. The Sinhalese do not. The Tamils do. This means that the Sinhalese feel they cannot afford a level playing field. They are apprehensive about a trade off, in which they retain an uneven playing field with politico-cultural space at the periphery, because of the proximity of Tamil Nadu and the fear of osmosis. This is why under Mahinda Rajapakse there is dawdling on movement in either direction: equality at the centre or space at the periphery.   For better or worse, the Sinhalese do not have the external component of national strength and power, to avoid making reform on one or the other, without a world of pain being brought down on them. This past week’s international offensive is just the arrowhead.

The Sinhalese simply do not have the strategic space to afford the generosity of conceding equal power on the island, but they do not have the strategic weight globally to retain sole power or sole ownership of the Sri Lankan state. They are simultaneously too strong (on the island) and too weak (off it).  The Tamils are too strong off shore, to be crushed as a collective under the Sinhala jackboot though Prabhakaran was, but they are too weak on the island to carve out the political arrangement that fulfils their self image and self-esteem. A prudent, pragmatic compromise is imperative.

Departing further from postures of politically correct pedagogues, I would argue that a Realist re-reading of Dutugemunu (a reading I had ventured in print slightly a decade ago) would trace the contours of such a pragmatic compromise. Dutugemunu of Mahavamsa legend evokes polarised responses: hero to the Sinhala chauvinists, anathema to the cosmopolitans. In a pioneering and valuable critique Gananath Obeysekara homed in on the consolatory episode in which the dying king is assured that his pangs of conscience are not in order.  While I agree with Prof John Richardson that this prevented the ‘Dharmasokan turn’ on the part of Dutugemunu and thereby Sinhala Buddhism, my own point is the facile resolution of the question of violence prevented the wrestling between religio-philosophical ethic of non-violence and the state imperative of the use of violence, which in the Christian case resulted in the theology of Just War, which has become a part of secular political philosophy. But I digress: the Dutugemunu legend contains a doctrine which I believe to be the viable strategic solution of our dilemma.

The Dutugemunu doctrine is twofold:

  1. The Indian ocean at our back and a Tamil kingdom in the North (with a Tamil hinterland further back) gives us little strategic space; given this strategic situation, a rival Tamil power centre on the North of the island will always be strategically intolerable and will have to be eliminated; The island’s geopolitical situation dictates strategic uni-polarity. Thus, a unitary state, not federalism still less con-federalism.
  2. The Mahavamsa legend has it that having won the war Dutugemunu appoints a Tamil ‘sub-king’ to rule the area ‘in accordance with the traditions and customs’ of the area and its people. Thus devolution and autonomy, not demographic incursion.

Now, the cosmopolitan liberal idealists refuse to accept the grand strategic validity of Proposition (1), and the contemporary Sinhala chauvinists fail to practise, indeed do not accept the validity of proposition (2). The fact that Sinhala chauvinism has deviated from Dutugemunu is a massive vulnerability which cannot be exploited ideologically because there is no one to do so, since that would require acceptance of and adherence to Proposition (1), in order to have viability and legitimacy, and indeed strategic soundness. The two propositions constitute an inseparable, organic strategic unity; a strategic synthesis. What makes matters more interesting is that public opinion surveys from 1997 (available in a PRIO bibliography) right up to the University of Liverpool’s survey of 2009-10 conducted by Prof Colin Irwin, reveals majority support precisely for the combination of the two propositions of my Realist reading of the Dutugemunu doctrine: strong centre, unitary state, no federalism or Indian model, tri-lingualism, zero tolerance of a parallel Tamil army, improved devolution and provincial autonomy.

I am a universalist-modernist who is also a pluralist, because I recognise uneven development.  The universal is an abstraction which is mediated by the particular in order to become real-concrete. Some think that world history is heading in one political direction – which I do not, preferring to think that each model has its advantages and disadvantages and that history remains open. Even though I respect and applaud genuinely universal norms and standards, I am enough of a votary of uneven development to know that not every state or society is at the same level of development as the other and that states have to go through a process of evolution. A reading of the Springtime of Nations, namely Europe in 1848, would reveal a picture of ethno-lingual nationalism as the propellant of nation building and a zero-sum game with minorities, rather like post Independence Sri Lanka.  That first great wave of European nationalism and state-building left an unfinished problem of internal ‘national questions’.

Sri Lanka, like many societies in the periphery, was impacted by colonialism with paradoxical results: one the one hand, internal development was retarded, holding back certain changes that would otherwise have come about, and on the other hand, accelerated certain processes ‘artificially’ as it were, rendering their results rather rootless in the native soil and consciousness. This is so in the matter of nation and state building. There are stages of political growth and Sri Lanka and many states in the global South at different stages of politico-historical development from those in the First world. Therefore, notions of nation, nationalism and nationality and concepts of citizenship are rawer and rougher edged, less refined and evolved.  Is Demos of mature or mid- modernity, Ethnos of and in early modernity?  We have a historical journey to complete, towards a universalism which accommodates pluralism; towards modernity, guided by Reason.

End of War Special Edition

  • Mala Srikumar

    /I am a universalist-modernist who is also a pluralist, because I recognise uneven development./

    Yes, this ‘who I am’ let you justify your government’s the heavy collateral damage in Geneva,and got commended for ‘eradicating terrorism’.

    Yes, the sri lankan government sponsoring sinhala colonization in north east is alright under this “who I am” definition.

    Yes, this “who I am” was part of Varatharajaperumal’s EPRLF government that forcefully conscripted many underage Tamil kids for Tamil National Army who were killed in vain.

    All of them are necessary evil, aren’t they?

    You are no difference from dead LTTE leader, aren’t you?

    Do not enforce and impose your victor’s rule on to the other side; it would only help to go for another cycle.

    You are no difference from Hariharan & Co either. Both parties try to justify your own state terrorism in the name of eliminating terrorism. Unless one tries to really go into the roots of the problem and genuine grievances of people, and to respect ea ch community’s right of self determination, this vicious cycle will unfortunately continue; it does not matter how thick and decorative your wall paper is. If People of Palestine have genuine grievances and unshakable rights for managing their own issues, certainly Tamils have too.

    Go on play Sri Lanka’s Christopher Hitchens and amuse us.

  • Susantha

    Dr Dayan
    Please take your time to look at this link from the dutch empire archives which clearly says that in the 1600s elephant pass which is in the present day Jaffna district was populated with Buddhists and was the border between the ducth colony and the Kingdom of Kandy and the Dutch archives of the VOC administration have no mention of Hindus in Sri Lanka they only mention Buddhists or Catholics No mention of Hindus.

    http://www.nationaalarchief.nl/AMH/detail.aspx?page=dpost&lang=en&id=682#tab2

    Also differentiating of Indian Tamils and Sri Lankan Tamils was done in 1911 according to the census department of Sri Lanka before that they were classed as one

    Question here is do Tamils have a right to self determination in Sri Lanka answer is

    The right of ‘self determination’ means the right of a nation to self-government. But such a right exists only in that nation’s own motherland – otherwise it would mean a preposterous demand for a ‘right’ for invaders or immigrants to colonise the lands of other nations! Tamil immigrants to the west have not dared to claim such a ‘right’ in the UK, France or other countries! Since the Tamils’ motherland is Tamil Nadu, the Tamils’ ‘right to self determination’ exists only there

  • Huh

    Susantha,

    that is contradictory with what other eyewitnesses have claimed. Please access Robert Knox’s ” An Historical Relation of the island of Ceylon…..”, online, it is readily availale. this book was published in about 1680,. He CLEARLY states that above the kandyan territory, around anuradhapura and above, there lives a SEPARATE group of people living there who are different from sinhalese, called the ” malabars”. Also, you seem to think that just because many tamils were settled in the east and the north, that means that they have no right to Sri Lanka, yet many historians say that from the earliest times, Sinhalese and Tamils have coexisted on the island. This can be seen in the social customs and language of the northern and eastern tamils which are in many cases VERY different from TN tamils. I’m sure part of the north and east were settled with tamils. HOWEVER, the same thing can be said of MANY of the low-country sinhalese who themselves are the descendants of agricultural workers brought by the dutch and settled in the south. The north, east, center, etc. do have the right to federal states, regardless of the ethnicities in those areas.

  • Pearl Thevanayagam

    Dear Dayan,
    To categorise that you disapproved of the war in your proclamation in this piece is quite derisive and marks you as someone whose mind is somewhat confused and thinking convoluted.
    In your postings you have virtually placed the President on a pedestal; yet you proclaim you are a partisan for peace.
    Your erudite theories citing Western and universally accepted scholars do not fool the thousands of Tamils who are still trying to come to grip with th reality that this govt. showed no mercy in ethnic cleansing.
    AI, HRW and independent journalists have proven beyond reasonable doubt that Mahinda, Gotabhaya, Rambukwella and Tamil paramilitary groups such as EPDP, splinter LTTE breakaways such as Karuna and Pillayan transcended all norms and decency to enable this autocratic, nepotic govt to entrench their political dominance despite rendering thousands of haples Tamil civilians homeless and straying abroad to seek refuge.
    What did your experience with Tamil militants teach you. You need to examine your inner self to realise that you are a product of perverted ideology.
    Please correct me if I am wrong.

  • Suren Raghavan

    Dear Dr Jayathilake,
    Amidst of your regular and personal attacks on me in this forum, I did not lose respect for the friend and teacher I had in you. Because arguably you are the most dialectically engaged public debater in the (English speaking) modern political discourse in Sri Lanka. This piece of your writing is a solid evidence to that immovable fact.

    What is it in that your conceptual analysis perpendiculars so much in either extremes? It is as though over night the waters (or wines) of the controlled democracy in Singapore has changed your ideological disposition. I am glad you have shown trajectories of a middle path to capitalize this post war possibility. I only hope the regime and its rulers will have the wisdom to see this.

    I assume your response will be another possible attack on me. I suppose that is part of the polity

  • Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

    Dear Pearl,

    Where on earth have I said that I disapproved of the war? Category 4 is those of us who approved of and actively supported the war but are dissatsfied about the nature of the peace. As for my experinece with the Tamil miltants, what it taught me was that since almost all of them were murdered by the Tigers, the latter were fascists who should be exterminated.

    Suren,

    You are completely mistaken. Please show me what has changed from my interview in the Indian Naxalite journal Voice of Alternatives ( Feb 1988) in which i supported the IPKF military action againstbthe Tigers while supporting the implementation of the 13th amendment, through my 1995 Vikas book calling for Total War against the LTTE while implementing devolution, my article on Groundviews in mid 2008 entitled Winning thr war Winning the Peace, to my stand today? Nothing!

  • Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

    Mala Srikaumar,

    The Palestinians were chased away by the Jews who migrated to Israel in the early 20th century and especially after Hitler’s Holocaust in WW 2. The Palestinians cannot vote in Israeli elections. Are you trying to say that we Sinhalese are recent migrants to the island? or that Tamils aren’t fully enfranchised citizens? That is why, during your war, the Palestinians fully supported us, Sri Lanka! And during the Gaza war, the radical latin American countries which broke of DPL ties with Israel, supported Sri Lanka in our vote at the Human rights Council.

    If you read my articles I am totally opposed to Sinhala colonization in the North and east. If you can produce a single scrap of evidence that I have ever supported colonization, i’ll stop writing to GV! So, please stop lying, like the rest of your pro-Tiger tribe.

  • Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

    Dear Susantha and Huh,

    The truth lies somewhere in between. True, the Tamils as a national minority do not enjoy the right of self determination ( and I didn’t think they did once I was out of my twenties) BUT that doesn’t mean they do not need or deserve autonomy and the devolution of power. However, I doubt there is a case for federalism, when a far greater number in Tamil nadu live with quasi-federalism, and a longer running struggle, in Northern Ireland settled for devolution within a unitary state.

    Mala Srikumar,

    I am proud of my role in geneva and I do find myself close to the veiws of Col Hariharan. However i think you should recall that I resigned from Vardarajaperumal’s administration in 6 months flat, a year before he started forced recruitment for his TNA.

  • indonicus

    “Gen Ashok K. Mehta’s Manekshaw paper No 22 for the Centre for Land Warfare Studies (New Delhi) on ‘How Eelam war 4 was Won’ (which cannot be read by any patriot or anti-fascist without a lump in one’s throat or mist in one’s eyes)….”

    Juvenile, as always.

  • Huh

    Thank you Dr. Jayatilleka for your response. I also think Eelam is pointless, but if devolution is possible under a unitary state and the Tamils and Muslims and Sinhalese are far happier than they are under the current system, then so be it. However, I am wondering what you would personally suggest? Do you think a unitary state is for the best or do you think federalism in Sri Lanka would be better, and why?

  • Susantha

    Huh

    you claim you are a Sinhalese but most probably you are a tamil terrorist trying to act like a Sinhalese like most of the NGO crows.You cant change history for the advantage of your terrorist activities.supporting that history is supporting terrorism. Has Robert Knox said that the tamil workers integrated in to the Sinhala population?That book you mention doesn’t say anything like that its a recent fairy tale theory bought up by tamil terrorists.Like you have some extracts from robert knox book I can give you extracts from books by the Tamil historian Rasnayagam who said Sinhalese settled in jaffna before tamils and the greatest proof by Portuguese priest and historian Fr Queroz he clearly identifies that Sinhalese were living in North and that Jaffna was a Sinhalese kingdom in the book “the Conquest of Ceylon” and even your book by Robert Knox doesn’t give Tamil terrorists the right to the east.according to historians tamils have always tried to Invade Sri Lanka and there have been always at war with the Sinhalese and we have crushed them always and we will thrash them in the future as well if they try to be funny .Tamil invaders/Illegal immigrants can go and ask federal states from Toilet Nadu or from England or Netherlands as they have settled them here

  • Susantha

    Huh
    what would be more credible proof for history a book or Archives?

  • Huh

    No, he does not say that they integrated with the Sinhalese. And no, I assure you, I am a Sinhalese, not all Sinhalese people think that Tamils are invaders. You seem to fail to make the distinction between feuds between rulers and people. the Tamil people and sinhalese people have never really been at war with each other, it is the RULERS who were at war with each other. Again Susantha, how is supporting federalism terrorism? I guess the Kandyan rulers must be stupid terrorists as well, by your definition, since they requested federalism before anyone did. That has got to be the most ridiculous thing anyone has ever said on this website(although….I’m not holding my breath). There have been tamil migrants from very early times, MANY of whom have integrated into the sinhalese population in the past 2000 years or so. ANY LEGITIMATE HISTORIAN will tell you this. Many have comes as migrants to the south and many were there in the north as well. Anyways, nobody on this site takes your kind seriously, so I don’t know why I am even wasting my time.

    Again, Dr. Jayatilleka, getting back to my question, do you think a federal setup would be better or a unitary state with devolved power?

  • Humanist

    Huh, my sympathies are entirely with you as you take on the convoluted logic of the Susanthas of this world.

    But I’m suprised that you don’t know that Dayan Jayatilleke does not support federalism. I, for one, do support federalism but I agree with DJ (and there is a lot that I disagree with him) that it is not within the range of possiblities right now, given the current thinking of the Sinhalese polity. I hope the country will be mature enough for it some day but I think there are more serious issues to worry about right now – such as the 13 Amendment.

  • indonicus

    Susantha,
    Your link does not lead to any specific document. Could you provide the exact reference?
    Which governor was it?

  • Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

    Dear Huh,

    A unitary state with devolved power, as in the UK, China, the Philippines and Indonesia, to name but a few.

  • Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

    Indonicus, if you think patriotism and anti-fascism are ‘juvenile’, you should take off your pseudonym and say so publicly. No wonder there are so few of you, and you have hide like paedophiles.

  • Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

    Hey Indonicus,

    You are either an expat or, more likely, you voted for Ranil from 1999 to date didn’t you? You sure fit the profile.

  • Suren Raghavan

    Dr J,
    True to your nature you are again galactic if not hegemonic.

    You prove that you have been writing SL politics over 25 years which is more than ¾ of my life on this planet. Thus an analytical mapping of the contextual contours of your ideological gravitation (except for the constant independent variable of the pathological hatred towards the LTTE), will demand at least a PhD level research and time.

    If such endeavor is seen as worthy, then i suspect, that will be the job of a future historian in the post-Jayathilake era.

  • Suren Raghavan

    @ Huh,

    For a detailed anlysis why the present debate on Federalism as proposed by the western lobbies and their partners in SL fails, see the 2008 PhD thesis by Morten Oleson’s at Colombia Univesiry.

    What had failed is not the principles of federalism but the way it is debated, (mis)understood and (mis) interpreted since 1926 to date.

  • wijayapala

    Suren,

    see the 2008 PhD thesis by Morten Oleson’s at Colombia Univesiry.

    Couldn’t find it.

  • Huh

    Hey Suren

    Would it be possible for you to post a link to this thesis on this thread? I cannot find the thesis but I really want to read it.

  • indonicus

    Shhhhh Dayan,

    Settle down. No need to get so excited and cranky or your fragile ego will go to pieces.

    The word ‘juvenile’ seems to have touched a raw nerve. Ah, you big intellectuals! Ideas of steel. Egos of clay!

    I was not referring particulalrly to your “Patriotism” or your “anti-fascist” stance, which are dubious at best. I was talking about you going misty eyed and getting a lump in your throat when reading Ashok Mehta’s paper which has nothing that most people who had been following the progress of the war already did not know. Certainly nothing to go misty eyed over.

    There are patriots and patriots. Many of your friends (and mine) were killed by people calling themselves patriots. Mahinda Rajapakse calls himself a patriot and so do Somawansa Amerasinghe, Champika Ranawake and Wimal Werawansa. Until he turned against the Royal family all these people called Gen. Fonseka a patriot. Now only Somawansa does so. And, if I am not mistaken there is even a missile called “Patriot”. They are everywhere, these patriots and usually they are killing each other.

    And I guess if one doesn’t go misty eyed over Mehta’s paper one is not a true patriot or an anti fascist, right? Now that is a very “anti fascist” observation. If you are not with us…….

    No I have never voted for the UNP. Or the SLFP or the JVP for that matter. However, I have voted for the USA. Then you were with ‘us’. Man! Those days we thought you were a revolutionary. Articulate, intellectual and conscientious. Now I realise you are just articulate, even though what you articulate doesn’t always make sense. Just don’t drop poor Gramsci in it whenever you feel you can’t make an impression on your own.

    The pseudonym is for reasons of security. These days there are too many ‘patriots’ in Sri Lanka going around committing ‘fascist’ acts like making people disappear. I will not endanger my life or the lives of my family members just to introduce myself to you. And don’t tell me you have never used a pseudonym yourself.

    I would rather have a pseudonym that a pseudo intellect or a pseudo conscience. And I suggest rather than trying to find other people’s identities you try to find yourself, comrade!

  • Nicola

    The author betrays himself thoroughly in his responses to Indonicus above.

  • Susantha

    Huh
    I didn’t deny that Tamils have integrated into sinhalese over 1000s of years but what i am denying is this recent fairy tale brought up by tamil terrorists to lay claim to Sri lanka (Sinhala country)

    http://www.eelamwin.com/blog/?p=81

    Rulers represent people

    also the fact that tamils integrated in to sinhala over 1000s of years clearly proves that the tamils living in sri lanka now do not have a history of more than 500 years ..as any tamil that lived 1000s of years ago integrated into the sinhalese population and became part of Sri lanka ..and I would like to know what you think of the details in the oficial website of the dutch archives?according to it it clearly shows the the north and east became infested with these miserable creatures during the Dutch and British times.

    The tamil grievances will end the day they understand that sri lanka is the traditional homeland of the sinhalese

    Sri lanka is the homeland of the sinhalese,sinhala civilization and culture was built in SL.therefore sinhalese have a right to every inch of Sri Lanka.
    In the same way French have a right to every inch of France ,in the same way Japanese have a right to every inch of japan ,in the same way Norwegians have a right to every inch of Norway
    this is the truth,so is telling the truth racism?,by the way it is known that the truth hurts

    Indonicus
    its a link from the official website of the VOC administration archives.

  • jasmine

    What puzzles me is how Dr. DJ expects that Tamil and other minority Sri Lankans can enjoy equal rights as citizens if the Sinhalese community is to be given more political and other powers than other communities. Hasn’t Sri Lanka’s history as a modern nation already exposed the contradiction in this?

    As for the argument that Sinhalese civilizational-linguistic uniqueness justifies their demand for dominance, that claim can only be made by assuming that Indian Tamil and Sri Lankan Tamil cultures are the same. They are not. A Sri Lankan Tamil person has a hard time following Indian dialects of Tamil. Also, some Sri Lankan Tamil dialects are regionally different, and can’t be understood by SL Tamils from other areas, let alone Indian Tamils. I understand from GV articles that some of these dialects are inflected by the Sinhalese language. No one can live for hundreds of years in one country and still retain the original culture and language of the land from which they migrated. If SL Tamils have a global presence, that is in large part due to the push factor of Sinhalese domination. And now their global presence is being used to justify the domination?

    Ask Singaporeans and Malaysians if the culture of their Tamils of Sri Lankan heritage is the same as that of Tamils of Indian heritage.

    The colonial Straits Settlements of Malacca, Singapore and Penang boast of a civilizationally and linguistically unique culture that is not found anywhere else on the globe–that of Peranakan culture. They don’t use that to claim special rights over others.

    I guess it just boils down to some communities in the world knowing how to live and let live, and others which are just not so inclined–especially when they have political tyrants who indulge their ethnic chauvinism.

  • Suren Raghavan

    @ Huh,

    Yes one cannot find it in the public domain as it is part of the academic collection of Columbia Uni. NYC. (not Colombo Uni)

    Send me your email. I will try and send it you
    Cheers

  • Burning_Issue

    Susantha,

    “also the fact that tamils integrated in to sinhala over 1000s of years clearly proves that the tamils living in sri lanka now do not have a history of more than 500 years ..as any tamil that lived 1000s of years ago integrated into the sinhalese population and became part of Sri lanka .”

    Please do not delude yourself; it seems that you are well and trully indoctrinated in the Sinhala Buddhist Chauvinistic materials! I would suggest that you conjure to have an open mind and study materials that shaped the inhabitants of the Island pre-Buddhism and post-Buddhism. One thing that you need to know is that, Tamils assimilated into Sinhala and Sinhala assimilated into Tamil. Hence, Sri Lankan Tamils have as much claim to the Island as their own as the Sinhala. This does not mean that, the Tamils’ demand for separation is justified but the history of Sri Lanka has both Sinhala and Tamil intertwined. You need to get this in your head first and foremost and try and see things in perspective if you are really interested in engaging people on these forums.

  • Burning_Issue

    Dr. DJ,

    I note that this article of yours is far more balanced compare to your other articles that you wrote post-war. However, the term “necessary war” is subjective. In a war that was conducted in absolute secrecy needs a thorough scrutinised by a man of your calibre but you label it as “Necessary” regardless of mammoth human losses! If one were to know the actual human losses then one can say whether it was necessary or not! There will be times in the future when you will need to defend yourself in the context of Political Scientific Academics around the world!

    However, please state on this forum as to what you think about the statement below that was made on GV by one of the Indian doctors who served on Menik Farm camp:

    Tathagata Bose said,
    May 22, 2010 @ 2:54 pm
    http://www.groundviews.org/2010/05/20/i-remember-–-19-may-2010/#comments

    “I am an Indian pediatrician who served with the Indian Medical Team at Menik Farm IDP center. The point I am trying to raise is this – we were managing scores of infants with bullet / shell blast injuries (some festering, mostly healed). It gives an idea of the extent of collateral damage suffered by the civilians caught in the last days of the conflict. If an infant could not be protected, imagine the plight of older children and adults. The so-called “Sri Lankan Solution” being touted as the panacea for dealing with terrorism worldwide needs a thorough relook.”

  • SomewhatDisgusted

    Dear Wijayapala,

    RE: “I have an even greater example of the “consideration” you can find in advanced Western countries- how the elderly are treated…”

    I tend to agree with you that Sri Lankans have closer-knit family units than their western counterparts. I don’t know whether mine is a biased viewpoint, but it appears to be true. However, I don’t know whether it could be a result of our inter-dependence and/or whether this deteriorates rapidly when the independence of individuals increases with better economic circumstances. i.e. Is this culture doomed to extinction, assuming economic development? (I hope not). Or is there merely too much emphasis on individuality in the west and can a happy balance be struck? I hope it can. Japan might be a good case to compare with and I think OTC might be able to help here.

    Still, while we should acknowledge the good things we have, there’s no doubt of the need to address the bad. In that sense, the problem BalangodaMan has highlighted is valid. I attribute it mostly to the upper and middle “classes”, who are most capable of effecting change. I don’t see how less privileged people can be held accountable for an education they’ve never received or options they’ve never had.

    People who bribe, and can afford to bribe, are people in our skewed upper/middle classes. The people who can afford cars are also in those classes. Given the hierarchical nature of our society, only those classes can change the status quo. I don’t see reform coming from bottom up (unless we are talking of some sort of revolution). Sadly, these persistent post-colonial?? attitudes, unnecessary wars, identity crises etc. etc. all help to aggravate these problems and that’s why a frank exchange of ideas is necessary.

    RE: “If Sri Lankans had a rationalistic secular and Western-like mindset as you and Schizo Sujewa envision…”

    I think this is a silly characterization. There is no logical pathway from secular humanism to mistreating your parents. You’re welcome to point it out if there is. There is however, a logical pathway to violence and insularity from any divisive religious grouping, as has been demonstrated by some amply in this very forum. Do you disagree with this?

    RE: “the arrival of Buddhism which spawned a 2300-year tradition of historical chronicles…”

    I think this is undeniable. Whatever said and done, it’s clear that Buddhism played a major role in Sri Lanka throughout its history and will continue to do so. The question is, how should these belief systems upgrade themselves to be in line with 2300 years of human progress since then? Unless someone is postulating that all such progress was successfully achieved 2600 years ago (as Mr. Yapa seems to be doing with his “everything is Dhamma” theory), this is a necessary and valid discussion.

    As for history itself, it can help us to learn from past mistakes or help us understand practical constraints (i.e. how did we get into this mess in the first place and how do we chart a course out of it) but it should not be the determinant of what the right thing to do is. I strongly believe that history has *no relevance* in this regard, which is why I don’t bother with talk about Eelams and Sinhala countries and all sorts of glories of the past, as if any of us were responsible for those glories. For most things, we already know what the right thing to do is and history has no bearing on the fact that those things must be done.

    (Contd…)

    cheers,
    /SD

  • SomewhatDisgusted
  • jasmine

    indonicus,

    Re: “Just don’t drop poor Gramsci in it whenever you feel you can’t make an impression on your own.”

    Good one!!

  • Humanist

    Susantha, some one who describes the presence of Tamils in Sri Lanka as “infested with these miserable creatures” is spouting racism and certainly not telling us any truths.

    I can’t belive that anyone who lives in the 21st century with all the knowledge resources that we have access to can actually state that Tamils in Sri Lanka have been there for only 500 years. I suppose the fact that they were known by other names such as Malabars, Cholas and Pandyans in the hisorical records is a facet of your ignorance.

    Your statement also defies common sense. The Palk straits separating India from Sri Lanka is very narrow compared to the vast expanses of oceans other people have crossed to get to the lands in which they now live. Simply put, have waters and canoes, people will travel. From the historical records. the Veddas are the oldest inhabitants of the island. They have a unique culture not found anywhere else in the world. By your logic, they should be the ones who have ecxclusive rights to Sri Lanka.

    But the main point here is whether people were here for 500 years or 2500 years, that is no reason for giving some people exclusive rights and other not.

    We are all a mixed people ( an in your case a completely mixed-up, as in confused person) and the fact that some people claim to be Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims or Bughers is an accident of birth and of a complex, constructed history, that cannot be reduced to your sweeping statement that Sri Lanka belongs to the Sinhala people as Japan belongs to the Japanese. I suppose you are not aware that a number of Sinhalese castes originate in Tamil Nadu and Kerala and you might actuallly have been born to one or more of them. Plus the fact that most Sinhalese kings married into Tamil royal families, if you claim more noble birth.

  • SomewhatDisgusted

    Susantha,

    I was thinking of responding in detail but then realized that there wouldn’t be too much point. You’re consumed by racist hatred, and you genuinely believe it’s the racism of Tamils that’s the root problem here. You are incapable of thinking beyond that, possibly due to childhood brainwashing and racial prejudice. Who knows!

    Well, just keep this in mind. You’ve stated that Tamils deserve equal rights as human beings. What equal rights did they get when they were attacked or burnt out of their homes in ’56, ’77, ’83 etc? Would Prabha ever have got the support he did if not for racist Sinhalese people attacking innocent Tamils?

    As long as you paint this vile, one-sided, racist picture, people like you will continue to cause more horrors to be visited upon us Sri Lankans, just like you have done in the past.

  • indonicus

    Somewhatdisgusted,

    “As long as you paint this vile, one-sided, racist picture, people like you will continue to cause more horrors to be visited upon us Sri Lankans, just like you have done in the past.”

    Well said!

  • wijayapala

    Burning_Issue,

    Haha don’t worry too much about Susantha; I have a strong feeling that he is not a Sinhala Buddhist and is instead someone else pretending to be one.

    Sinhala racists rarely come out in the open and acknowledge that they’re racist. They cover their mindset with a stream of rationalizations, and they do such a good job that they convince themselves that they’re not racist (“only the Tamils are racist”).

  • wijayapala

    Actually the article that Susantha cited is worth a read. Originally it was posted on Asian Tribune an anti-LTTE site.

    The Portuguese may have played an indirect role in preserving Buddhism by suppressing the Muslims, who were poised to make inroads into Sri Lanka as they did in the Maldives and SE Asia while Buddhist institutions lay in shambles.

  • Huh

    Suren,

    thanks! just shoot me an email at [email protected]

    Anyways, regarding Susantha, yes, The SL tamils have every right to SL in the same way that ANY french citizens, british citizens, and American CITIZENS have a right to every inch of their respective countries.

    Also, Humanist, THANK YOU!!! You pointed out something that I have been trying to point out all along–that many low country sinhalese are just as genetically ” tamil” as many indian tamils or sl tamils are.

  • niranjan

    “A reading of the Springtime of Nations, namely Europe in 1848, would reveal a picture of ethno-lingual nationalism as the propellant of nation building and a zero-sum game with minorities, rather like post Independence Sri Lanka. That first great wave of European nationalism and state-building left an unfinished problem of internal ‘national questions’.

    Sri Lanka, like many societies in the periphery, was impacted by colonialism with paradoxical results: one the one hand, internal development was retarded, holding back certain changes that would otherwise have come about, and on the other hand, accelerated certain processes ‘artificially’ as it were, rendering their results rather rootless in the native soil and consciousness. This is so in the matter of nation and state building. There are stages of political growth and Sri Lanka and many states in the global South at different stages of politico-historical development from those in the First world. Therefore, notions of nation, nationalism and nationality and concepts of citizenship are rawer and rougher edged, less refined and evolved. Is Demos of mature or mid- modernity, Ethnos of and in early modernity? We have a historical journey to complete, towards a universalism which accommodates pluralism; towards modernity, guided by Reason.”
    – Excellent summing up of where SL is. It seems as though we are about 160 years behind Europe. I guess colonialism partly explains this. But was colonialism the only reason for our backwardness/retardation. I think not.
    For instance SL never went through a renaissance, industrial revolution period as Europe did.

  • Susantha

    burning issue
    you talk of people called “Sri Lankan ” tamils which was a term invented in 1912(or somewhere around that time).Prove to me otherwise that the cesus department in Sri Lanka started counting tamils seperate as indian and sri lankan only in 1912.
    I have provided facts for my claims i haven’t just made statements like some tamils here.

    Humanist
    cholas and pandyans have made their presence in Sri Lanka for thousands of years as INVADERS,COLONISTS, SQUATTERS,CRIMINALS etc so in that case may be the dutch descendant in sri lanka can also claim the western coastal belt as the dutch occupied these areas if tamils can claim a homeland in sri lanka so can the Portuguese, British and dutch.even the so called jaffna tamil kingdom which if existed could not have existed beyond elephant pass was a result of a COLONIZATION and ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION by these “miserable creatures” by the way there is not even a justifiable fairy tale that says that the eastern province was a part of this criminal kingdom and according to sinhalese archives this terrorist kingdom was a kingdom which was ruled by pirates of non tamil origin.yes, tamils integrated into the sinhala and they adopted the sinhala culture so they are sinhalese and they are not tamils and you point out similarities between tamil nadu customs and sri lankan ones but all south asian customs are similar not only customs of Sinhalese and Tamils.I would also like to tell you something stated by General Sarath Fonseka (your hero) ” The truth is that this country is ruled by Sinhalese for centuries and centuries. China is ruled by Chinese, England by the Englishmen and Germany by Germans. This is because these countries are ruled by the majorities.
    That is the truth. This will prevail today and even tomorrow. It is sad that some people have given a wrong interpretation to my statement. What is wrong by saying that this country, which is historically ruled by Sinhalese will ruled by the Sinhalese.
    Some people say that when I say this it was an insult to the minorities.
    Then what about Sinhalese who are the majority? They will also be hurt when the others say that this country does not belong to them. Isn’t it an insult to the majority of a country? ”

    General Fonseka clearly hits the nail on the head here

    Some what disgusted
    my man what about the attacks on the Sinhalese in 1958 in jaffna and batticloa Ethnic cleansing of the north east of Sinhalese was operative since the 60s.What about the attack on Sinhalese students in 77,what about GG ponmbalam who tried to rob the representation of the sinhalese.what about the educational genocide on the Sinhalese students ?

  • niranjan

    “But the main point here is whether people were here for 500 years or 2500 years, that is no reason for giving some people exclusive rights and other not.”-

    Well said Humanist. But you may be surprised at the number of Sri Lankans mainly on the Sinhala side who say that the Sinhalese have exclusive rights and the Tamils do not because the Sinhalese were here first.
    I have heard people say ” the Tamils belong in India and not in Sri Lanka.”

    It is sad that Sinhala people even educated ones harbour racial attitudes like this. It is perhaps due to ignorance and a lack of a well rounded education(I mean lack of reading).

  • jasmine

    Susantha,
    You said “You talk of people called “Sri Lankan ” tamils which was a term invented in 1912(or somewhere around that time).Prove to me otherwise that the cesus department in Sri Lanka started counting tamils seperate as indian and sri lankan only in 1912.”

    How could Tamils be named by the census department as “Sri Lankan Tamils” in 1912 when the island only adopted the name Sri Lanka in 1972?

    You said, “cholas and pandyans have made their presence in Sri Lanka for thousands of years as INVADERS,COLONISTS, SQUATTERS,CRIMINALS etc”

    Since the name “Sri Lanka” is of Sanskrit origin, a language that came from India, to which category do your ancestors belong: invaders, colonists, squatters or criminals?

  • Humanist

    Susantha, there you again…insulting the Cholans and Pandyans. They were your ancestors too. When a Sinhalese insults a Tamil, you can be sure that he or she is insulting himself or herself in the process because whether you like it or not, you have Tamil ancestry inside you. Be proud of your mixed ancestry – that is a cause for celebration not for insults.

    Also, Sarath Fonseka is certainly not my hero – there is nothing to choose between him and MR.

  • Burning_Issue

    Susantha,

    “you talk of people called “Sri Lankan ” tamils which was a term invented in 1912(or somewhere around that time).Prove to me otherwise that the cesus department in Sri Lanka started counting tamils seperate as indian and sri lankan only in 1912.”

    Let me tell you this, if Sri Lanka had never been colonised, there would be at least three kingdoms today! One would be a Tamil Kingdom, do you understand this? Might be the Kandyan Kingdom still be under a Tamil King, do you understand?

    When The British amalgamated all administrative territories into one in 1848, the Tamils of North and East became Ceylon Tamils; then in 1972 they became Sri Lankan Tamils. What does the 1912 census has anything to do with the term Sri Lankan Tamils? The British brought the Indian Tamil Plantation workers over; this does not invalidate the nature of Tamils of the island in any shape or form.

    “I have provided facts for my claims i haven’t just made statements like some tamils here.”

    Please provide facts to any of your claims, I will respond accordingly. You can try your best to alienate the Tamils from Sri Lanka, but the Tamils will always be there and they will be equal to the Sinhala in every sense of the word!

  • wijayapala

    Dear niranjan,

    It is sad that Sinhala people even educated ones harbour racial attitudes like this

    Although I agree that this is a negative mentality that should be condemned, I have to add that this sentiment became popular only after the “Federal Party” (ITAK) began agitating for federalism after 1956. Of course, ITAK became popular only after Sinhala-Only policy, so the blame falls on SWRD Bandaranaike and those who supported him.

  • wijayapala

    dear jasmine, Humanist, Burning_Issue:

    Good answers all around. Burning_Issue I have a question for you. The current Lion Flag was the standard of the last king of Kandy who was not Sinhala. So what do you think about Lion Flag.

  • SomeOne

    Dear Dayan J,

    “…FROM NECESSARY WAR TO SUSTAINABLE PEACE IN SRI LANKA…”

    1.There is no such war called “necessary war”. If any one believes that it is a necessary war then he or she is morally corrupt.

    2.There is no such thing called “sustainable peace”. Peace is a consequence of “Unconditional love”. Therefore, peace is a “just peace”. You don’t have to maintain or sustain it.

    Thanks

  • niranjan

    Dear Wijepala,

    The rot started with SWRD Bandaranaike and his “Sinhala Only.” What is even more so is that no leader after his time tried to correct the wrongs that he did.

  • niranjan

    Humanist,

    “Also, Sarath Fonseka is certainly not my hero – there is nothing to choose between him and MR.’- I totally agree with you. SF is not my hero either neither is MR.
    There are no heroes in SL as far as I am concerned.

  • niranjan

    Susantha,

    You are partly correct when you say that this country will be ruled by the Sinhalese. But what you have failed to add is that Tamils, Muslims, Burghers, agnostics, athiests will also rule this country together with the Sinhalese. Togetherness is important. That is why the 13 amendment to the Constitution should be fully implemented even at this late stage. It may well save us another war.

    I strongly urge you to read the book titled ” The Argumentative Indian” by Amartya Sen.

  • SomeOne

    Dear Wijayapala,

    “….The current Lion Flag was the standard of the last king of Kandy who was not Sinhala…”

    Before talking of lion flag, I wish to talk of last Kandian king.

    For some reason, the famous “Pilimathalawa” wanted Kannusamy the so called Sri Wickramarajasinha to that top position at the first place.

    What actually happened was that the popularity of Kannusamy increased beyond a level which Pilimathalawa was anticipated. Pilimathathalawa was looking for an opportunity to get rid of Kannusamy. Pilimathalawa saw an opportunity to over throw Kannusamy with the help of east India Company. The rest is history.

    Now, this Tamil king promoted Buddhism and got the applause from Sinhalese. Forget about the lion flag.

  • Susantha

    burning issue
    I have infact provided a link from the official website of the archives of the VOC administration which is a 3rd party not sinhalese or tamils on the 2nd comment on this article it clearly says that the kindom of kandy existed as far north as elephant pass and the population in these areas were Buddhists in the 1600s and archives are much stronger evidence than books written by people.You say that the census department only starting to count the north east tamils separate from the hill country Tamils only in 1911 is not a fact of importance that is your wish to think so.
    If SL was not colonized by Portugese Dutch and British I can say clearly that SrI lanka will be at least 90% Sinhalese country as there will be no hill country tamils and there will be no tamils in east (according to dutch British Portuguese archives east was inhabited with sinhalese) and any tamils majority area in sri lanka would be north of elephant pass jaffna too would have been recaptured if the western colonists didn’t keep the kings busy
    Its also a known thing that 100000 Sinhalese were killed during the uva rebellion around 1818 (this area was in present day moneragala as well as parts of the eastern province) so if 100000 Sinhalese were not genocided with the population growth rates there would have been about 1.2 million Sinhalese more today

    the king of kandy at the time was a Telengu and not a Tamil and he and his family was sinhalised and paid homage to Buddhism.

    why did the west minister Parliament accept the superiority of Buddhism for the whole of Sri Lanka?during the time sri lanka was controlled by that parliament

    jasmine
    i didnt use the old terms.what i mean is the counting of the 2 groups as separate was only done in the 1911 census and the 1901 census counts them as 1 group

    Niranjan
    to prevent another war we have to reach an international combat level and our inteligence services must also reach a very high level so that all these eelamists,jihadists etc will fear to even think about anything will the Tamils in Malaysia ever think about rising up against the state?we have to show them clearly that they will only receive death and destruction if they try to rise against us the 13 th amendment should be repealed as even without the police and land powers they are not any use they are a waste of money.
    I will read that book when i have time u should also read the book “conquest of Ceylon” by Fr Queroz and read the dutch national archives available on line.Sinhalese have a legitimate right to regard the whole country as the Sinhalese homeland its true that there are minority communities and they too have rights but they don’t have a single historical document to prove they have any historical rights to sri Lanka and are not entitled to anything more than proportional representation in the parliament .Before SWRD it was GG Ponambalam who tried to rob sinhalese of representation if his sytem was activated the sinhalese who made up 70% of the population at the time will have only 35% of parliament seats

    Humanist
    there are many theories as to the ancestry of the Sinhalese people and I too will not deny that tamils have mixed into the sinhala but that is a very small % and the sinhalese living in the north also integrated into tamils when the Sinhalese power in the nort deteriorated with the western invasions.

  • Burning_Issue

    Susantha,

    I do not know as to who you are and what possess you to espouse such narrow views given that the Island that is now called Sri Lanka has historically been multicultural ever since the recorded history began. The Tamils have been part of this history from the outset whether they were Buddhists or Hindus is irrelevant! The fact that one needs to be a Sinhala to be a Buddhist in Sri Lanka is a recent phenomenon in the context of the country’s history. There is no doubt that the Buddhism played a major part in fostering the Sinhala language; hence, the inextricable link between Sinhala and Buddhism that exist today.

    “I have infact provided a link from the official website of the archives of the VOC administration which is a 3rd party not sinhalese or tamils on the 2nd comment on this article it clearly says that the kindom of kandy existed as far north as elephant pass and the population in these areas were Buddhists in the 1600s and archives are much stronger evidence than books written by people.”

    The fact that they were Buddhists does not mean that they were Sinhala exclusively! You need to pay attention to the Eeaswaram Temples that existed in all corners of Sri Lanka from ancient times:

    http://thiruketheeswaram.com/
    “According to Dr. Paul E. Peiris, an erudite scholar and historian, “long before the arrival of Vijaya (6th century B.C.) there was in Lanka five recognized ‘Eeswararns’ of Siva, which claimed and received adoration of all India. These were Tiruketheeswaram near Mahathitha, Munneswaram Thondeswaram, Tirukoneswaram and Naguleswaram.”
    I would welcome views about the Eeswaram temples in Sri Lanka and their antiquity.
    The ancient Murugan temple of Kathirkamam:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katirkamam_(Hindu_temple)

    Though is now predominantly claimed by the Buddhists these days, the Hindu identity is undeniable!

    “You say that the census department only starting to count the north east tamils separate from the hill country Tamils only in 1911 is not a fact of importance that is your wish to think so.”

    What is this! I gave you facts and you are not interested!

    “If SL was not colonized by Portugese Dutch and British I can say clearly that SrI lanka will be at least 90% Sinhalese country as there will be no hill country tamils and there will be no tamils in east (according to dutch British Portuguese archives east was inhabited with sinhalese) and any tamils majority area in sri lanka would be north of elephant pass jaffna too would have been recaptured if the western colonists didn’t keep the kings busy”

    All those ancient battles were fought because of empire building and territorial aggressions and ethnicity played a little part in it if any! In one of your posts, you gave the following link:

    http://www.eelamwin.com/blog/?p=81

    By which you wanted to show the all Tamils who were in the Island in the ancient times were assimilated into Sinhala as a result of Portuguese rule. Then you invalidate your earlier claim by your above claim. I do not think that you know what you are on about; you are complexly mixed up and bigotry is playing havoc in your head!

    “Its also a known thing that 100000 Sinhalese were killed during the uva rebellion around 1818 (this area was in present day moneragala as well as parts of the eastern province) so if 100000 Sinhalese were not genocided with the population growth rates there would have been about 1.2 million Sinhalese more today”

    Hindsight is a wonderful thing! If Buddhism has not arrived in Sri Lanka, it is most probably a Hindu majority country with Tamil as the national language! I can also say many ifs and buts. If those Tamils who became as Sinhala had not done so, the percentage of the Tamils would be far higher. It is ludicrous to talk on this line; don’t you think so?

    “the king of kandy at the time was a Telengu and not a Tamil and he and his family was sinhalised and paid homage to Buddhism.”

    Hmmm

    “why did the west minister Parliament accept the superiority of Buddhism for the whole of Sri Lanka?during the time sri lanka was controlled by that parliament”

    Please provide evidence!

  • Burning_Issue

    Wijayapala,

    “Burning_Issue I have a question for you. The current Lion Flag was the standard of the last king of Kandy who was not Sinhala. So what do you think about Lion Flag.”

    It is a good question! The flag was accepted by all at the independence. I remember as a young boy at St. Johns College; we stood lined up outside the college waving Sri Lankan flags at Prime Minster Mrs Banda who was being paraded on an open top vehicle. There were no problems then, this was even after the infamous Sinhala Only had been passed!

    I personally have no issues but for the Buddhist association; it should be secular and with a suitable political solution, it will be accepted by all Sri Lankans.

  • Huh

    Burning_Issue, you are a brave person for taking on Susantha…i don’t have the patience to do it anymore. Anyways, you are correct that Tamil Buddhists have been on the island for a long time, and probably assimilated into the Hindu and Christian religions after hundreds of years. I think the biggest mistake Susantha is making here is that he mistakes acts to gain territory with ethnic hatred(i.e. just because the Cholas invaded sri lanka, does not mean that sinhalese people and tamils hated each other).

  • Humanist

    Although my patience is reaching its limit as well, I am going to take on Susantha one more time because unfortunately there are other people who believe this kind of nonsense, or are at least motivated by it to offer preposterous solutions to our problems.

    Susantha is entirely deluded in thinking that only a small % of Sinhalese are mixed. And if they were not mixed where does he think they come from? Jasmine’s question is very pertinent in this respect.

    The genetic evidence available suggests that while almost 70% of genetic material of the Sinhalese comes from Tamils of South India, only 25% comes from the Bengalis of NE India. Similarly 55% of the genetic material of Sri Lankan Tamils is what they share with the Sinhalese, whereas only 16.6% comes from Tamils of South India. The only distinct gene pool in Sri Lanka appears to be that of the Veddahs.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8543296

    The fact that both groups share the same gene pool implies that they have intermarried, assimilated within the two linguistic groups (Tamil and Sinhalese; and that’s what they are at the end of the day – two linguistic groups with constructed identities) and lived in peace for centuries. There is no rationale for arguing for special or inclusive rights for any group – what is needed is equal rights for all three languages and the people who speak them, and a just peace. “This land is your land, this land is my land”…and there is no reason why we all cannot share it.

    As for Susantha, to quote from the Buddha (although it is probably lost on him because with the kind of opinions he expresses he can’t possibly be a Buddhist), “A fool who knows his foolishness is wise at least so far. But a fool who thinks himself wise is very much a fool indeed”.

    And for the title of this article, the reality and the way forward would have been reflected better if it read: ” From a dirty war to building consensus towards a just peace”.

  • A Guy

    Interesting stuff guys but a few things I would like to say though…

    Ok, what does ‘Tamil Nadu’ mean?…Anyone?… Its basic meaning is Tamil Homeland. Why do you, thonk that might be?

    Ok, what does ‘Ilam’ mean?…According to the Tamil Lexicon of the University of Madurai…Its derived from Sinhale and is the Tamil word for Lanka…Now why do you think, Lanka was called Sinhale or Ilam by Tamil’s, if it was a Tamil nation?

    But I digrace, lets discuss what’s written on here already;

    Huh
    You mentioned Rober Knox?…Please see with page numbers, what he say’s;

    *Cuttiar, which last together with Batticalaw, and part of Tuncourly, the Hollander took from the King during my being there..Page 2, Part I,Chapter I
    This indicates that majority of the East was well under the control and part of the Sinhala Kingdom and not of any so called Wannea’s. Thus from the start, showing the flasehood of the Eelamist’s claim.

    *Besides the Dutch who possess, as I judge, about one fourth of the Island, there are Malabars, that are free denizens and pay duty to the King for the Land they enjoy, as the King’s natural(Meaning Naturalized Foreigner’s), subject’s do; there are also Moors, who are like strangers, and hold no Land, but live by carrying goods to the Sea-Ports, which now are in the Hollanders hands. The Sea-Ports are inhabited by a mixt people, Malabars and Moors, and some that are black(Negro communities via the Portuguese).

    But I am to speak only of the natural proper People of the Island, which they call Chingulays..Page 62, Part III-Chapter I

    Cont…

    *Discourse of any of these, I shall detain my Readers a little with another Nation inhabiting in this land, I mean the Malabars; both because they are Strangers and derive themselves from another country and also because I have had occasion to mention them sometimes in this book.

    These Malabar’s then are voluntary Inhabitants in this Island, and have a Country here; tho the Limit’s are but small: it lyes to the Northward of the King’s Coasts betwixt him and the Hollander. Corunda Wy(Oya), River parts it from the King’s territories. Thro this country we passed, when we made our Escape..Page 175, Part IV, Chapter XIII

    Have you noticed how he describes Malabar’s as Strangers and Sinhalese as the natives????

    Also notice the words ‘Small’, when describing the area and it’s not even the East or Northern parts!!

    Huh…you said;
    HOWEVER, the same thing can be said of MANY of the low-country sinhalese who themselves are the descendants of agricultural workers brought by the dutch and settled in the south.

    What on earth are you on…the South was packed full of Sinhalese. I highly recommend you to do some research if you still want to argue with that lol. Even the census of 1824, only 0.3 percentage were non-Sinhala in the Southern area’s.
    —-
    Another topic that has popped up is regarding the census and if Tamil’s were really only separated in 1911. I know many on here would not like hear this but it is true. See the link to a scan of the census’s since 1881.

    http://www.jaffnahistory.com/Northern_Province/Images/census1881.jpg

    Now if Tamil’s were a native population, then the British would never have done this.

    Also the Flag of Ceylon, as chosen by the British is the typical colony type but with the ancient Sinhala emblem of the Elephant and Stupa. This signifies that British considered this Isle a Buddhist nation.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/British_Ceylon_flag.PNG

    Another topic that has been on is about assimilation of one or the other. There is in fact no evidence’s or record’s of any Tamil’s becoming integrated to Sinhalese people but we the Sinhalese do except that it must have happened in some cases. That is a case everywhere in the world. We are no different and had marriages etc etc….But what we do have are record’s from the British era, who do speak of Sinhalese being assimilated into Tamil’s and on quite a large scale and throughout not only the British period but also the Dutch;
    http://www.jaffnahistory.com/Northern_Province/Links/Ceylon_Administration_Records_1898.html

    Further, the Tamil’s that integrated are not of the stock of Tamil’s that are in Lanka today. That is why, Tamil’s have no right to claim any link’s to them.

    Otherwise, the French who are mother country to the Brit’s and Italian’s, Norway etc etc can claim England as theirs? Would that ever be accepted?…No

    I have noticed quite a few have made comments regarding susantha’s VOC archive link…and it does work to the person that said it doesn’t. Two points on this matter;

    1. It is stated that beyond, Alimankada is the Kandian King’s territory. At that point it was Rajasinhe II. Who was an amazing Sinhelese king!

    2. Yes it does state Ceylon Buddhist’s…can I ask where any Tamil Buddhist’s from this period are recorded? Tamil’s were very much a Hindu populace by this time and that is an excepted fact. Plus I find it quite amussing that so many people on here, don’t seem to realise how easily Tamil art and Sinhala religious art is distinguishable by. If their were any Tamil Buddhist monuments they would have discovered by now and especially during the British era, who gave Tamil’s so much support!

    I have seen people argue about the North, well just a few points;

    *The Portuguese, only mention having battles with Sinhalese in Jaffna and in fact Philip Bealdous confirms that the fort of Jaffna Fort was taken only after defeating the Sinhala army of the Kandian king.

    *The famous of all the so called Tamil king’s of Jaffna is Sankili. Who’s treaty with Portuguese is in Portuguese and Sinhala…Strange that such amight Tamil, doesn’t even write in Tamil?

    *The Portuguese report that the palace of Sankili is found Sinhelse, Vadugaz(Telegu) and Moors. Where are the Tamil’s?????????

    *The Portuguese after taking Jaffna is welcomed by a packed town by the Sinhelese. Again where are the Tamil’s..Non to even put up black flags!!

    *Why is it on Portuguese, Dutch and British map’s, Jaffna district is called Waligama? This is a Sinhala word, today is Tamilized word Valikamman or something. Census of 1824 its Waligamo then in 1911, its Valigamman, then today its Valikamman. It’s strange if Tamil’s have been in Jaffna for so thousand’s, that they only started having Tamil name’s in the 1900’s lol.

    Regarding the East, I am not goin to even bother. Its too easy and considering even Tamil historian’s like Dr. Karthigesu Indrapala say’s;

    No definite evidence regarding any significant Tamil settlement in the Batticaloa district of the Eastern Province, or in other parts of Southern Ceylon has so far come to light.

    Right that is my bit for now but I’m sure I will say more later.

  • A Guy

    Just to add though, regarding the Pre-Buddhist era. Thought it was amusing to read some comment’s on that matter lol.

    Ok….

    1. Balangoda man, who is dated to be around 38,000BC. From the dental trait’s it is established that they match today’s Veddha and Sinhala communities but not the Tamil’s. That it self is clear indication of who was here first.

    2. The pre-historic sites are all Sinhala eg Pomperrippu, has been discovered to conatin only Sinhala DNA evidence by Utah Unversity and no Dravidian sites have been found any where in Lanka.

    3. I am quite surprised, that no one on here know’s that the Sinhalese used to Siva Bhakti’s before the 6th Century BC.

  • Huh

    A Guy,

    You should not quote Indrapala’s thesis. He clearly states in his book ” Evolution of an Ethnic Identity:

    ” That dissertation is now completely out of date. My own perspectives and interpretations have changed since its completion. More importantly, significant developments, both in terms of archaeological research and changing historical perspectives, have taken place in the last four decades.”

    You are correct and I am well aware of how the east was under the control of the Kingdom of Kandy. However, based on what I have read, the territory of the east was given some degree of autonomy although under the control of the kandy kingdom.

    Also, you quote Robert Knox but he also says bluntly:

    ” they have a country here”. I don’t agree with the traditional homelands crap, but this quote is pretty self-explanatory.

    You also say:

    ” The famous of all the so called Tamil king’s of Jaffna is Sankili. Who’s treaty with Portuguese is in Portuguese and Sinhala…Strange that such amight Tamil, doesn’t even write in Tamil?”

    This doe not necessarily prove anything by itself. In 1815, the Kandyan Lords in the Kandy convention signed their names in the tamil language. Does that prove Kandy was a tamil area?

    ” What on earth are you on…the South was packed full of Sinhalese. I highly recommend you to do some research if you still want to argue with that lol. Even the census of 1824, only 0.3 percentage were non-Sinhala in the Southern area’s.”

    You misunderstood me. The South is filled with Sinhalese even in the 1800’s because like the north, it was settled with slaves. These slaves integrated into the native populations of their respective areas. The south indian slaves settled in the south during the dutch era became Sinhalese while the ones in the north became tamil.
    The North was settled with slaves but so was the south. Here is a link to Markus Vinks ” The World’s Oldest Trade: Dutch Slavery and Slave Trade in the Indian Ocean in the Seventeenth Century”:

    http://www.historycooperative.org/cgi-bin/justtop.cgi?act=justtop&url=http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jwh/14.2/vink.html

    Here is a quote from that artilce.

    ” In 1694, the city of Colombo alone had a slave population of 1,761. See Knaap, `Europeans, Mestizos and Slaves,` p.. 88. In 1661, 10,000 slaves had been put to work by the company and by private individuals on the lands in southwestern Ceylon, including 2,000 company slaves. ”

    ” The pre-historic sites are all Sinhala eg Pomperrippu, has been discovered to conatin only Sinhala DNA evidence by Utah Unversity and no Dravidian sites have been found any where in Lanka.”
    -I believe you mean to say Arizona State University and I believe you are referring to the study done by Diane Hawkey. However,if that is the case, you should not quote from this study. This study was about as definitive as, say, Indrapala’s thesis. I have read the study and she says the following:

    ” However, a great deal of caution should be excercised before accepting these findings. Exclusion of the protosylid data completely reverses the results: Sri Lanka H/G and Sri Lankan Tamils become more similar to Sri Lanka IR, slightly more dissimilar to India H/G and Sri Lankan Sinhalese”

  • Huh

    You also mention the fact that because the distinction was made between between indian tamils and sri lankan tamils was made only in 1881, then it means that the sri lankan tamils are not a native population. Sorry, but I don’t follow you. Isn’t it just the opposite case? The Indian Tamils were settled by the British in the late 19th century, so since the British differentiate them in 1881 or whatever through the census, doesn’t it show just the opposite? If the Indian tamils were not a distinct group, then the British colonizers would have had no need to differentiate them.

    ” There is in fact no evidence’s or record’s of any Tamil’s becoming integrated to Sinhalese people but we the Sinhalese do except that it must have happened in some cases. That is a case everywhere in the world. We are no different and had marriages etc etc….But what we do have are record’s from the British era, who do speak of Sinhalese being assimilated into Tamil’s and on quite a large scale and throughout not only the British period but also the Dutch;”
    -This is incorrect. Read Indrapala’s book ” Evolution of an Ethnic identity” and even the book ” Ancient Jaffna”. Both of these authors say that Sinhalese and south indian ethnicities became absorbed in the northern part of the island, into the tamil population. However, I am also confused in what you are trying to say here? I suggest you read ” Crucible of Conflict” a book by an anthropoligst regarding the TAmils and muslims of the east. Most of them are descended from northern kerala and tamil nadu and have been there for hundreds of years. He shows this through the customs of these tamils and their dialect they speak, and how they are very different from the dialect and social customs of the tamils of tamil nadu.

  • Burning_Issue

    Huh,

    “just because the Cholas invaded sri lanka, does not mean that sinhalese people and tamils hated each other”

    This is the very point many people overlook; there was no ethnic animosity in Sri Lanka pre-colonisation.

    I will give up on Susantha soon; his mind is made up!

  • wijayapala

    Hi A Guy,

    Thank you for the history lesson. As a proud Sinhalaya myself, I am so glad that there are people like you who prove that Sri Lanka has always been a pure 110% Sinhala country based on what the White Man thought. These Eelamists thought that they could use the Cleghorn Minute to establish Tamil Homeland but you taught them a good lesson that the White Man was always on our side. I only have a few questions:

    There is in fact no evidence’s or record’s of any Tamil’s becoming integrated to Sinhalese people but we the Sinhalese do except that it must have happened in some cases.

    Actually it happened in a lot of cases. Genetic studies are divided as to the origins of the Sinhalese, but they all point to a strong link with the Tamils.

    If you’re looking for evidence of Tamils becoming Sinhalese, take a look at the people of the west coast from Puttalam all the way down to Negombo. You’ll find families where the grandparents are Tamils but the grandchildren are Sinhalese!

    Have you forgotten Mr. Piyasena, the “Sinhala” TNA man from Ampara?

  • A Guy

    Thank you for your comments…Huh, you said;

    ” they have a country here”. I don’t agree with the traditional homelands crap, but this quote is pretty self-explanatory.

    Robert Knox, clearly that this is a small place and is in-between end of the Kandian King’s territory and the Dutch and from the locality of Arripo been close by, it obvious then that it is not in the North or East but in what is today Puttalama district.

    Also by 1824, these people had been absorbed into the Sinhala people, as in the British describe these area’s as Sinhala plus his account is of a very small populace, by the fact that he says that he couldn’t even see the village not town till he was extremely close. That mean’s it’s a very small area!!

    U also says;

    This does not necessarily prove anything by itself. In 1815, the Kandyan Lords in the Kandy convention signed their names in the Tamil language. Does that prove Kandy was a Tamil area?

    Ok…the treaty in fact has now been shown to be a possible forgery…The signature’s on the treaty do not match their signature’s on royal declaration’s given to them. Even the Telegu signatures are fake and their real signature’s are in Sinhala script. I will find the details and post the link on here. This was unfortunately only discovered early this year by the Archives Dept…Kinda says it all!!

    Regarding this period in Jaffna though;

    1. When two spies are sent by the Portuguese, to see the defences of Sankili, they are arrested by a Sinhala Army at Nallur.
    2. The Army commander of Sankili, Urasinhe is Sinhalese.
    3. The welcome party for the Portuguese are Sinhalese.
    4. The Portuguese advise to their people not too heir any Sinhala guides in Jaffna as they take order’s from the Sinhala King.
    5. The Portuguese state, that the emblem of Jaffna royal’s is a Black Lion.
    6. The advisor’s to royal family are Sinhalese.
    7. Sankili’s best friend and advisor is Sinhala and names Ananda Amarakoon.
    etc etc
    8. Sankili’s wife is Buddhist and commit’s sucide.
    9.After the capture of Jaffna by the Portuguse, one of the most famous but not that mentioned events was taking of the Buddha relic, which was sent to Nallur from Kandy. One must ask….Would Rajasinhe II or any Sinhala King permit a Buddha relic to be on tour in Jaffna, if Jaffna was a Tamil region?

    Lol, I highly recommend you to read up on record’s of the Portuguese regarding the South and the many battles that it took to take it from the Sinhala king’s and off the Sinhala populace of that area. Also details of the thousands of villages plus their product’s and their irrigational skills etc etc… U gets the point.
    The Dutch VOC records that the richest man and owner of half of the lands in Jaffna is Ratnasinhe. How is that possible if these are Tamil areas?

    In 1824 census, its only 324 Malabar’s in Colombo district and your link I have seen before but I highly recommend you to read it thoroughly again. As it states, where majority of slaves came from and it certainly wasn’t from the Sinhalese lol.

    Wasn’t aware that Arizona was involved but hey. It’s quite amusing how you guy’s always dismiss detail’s done by anyone that doesn’t agree with your idea’s. What is expected by scientists yes should be looked at carefully but the fact of the matter is. No Dravidian elements have been discovered in Lanka.

    Regarding the East, as I am compelled to talk about it lol;

    1. Van Sanden, who was the Dutch administrator of Trinco. Writes and gives a clear account of the region. He even given names of the ruler’s that encounter’s. These are all Sinhalese.

    http://www.jaffnahistory.com/Eastern_Province/Links/Van_Sanden_1786.html

    2. The names of the areas of the East even during the Dutch period are in Sinhala eg Samanthura..Samantuari today, Mavil Ganga..Mavil Aru today etc etc…
    3. Two English priest’s (Will have their names later), wrote in 1816; that the East is Sinhala except for the area of the fort in Batticaloa. Which has samll grpup of Malabar slaves of the Dutch.
    4. 1848, Govonor Torrington and Lord Grey, discuss what to do with lands acquired from masscare of the Sinhalese. The Colonail office advisor’s settleing of Whole Malabar village’s from South India into these lands..From Kandy to Trincolomalee. This is where Tamil people started to appear in the East.

    If you read the British Administration report’s, these Tamil’s could not even eat the rice of Lanka and 40,000 ton’s had to be imported from India plus these peoples left the land’s given to them and settled along the coast and their a road developed known as the great coastal road or something. Will admit I can’t remember the name exactly lol. It was only around the mid 1890’s that Tamil villages really started taking shape….PLEASE READ British Administration Report’s.

    Look…My own opinion is that Sinhalese and Tamil’s can live in this country quite peacefully but it is the Christian leadership of the Tamil’s that are hell bent on creating problem’s that never really existed. It is their lose of power after Independence that they thrive. This was admitted too last year by a member of the TNA in parliament.

    Though I say that, Tamil people cannot demand’s right’s that are not theirs to demand and distorting of history is not a morally correct thing to do!

    I am not really that much practicing reliogous person but Tamil’s must ask themselves;

    What Karmic force will do;

    You have buthered more than 150,000 innocent people incl thousand’s of chidren. I mean what kind of people takes babies by their legs and smashes their heads on trees(Morawewa)? What kind of people can strap bombs on to childern and blow then up(13yr old Tamil gilr)? What kinda people take children and impale of to fences(Dollar farm)? What kinda people chop men, women and children into peices…These are excluding attacks of suicde bombs, bombs on trains, school buses, holy places and priests incl the Arantalawa masscare and the many Hindu Poosai’s incl of the Devala of Trincomalee.

    No matter how Tamil’s try, you can never wipe these sin’s away! Irrespective of what you might belive in, you guys will have to deal with the coinciquences..!

  • A Guy

    Just a question to those who believe in antiquity of Tamil’s…Why is it that in the Mahabharata, even spaeking of the origin’s of different race’s, their is NO Tamil’ listed?

    Please see;

    The myth about the origin of the Sinhala Tribe

    * Mahabharata, Book 1, Chapter 177

    When the sage Vasistha was attacked by king Viswamitra’s army, Vasistha’s cow, Kamadehnu, brought forth from her tail, an army of Pallavas, and from her udders, an army of Dravidas and Sakas; and from her womb, an army of Yavanas, and from her dung, an army of Savaras; and from her urine, an army of Kanchis; and from her sides, an army of Savaras. And from the froth of her mouth came out hosts of Paundras and Kiratas, Yavanas and Sinhalas, and the barbarous tribes of Khasas and Chivukas and Pulindas and Chinas and Hunas with Keralas,and numerous other Mlechchhas.

    As you can see, Sinhala and also even Kerala’s are named but NO Tamil…If you guy’s are so anceint a people, shouldn’t you be on this list?

  • Huh

    A guy,

    your information is quite interesting and it would be pretty cool if you could post a link about the fake treaty. And you still seem to be missing the point I was trying to make. Many of the Sinhalese people of the southwest who claim to have been living in Sri Lanka for thousands of years and to be the sole protectors(read: Sinhalese Buddhists) of the island have been there just as long as these tamils you say are from the dutch-british era. malabar slaves obviously assimilated into the sinhalese population and call themselves sinhalese today–It says in the link that i posted that in 1694 slaves were 53% OF THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF COLOMBO(it’s just kind of ironic) He also mentions how there are over 2,000 slaves in the entire southwest, including colombo and galle.

    Also, although I’m not LTTE or eelam fan, do you have any evidence of 150,000 people being killed by the LTTE? From what I have read, the number is about 5,000 or so. On the other hand, I have read the GOSL has killed over 100,000 at the very least–and that is just tamils. It has killed at least 60,000 Sinhalese in the JVP rebellions.

    P.S. I am not a Tamil, I’m an American-Sinhalese.

  • Susantha

    guy
    thank you for giving these [Edited out] cholan imperialists a history lesson also and we must not forget that the Eelam movement is supported by a mainly Hindu Tamil groups and huge support from the Tamil nadu state in order to create a second tamil country in our sinhala country.Christian fundamentalists get involved here to try and get through their agendas which are different from the eelamists and the Christian fundamentalists from the Sinhala community feel that if some sort of devolution is given it will reduce the power of the Sinhalese Buddhists in Sri Lanka that is why they support devolution.

    burning issue
    even if Buddhism never arrived in SL it will never be a tamil country it will be a Sinhalese Christian country then like the Philippines and about the link i gave about the Portuguese period from a blog which is named eelamwin I said I dont agree with material their i dint give that link to prove anything.

  • Observer

    It still amuses me that people still cling onto history to justify their cases. The only thing history is useful for is to learn a lesson. You can give people a 100 thesis as to who’s homeland is where, who are the rightful owners, it’s irrelevant.

    You cannot escape the fact that people need/must to co exist. I have no issue Tamil people living in their own quarters independently if they so despise coexisting with Sinhalese people and if it truly makes them happy. I am all for it. But the problem remains in our small island it’s more complicated and unworkable peaceful solution. The day we draw a border within we sign up for an eternity of conflict, being we’re so close together, and the fresh wounds we have. Look at Israel/Gaza for god’s sake! Is that what we want?

    And who ever drew the eelam map drew it to fail. You can’t allocate so much coastal line, land for 20% population and call that equitable and think people will accept. I bring this up because had a sensible person drawn it, he/she would have used statistical proportionality to draw it. No they relied on historical, mythical crap (half of which is probably inaccurate) instead and drew an extremely bloated eelam. A diplomatic person would not have drawn such an enraging map. That’s where it primarily pissed me off and found unacceptable.

    And if there were provisions for Sinhalese and non Tamil minorities to live in eelam with equal rights and not be exclusive Tamil land I would have found it more acceptable as well (and vice versa) – free movement (meaning no passport crap) regardless of administrative exclusivity. Bottom line is no one owns Sri Lanka more or less than anyone else. That was unacceptable as well.

    Finally most people were put off by the tools used to try gain eelam – brutal, indiscriminate violence. Violence is not justified no matter how much of an underdog you are.

    Reality is no one could draw a map to please everyone. Isn’t it better just to co exist and share all of the beaches, resources, land? Isn’t this history being used against us? Why be a slave to the history when what matters is the present and the future, and more pressing problems like poverty, class discrimination, desease, etc. I guess it’ll always amuse me.

  • Humanist

    Now here comes a guy who doesn’t seem to figure out that ethnic groups can be known by different names in different periods of history. As if the Mahabharata which is a myth should mention all the 300+ ethnic groups of India. However, it does happen to mention the Pallavas and Dravidas, which are but two names that Tamils have been known by.

    What is it about racists that they refuse to believe that people on this planet have mixed and assimilated for centuries, despite the archeological and genetic evidence?The important thing is not what names we are known by but what kind of human beings we have become. And there is definitely not much that either group can be proud of during the last 30 years. How ironic to be arguing about whether the Sinhalese or Tamils are more ancient as if it proves whether either is less barbaric?

    .

  • Burning_Issue

    Susantha,

    “even if Buddhism never arrived in SL it will never be a tamil country it will be a Sinhalese Christian country then like the Philippines and about the link i gave about the Portuguese period from a blog which is named eelamwin I said I dont agree with material their i dint give that link to prove anything.”

    I am afraid you cannot be allowed to get away that easily! Are you saying that the Sinhala language existed before Buddhism arrived in Sri Lanka? If so, please provide evidence.

    Like Philippines, why didn’t Sri Lanka become Christian country then; we had 500 years of Christian domination where as the Spanish only occupied the Philippines for 300 years. Don’t you think that both Buddhism and Hinduism were well established religions in comparison to Philippinos who were pagans mainly with some Islam?

    Please also tell me as to who really are the Sinhalese? Are they Aryans or Dravidians or mixer of the both?

    You said in one of your earlier posts:

    “why did the west minister Parliament accept the superiority of Buddhism for the whole of Sri Lanka?during the time sri lanka was controlled by that parliament”

    I asked for evidence; please provide.

  • wijayapala

    Susantha,

    even if Buddhism never arrived in SL it will never be a tamil country it will be a Sinhalese Christian country

    Nice try, though it seems that Burning_issue beat me to the punch.

    If Buddhism never came to Sri Lanka, we would probably all be Tamil Christians, Hindus, or Muslims, because Buddhism is at the root of our culture. Without Buddhism, we are nothing.

  • jasmine

    A guy,

    So your ancestors came out of the froth of the mouth of a cow? Hmmm, yes, I can see how that could be a legacy you’d want to take up.

  • A Guy

    Burning Issue:

    Your evidence on Buddhism been accepted as the religion of this nation by the British is in their choice of emblem for the flag of Colonial Ceylon..

    http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:British_Ceylon_flag.PNG

    Their are sel lipi written during the time of the Buddha in Lanka, that’s 6th BCE and their are even sel lipi written by Kuveni and one so far by Ravana.

    Also as I said before, Sinhala people have been found to have the dental traits of the Balangoda man(40,000 yrs). This cannot have happened, unless Sinhala people were here to integrate with them obviously or Sinhala people and Veddha are the direct descendent’s of Balangoda man.. Their is no such evidence’s in Tamil’s!

    This is not computer science, it’s quite simple to understand but guess that’s too much to ask.

    Huh…

    You need some help mate!! Seriously!!

    I remind you again to please read, Portuguese record’s. Which clearly state who and what they found when they arrived in Colombo and Galle…etc etc. Your thinking of Sinhala people been brought into these area’s by the Dutch is possibly the most unhistorical inaacuracy that I have ever read. No offense but please read up on these things or even visit the Kotte musuem and see how huge an area in the Kotte Kingdom(that 13th Century, although the Portuguese state it was built starting in the 11th) was and its Sinhala Buddhist populace. The amount Vihara’s they found, incl three Buddhist Colleges…

    Also I have said before but will say again. The scales of assimilation that confused people like yourself speak, would leave an enormous trail. If historian’s can find evidences of how people left Africa a Million year’s ago then 100,000yrs and assimalted with many of the different peoples. Don’t you think, their would be evidence of such a Tamil-Sinhala assimailation???? Its not something you can hide…but their is no evidence! Except for the Sinhala-Tamil during the British era, which I gave a link too.

    Even still we Sinhala people except the fact that Sinhalese must have absorbed different peoples who have arrived to this nation. Been Sinhala, is not about a genetic code, its about a way of life. Its a culture! Although, I will admit, today due to British policies, that life style as been severely damaged.

    Also seriously 5000 killed by LTTE???? lol…are u for serious????

    I remember news item’s even on CNN in 1996 it was 78,000…No offense but why do I get the feeling ur lieing because anyone that has seen the news at any point since 1996 know’s these things.

    Ok, that the amount of 150,000 is actually from records my collegue managed together. You proberly are not aware that the SL goverment, used lower the amounts killed by LTTE attacks. Hosiptal records on the hand have the correct amounts!

    Lol…100,000 Tamil’s lol….When one Tamil got killed mate, it was all over the world. Do you really belive 100,000 would have gone unnoticed???? lol…
    Seriously mate, wake up!

    Susantha..

    I have to disagree with you on one thing that you said.

    If Buddhism hadn’t arrived, then in my own opoion, Lanka would be still a Sinhala Siva Bhakti nation. .

    Humanist..

    Thank you for your reply and its exactly what I hoped;

    So in your own word’s the word Tamil didnt exist. I would assume these are main names of the different groups known to the writer’s and if Tamil was a known word at that time period, I would assume, they would have used such. By the way wasn’t the Mahabharata, written in 540 to 300 B.C???

    But as you can see, Sinhala on the hand already existed and we still have the same name…!!

    Sinhalese never in its history commited that crimes that Tamil’s have commited on this soil and time will tell, wouldn’t it!!

  • A Guy

    Additionally…

    When I said sel lipi, forot to add that, its in what considered as Old Sinhala.

  • Huh

    A guy….you failed to read the link i posted very clearly. It clearly states that roughly 50% of Colombo’s population ALONE by itself was that of SLAVES from south india in the dutch period. I never said that the whole population was brought their by the dutch. Obviously, though, a huge number of it IS a result of the dutch settling slaves there. Even K.M. De Silva briefly mentions this settling of slaves by the dutch in southern sri lanka. What do you think happened to these slaves? Obviously, they had to become Sinhalese or else what else happened to them? If you have any proof of these slaves being sent back, it would be greatly appreciated. Wijayapala has demonstrated what he believes is an example of tamils becoming sinhalaized so to speak on the west coast, but you just ignored it. Even wikipedia mentions this assimilation of tamils into sinhalese society.

    78,000 were reported to be killed TOTAL both by the army AND the LTTE, NOT solely If you read reports by various human rights organizations, they blame MOST of the deaths during this war on the government, not the LTTE. I am not a fan of the LTTE, but if you read correctly, most deaths are not attributed to them(although we must remember the number of lives killed does not take into account how the LTTE destroyed sri lanka’s economy, recruiting little children to do their dirty work, smuggling drugs, the vibrant jaffna culture of activism, etc.–most of this was mostly due to the LTTE’s influence and actions).

    I’m sure people like Wijayapala or Heshan can back me up on this.

    And btw, a Harvard professor estimates that the 100,000 number of deaths is a HUGE underestimate of these deaths. He estimates that about 215,000 deaths were from the sri lankan civil war alone!!!! Do you honestly think the LTTE was responsible for most of the deaths? Again, I’m not a fan of the LTTE, or eelam or secession, but even in the recent end of the war, most of these human rights organizations predict that most of these deaths are attributable to the army, not to the LTTE!!!!

    Remember, the sri lankan government is accused or killing at least 40,000 Sinhalese people, alone during the JVP riots. If they did that, who do you think could honestly cause most of the deaths of the civil war?

    I think it is you who needs to wake up. Although I think the LTTE was the greater threat to the tamil livelihood and dignity and prosperity, I think the Sri Lankan government has run out of enemies and is most responsible for nearly destroying the livelihood of the whole island, regardless of the ethnicities of the people we are referring to. It has run out of enemies, and it has nobody to blame but itself if things turn out for the worse on that island for the next few decades.

  • Heshan

    Been Sinhala, is not about a genetic code, its about a way of life. Its a culture! Although, I will admit, today due to British policies, that life style as been severely damaged.

    Sri Lanka was better off under the British. Tell me one single honest politician that the *Sinhalese* people have elected in 60 years. It’s nice to have freedom, but some people are simply incapable of taking proper advantage of the opportunities offered by that freedom. Lee Kuan Yew, the man who single-handedly turned Singapore into a first-world nation explicitly states that he saw all the mistakes Sri Lanka had made, and deliberately chose the opposite track when it came to the development of Singapore. In his latest interview, Lee Kuan Yew states explicitly that Mahinda Rajapakse is an extremist whose mindset simply cannot be altered. Why should we listen to Lee Kuan Yew? Well, he is much more capable than any politician Sri Lanka has produced. Perhaps if the majority community in SL came out of its insular shell, it would learn a thing or two.

  • Heshan

    *Sri Lanka was better off under the British.

    Of course, “Sri Lanka” was just as well off before the British, although that is somewhat of a misnomer, since “Sri Lanka” did not exist before the British united it for administrative purposes. Sri Lanka could also be very well off post-Britain, but I very much doubt that it will be the case, at least for a very long time to come. If, after 2000 yrs, the “patriotic” Sinhalese still hold Mahavamsa above Tamil rights, what difference will another 2000 yrs make? God forbid the Sinhalese are like the “Jews” (who call themselves the chosen ones) but it seems to be the case, seeing as 100,000 lives were shed in a desperate attempt to uphold borders demarcated by Mahavamsa and radical monks…

  • jasmine

    A guy,

    So, 150,000 Sinhalese killed, but it was the Tamils who left the country in droves, signing up to be refugees all over the world? Somebody should have told them that it was the Sinhalese that the killers were after!

    Just wondering–do you bring any logic to the table when you read all the stuff you’ve been reading? Like trying to figure out how Northern Indians got to Sri Lanka first before Tamils, who lived right next door, who were actually geographically connected to the island by a natural causeway?

    Where are you going with your fantasy theories? So, if a nation’s character, culture and rights are determined by the majority population, then doesn’t that mean that the Tamils should be given a separate nation since they are the majority in the north? Of course, I am only asking hypothetically since, as you claim, there are no such people as SL Tamils in the first place.

  • A Guy

    Heshan,

    I do in fact agree with you that the leaders since Independence have not been up to standed but comparing Lanka, a nation with an actual Civilization to a fishing port called Singapore, created by Chinese pirates in the 14th Century and named by the British in the 17th, is quite funny.

    Yes, I do agree that Lee Kwan was a amazing ruler but he is also regarded as a dictator and how and what suits one does not fit another…Maybe you should live in Singapore, if you dont already….

    Huh….

    You can keep reading your websites mate and offcourse if it appears on wikipedia, it must be right lol.

    No real historian of any country would take, what you regard as fact Im afraid. If half of Colombo was made up of South Indian’s brought over by the Dutch, then assimaltaion would not have occured to a large extent at all…You see in 1824 census, the Sinhala popluce made up 255,000 in Colombo, while Malabar’s made up 324. This would not have been the case, if what you so fancifully say is true…Plus considering the Dutch and British policy of keeps Tamil’s, as Tamil’s, then assimilation would have been in the opposite direction!!

    But I am sure, you will disagree with another website quote lol….

    O and regarding, your assertion’s, its quite interesting who you have said as your guides as on the numbers. You must remember one simply fact in all this, that people like the UN, Red Cross and many other’s have been located in these region’s and they certainly dont have these view’s. Yes, civilian’s did get killed during the final stages of the war but strangely enough that’s what happen’s in war…Nearly 500,000 civilian’s have been killed in Afganistan and more 400,000 in Iraq but that’s what happen’s in a war…And I quote; We are told to carry spades with us, you get rid evidences of civilian’s killed…That was what an american soilder, who got back from Iraq had said live on TV at a press conference.

    But their is a clear difference from an elected goverment, defending the country to a foriegn community taking up arms to rip apart a country that isnt their’s.

    ps

    The amount’s from jvp and jr/premadasa era is alot higher than you have put!! A lot higher!!

  • jasmine

    A guy,
    Just to add (because I tend to get a little obsessive about applying common sense to issues)–why would the SL government downplay the numbers of Sinhalese killed since it was trying to put the word out to the world that the Tamil Tigers were the mother of all terrorists?

  • wijayapala

    Huh,

    The only correction I would make is that it was not THE SL govt which caused a lot of deaths but a number of governments beginning with JR’s. These govts overall may have killed more people (although I would argue that the LTTE’s figure is probably a lot closer to the govts’ than you may think), but I think that the LTTE caused more damage to the Tamils’ society by destroying any shred of independent thinking.

    Try to avoid asking Heshan questions about SL history. He only knows what Jesus tells him.

  • wijayapala

    Dear Prof. Heshan,

    Sri Lanka was better off under the British. Tell me one single honest politician that the *Sinhalese* people have elected in 60 years.

    Dudley Senanayake? Wijayadasa Rajapakse? DEW Gunasekara?

    Perhaps you also believe that the Tamils are better off under Sinhala rule, since they did not produce an honest leader?

  • Belle

    To ‘A guy':

    Well, I do live in Singapore, and it’s marvellous, aint’ it, how history works out? A fishing village transforms into a first world country and your “actual Civilization” is in the dog house. That’s what comes of preferring to wallow in your ancient glory instead of flowing with the times and trying out new ideas (such as peace).

    By the way, long before Singapore became a fishing village, it was a centre of trade in South-east Asia, and fought over by many kingdoms in the region.

    As for Lee Kuan Yew being a dictator, mate, I suggest you look a little closer to home instead of casting stones at other people’s houses. The difference between Singaporeans and Sri Lankans is that the former know a dictator when they see one. And our dictator didn’t waste our hard-earned money on wars and killing fellow citizens.

  • Heshan

    A Guy:

    The insular worldview held by many Sri Lankans (in Sri Lanka) – such as yourself- is far more dangerous to the future of the country than the LTTE. What has SL achieved in 60 years? Now that the LTTE is gone, what is SL achieving? I don’t see the expatriates flocking back, neither do I see a mad rush by foreign investors. Neither do I see any substantial efforts by the Government to improve the general welfare of society. What I see is a single family exploiting the wealth of the island for itself and its small band of cronies, and the steady entrenchment of Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism in various civil institutions. The primary barrier to that entrenchment – the Constitution – is being slowly done away with, albeit indirectly and rather shrewdly. Unfortunately, lack of a vibrant media has created a subservient population that jumps and sings to the tune of “Tamil terrorist bogeyman.”

  • Huh

    A Guy,

    I obviously know that wikipedia isn’t always reliable–you just seem to deny EVERYTHING that everyone else posts in my defense by either ignoring them or making defesnive comments. I am well aware that the numberkilled in the JVP riots is much more than that. Hence, the fact that I stated AT LEAST 40,000 people were killed. I don’t know why you keep going on how my link is a fake. It comes from the Dutch East india’s company own records–why would they lie? Your british census is not proof at all that what I posted is incorrect. That census came more than a century after the Dutch Slave Trade in Malabar was at its height! Again, if you have ANY proof of those slaves being repatriated back to malabar/coromandel coast, it would be greatly appreciated. And also, it is estimated that at least 215,000 were killed by that medical team. They say the number ranges from 215,000-338,000 people!! And although the government of Sri anka has always used that line of being a ” sovereign government defending its people in the face of terror”, I think we all know how the Sri Lankan government can outdo even the LTTE in terms of the terror they cause(i.e. JVP riots, Civil war, kidnappings, abductions, journalist killings, etc.)

    Wijayapala,
    I agree that the LTTE deaths are probably a lot higher than what is reported. However, I think we all know who caused most of the deaths since Civil War, and that is the government(s). Thanks for agreeing with me, though!

  • Janaki

    [cit]So, 150,000 Sinhalese killed, but it was the Tamils who left the country in droves, signing up to be refugees all over the world? Somebody should have told them that it was the Sinhalese that the killers were after![/cit]

    How many Sinhalese left the country between 1988 and 1991 when 60,000 Sinhalese were killed? The Sinhalese don’t believe in running away unlike the Tamils. They have roots on the island which they want to maintain.

  • Janaki

    [cit]Well, I do live in Singapore, and it’s marvellous, aint’ it, how history works out? A fishing village transforms into a first world country and your “actual Civilization” is in the dog house. That’s what comes of preferring to wallow in your ancient glory instead of flowing with the times and trying out new ideas (such as peace).[/cit]

    I don’t care about “first world status”. I’m fine living in Sri Lanka rather than Singapore. The environment, the climate, the people, the culture, etc. is much better to me than Singapore and it will always be so despite how bad the government is.

  • Janaki

    [cit]Like trying to figure out how Northern Indians got to Sri Lanka first before Tamils, who lived right next door, who were actually geographically connected to the island by a natural causeway?[/cit]

    The Sinhalese have descended from people who have always lived on the island. Vijay was just the first to form a major dynasty.

    And when did Tamils come to live “right next door”? Have they just always lived in the Tamil Nadu? The notion of a Tamil race didn’t exist when the first records of the Sinhalese were made with Vijay in 5th century BC.

    The first Tamil kingdoms only came around the third century BC.

    “From around the third century BC onwards, three royal dynasties—the Cholas, the Cheras and the Pandyas—rose to dominate the ancient Tamil country.[18] ”

    In fact the oldest records of a Tamil race seems to come from the the Sinhalese records in Sri Lanka of “Demalas” according to Wiki.

    “Epigraphic evidence of an ethnic group termed as such is found in ancient Sri Lanka where a number of inscriptions have come to light datable from third to first century BCE mentioning Damela or Dameda persons.”

  • Janaki

    [cit]NOT solely If you read reports by various human rights organizations, they blame MOST of the deaths during this war on the government, not the LTTE.[/cit]

    And we are to believe groups like Amnesty International which are not present inside Sri Lanka and rely on mainly Tamil eyewitness accounts (which aren’t reliable)?

    “The Sri Lankan civil war was very costly, killing an estimated 80,000-100,000 people.[15] The deaths include 27,639 Tamil fighters, more than 23,327 Sri Lankan soldiers and policemen, 1,155 Indian soldiers, and tens of thousands of civilians.”

    50,000 of the casualties were combatants. That leaves only about 30,000 -50,000 civilian casualties. About 30,000 Sinhala soldiers were killed by the LTTE. That’s a bit more than 5,000 I think.

  • Janaki

    [cit]Well, I do live in Singapore, and it’s marvellous, aint’ it, how history works out? A fishing village transforms into a first world country and your “actual Civilization” is in the dog house. That’s what comes of preferring to wallow in your ancient glory instead of flowing with the times and trying out new ideas (such as peace).[/cit]

    And really it’s much easier to run a city state than a diversely populated island of 21 million. Sri Lanka has done really well considering that there’s been a civil war going on for 27 years. A lot of people in Colombo are well-to-do. The economy is going to get better now though there needs to be significant work done in repairing relations with Northern and Tamil Nadu Tamils.

  • Burning_Issue

    A Guy,

    “Your evidence on Buddhism been accepted as the religion of this nation by the British is in their choice of emblem for the flag of Colonial Ceylon..”

    So that the British accepted Buddhism as the religion of the nation; then they employed disproportionately the Tamils for State administration! They also promoted Anglicanism; according to the Sinhala Buddhist Chauvinists, the British conspired to keep the Sinhala Buddhists uneducated by employing the divide-and-rule tactic! So, is it the same policy that they employed to project Buddhism on the flag to keep the Buddhist quiet?

    Kandy was intact and free of Portuguese and Dutch reigns unlike all other regions of the island thus retained all religious monuments. If the Portuguese had not destroyed many prominent Hindu and Buddhist places of worships, who knows the British would have had a different opinion!

    However, how do you explain the Kandyan Convention, by which the British agreed to “The religion of the Buddha is declared inviolable and its rights to be maintained and protected.” And then with the clause 9 “Over non-Kandyans the position to remain according to British law.” They maintained that, the Convention did not apply to non-Kandyan regions.

    Yet, the present day Sinhala Buddhists maintain that, the Convention was meant for the entire nation! The conclusion that I arrive at is that, one cannot go by what the British did or did not do as everything that they did was to maintain their reign trouble free with full benefit to the crown.

    “Their are sel lipi written during the time of the Buddha in Lanka, that’s 6th BCE and their are even sel lipi written by Kuveni and one so far by Ravana.”

    Ravana and Kuveni stories are myths; there are no evidence whatsoever to prove that these people really lived; please do yourself a favour, just get real! Also please prove on this forum with evidence when exactly Buddha visited the island.
    “Also as I said before, Sinhala people have been found to have the dental traits of the Balangoda man(40,000 yrs).”

    Please state on this forum as to when exactly the term Sinhala was used with evidence. Then we can talk about associating the Sinhala people to the 40,000 year old Balangoda Man!

    “This is not computer science, it’s quite simple to understand but guess that’s too much to ask.”

    Ahh; the problem is that you have taken everything too simple without asking any questions!

  • A Guy

    Bell..

    Im glad you live in Singapore and so you have right to talk how this country should be then, do you?

    I live in SL and am very happy. Their is a such difference since the end of war and a sense of peace. Which you proberly don’t because you more than likely have never lived here during the last few decades?

    So dont try and understand something you obviouly dont!

    Sri Lanka’s was a nation without poverty and even slavery before the Colonilist’s. Why don’t you read British report’s on how their is no poverty in Ceylon and how well educated the popluce…All these great thing’s were destroyed by the one law after another by the British goverment and establishing the corrupt system of voting and introduction of politics into this country.

    You must realise, Colonialist’s required their to be productive and bring in as much money.

    Heshan..

    For your information, our stock exchange alone has increased by 160% since May 2009 and in fact by the end of this yr, it is expected to have recived 200%. That happen’s by investor;…Did you know that..Yes Investors!

    Investment’s…Are you joking…Companies from everywhere is over here building and buying as much as they can of what will be great future.

    It’s simple situation mate, those that don’t like living in SL have every right to leave and those that never have lived have right to talk about how this country should. We the people of this country will decide that…Thank you!

    But saying that, I do think that their should be more freedom of media and a goverment that is more transparant in its business dealings but that our business and I am confident that in time, these things will take shape.

  • A Guy

    Bell…

    Im glad you live in Singapore and so you have right to talk how this country should be then, do you?

    The grammer their is bit wrong lol..

    It’s meant to be;

    Im glad you live in Singapore and so you have no right to talk about how this country should be then, do you?

  • Observer

    Huh, when I read your comment…

    http://www.groundviews.org/2010/05/27/from-necessary-war-to-sustainable-peace-in-sri-lanka/#comment-20065

    My exact response was “HUH?!?”

    I would love if you could please provide proper references to what you claimed in your post instead of saying “a Harvard professor”. It means nothing! Also what would a “Harvard” professor know that more closer to home local and Asian analysts find hard to put a figure on? Does being in Harvard give him some special ability to zap into war zones and take accurate figures as an invisible man among the chaos?

    From everything I have read the 60/70 thousand figure is never attributed to any party. In all references it states just to the civil war. You need to understand that for a good part of the 90s LTTE had the upper hand militarily and the SL Army was taking it up the a$$ despite few offensive that recovered lost ground. Who do you think that did the most killings? When the SLA bases were surrounded and over run in so called “unceasing waves”? I wonder!!

    My understanding also is that majority of that figure is combatants as opposed to civilians. From what I recall that figure is primarily based on official casualty figures and well publicised tragedies. The army casualty figures alone on records would account a significant proportion of that. Unfortunately I don’t have access to them to publish here, other than figures I have mentally notes over time. It’s not way off if you also claim LTTE combatant deaths would be on par with SLA casualties. The kill ratio in this conflit more or less has been a 1:1 from my observations. Combatant figure are all fair game regardless of the stupidity of the head to head bloody combat.

    So Huh, I think you need to wake up! Otherwise, please provide some references, because if it is credible stuff I’d like to update my collection of literature.

    On another note, you cannot compare many successive governments against current ones. For instance JVP was culled by a UNP government. What correlation does that have for the current administration or its actions? Care to explain your logical path here?

    “It has run out of enemies, and it has nobody to blame but itself if things turn out for the worse on that island for the next few decades.”

    Oh and SL has run out of enemies? You really must be sleeping. Can you please explain the massive, bitter Tamil diaspora lobby group who’s trying to prevent any form of international corporation, aid and even boycott Sri Lankan exports??? Basically just wants to bring down any sort of fire ball on Lanka.. There are still huge challenges ahead.

    You just sound like a current administration hater….

  • Observer

    Heshan said,
    ……
    Sri Lanka was better off under the British. Tell me one single honest politician that the *Sinhalese* people have elected in 60 years.

    ///////

    Heshan, what sort of fantasy world do you live in man? You have a very daunting task at hand if you take the British side here (nevertheless you’re always happy to take on this role, probably because you live in the west). Let’s for a moment accept that colonisation was an “honest practice”.

    What honest politician would lie and forge intelligence in relation to WMDs so his master could draw war plans for invading another country for plundering oil? I’m talkin Bush’s one time lackey Tony Blair here! haha Honesty!!! You even went there!

    Britain is the country that still has a fluff “house of lords” and a “queen” who are partially supported by tax payers (rest supported by what was plundered from the commoners during the hay days of subjugation). Which are non democratic positions. LOL!

    British screwed everything up and [Edited out] here and all other colonised countries, which unfortunately we’re still trying to clean up. Now they’re [Edited out] on Iraq & Afghanistan with their master. I wonder how long they’ll have to clean up that pile.

  • Observer

    jasmine said,

    A guy,
    Just to add (because I tend to get a little obsessive about applying common sense to issues)–why would the SL government downplay the numbers of Sinhalese killed since it was trying to put the word out to the world that the Tamil Tigers were the mother of all terrorists?

    jasmine, not during the CFA period! It was all about sharing a noodle from 2 ends – appeasement hehe have we forgotten about that time?

  • Belle

    Janaki,
    “And really it’s much easier to run a city state than a diversely populated island of 21 million. Sri Lanka has done really well considering that there’s been a civil war going on for 27 years.”

    Hello, the fact that there was a civil war going on for a quarter of a century is in itself an indictment against your governance! You can’t say “except for a civil war, we’ve done really well”! Your leaders couldn’t rule a fishing village, let alone Sri Lanka–they’d probably exhort the catfish to fight with the sting ray.

    As for not caring for first world status, that’s really a darn pity. Because perhaps if more of you cared for that, there wouldn’t have been war and so much criminal waste of your human and other resources.

  • Belle

    A guy,

    “Im glad you live in Singapore and so you have no right to talk about how this country should be then, do you?”

    Oh yes, I forget–you come from a country where people get killed for saying the wrong thing. So perhaps you need a little reminding: you don’t have any rights in setting the rules of discourse in Groundviews.

    As for “The grammer their is bit wrong lol..”

    Not only is your “grammer” wrong, it’s also misspelt. LOL.

  • Burning_Issue

    Observer,

    “British screwed everything up and [Edited out] here and all other colonised countries, which unfortunately we’re still trying to clean up. Now they’re [Edited out] on Iraq & Afghanistan with their master. I wonder how long they’ll have to clean up that pile.”

    Leaving a side the country’s infrastructure that the British left behind, please outline as to how they screwed up in Sri Lanka.

    Is it because they amalgamated all separate territories into one in 1833?

    Is it because they defined the constitution wrong in 1948?

    What exactly did they do that contributed to the failures of the task of nation building?

  • jasmine

    Janaki,
    “And when did Tamils come to live “right next door”? Have they just always lived in the Tamil Nadu? The notion of a Tamil race didn’t exist when the first records of the Sinhalese were made with Vijay in 5th century BC.

    The first Tamil kingdoms only came around the third century BC.”

    Hmmm, aren’t the Tamils Dravidian? And don’t the Dravidians live in South India, which is a lot closer anyway to Sri Lanka compared to the geographical origins of Aryans.

    The Tamil language was the first Indian language to be declared a classical language by the government of India (even before Sanskrit). The criteria they used included established high antiquity of its early texts and historical records as well as an original body of ancient literature. To get to such a stage of cultural development, you have to have settled somewhere for a very, very long time.

    Sinhalese, by the way, is not considered to be among the Indo-European classical languages. Not ancient enough, apparently.

    As for “How many Sinhalese left the country between 1988 and 1991 when 60,000 Sinhalese were killed? The Sinhalese don’t believe in running away unlike the Tamils. They have roots on the island which they want to maintain.”

    You said it–the Sinhalese have roots on the island. When a community is NOT ALLOWED to have roots someplace, they tend to find it easier to leave. Plus, it sure helps to have not one, but two lots of people firing at you–the LTTE and your own country’s national army. Not to forget the IPKF years.

  • SomewhatDisgusted

    Dear Janaki,

    “How many Sinhalese left the country between 1988 and 1991 when 60,000 Sinhalese were killed? The Sinhalese don’t believe in running away unlike the Tamils. They have roots on the island which they want to maintain.”

    I don’t see how this is a fair statement at all. There’s a fundamental difference when you are outnumbered 5 to 1 and you are part of the “out-group” called Tamils, How is that situation comparable to the JVP problem where there was no such in-group/out-group dynamic? Plus, was there a situation where one’s own government was acting against you? Who’s left to speak for you?

    I don’t think that the majority of people who left, at least in the early stages, did so for economic reasons. That’s just a canard to rationalize the situation when the truth is that our fellow countrymen had to leave their own homes in droves to escape the appalling climax to many years of harassment. What about the episodes of violence prior to that spread across so many years? That doesn’t take a toll on people’s psyche? Sorry, I really think this is a terribly unfair statement to make.

  • Huh

    Burning-Issue:

    I believe possibly the worst thing that the British did(of all the many things) in Sri Lanka is that they denied the Kandyan Leaders requests for federalism twice, for Sri Lanka to be divided into three federal states. If that happened as early as 1948, when tensions were virtually non-existent between the Sinhalese and Tamils, who knows what the country would have been like today?

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    British screwed everything up and [Edited out] here and all other colonised countries, which unfortunately we’re still trying to clean up. Now they’re [Edited out] on Iraq & Afghanistan with their master. I wonder how long they’ll have to clean up that pile.

    I am not defending colonization. I am simply making the irrefutable observation that British administration of the island was far superior to what one finds in SL today. Capable people actually ran the show. The British were able to transcend caste/class differences. They brought schools, hospitals, built roads (using local labor), and introduced a railway – I dare say, the railway system they setup hasn’t changed much since 1948. They also introduced tea, which still happens to annually generate over 1 billion USD in revenue for SL (not a small feat), and the labor source to exploit the tea (after the Kandyans refused). In simple terms, the British laid the foundation for capitalism on the island. Why is that such a bad thing?

    As for the rest of its “empire”, well, this empire was quite vast and spanned 6 continents. At one point, the empire contained 1/4 of the global population. Not of all it’s ex-colonies have squandered. To name a few, Singapore, America and India are doing quite well. You also have to keep in mind that colonization was rather mild compared to conquest – at that time, conquest was a popular activity. Compared to what the Mughals (Muslims) did in North India, or the Spanish did in South America, or the Japanese did to China during WWII (23 million dead Chinese), the British occupation of Ceylon is tame in comparison. Recall that during the siege of Berlin in 1945, the (German) people who fled all fled in the direction of the advancing Americans and British. They knew what treatment would come from the uncivilized Russian side. As small as this planet is, it is universally accepted who the most civilized ones are.

  • wijayapala

    Burning_Issue

    What exactly did they do that contributed to the failures of the task of nation building?

    Representation in the original Legislative Council created after 1833 was based on communal lines. Out of six members nominated by the Governor, one was Sinhalese, one was Tamil, and one was Burgher. This arrangement paved the way for communal politics.

  • A Guy

    jasmine,

    Let’s talk about roots shall we;

    In 1987, 32 Sri Lankan Tamil (NOT estate) lads arrived at Heathrow illegally and had requested asylum. These guys went so far as strip naked and protest. Obviously they were arrested and produced in the courts.

    While in court, their reason’s for arriving in Britain was told;

    We were brought to Lanka by the British government and then in 1948, it was handed over to the Sinhalese. We are now discriminated against and request that the British give us asylum or help us in Lanka.

    This was accepted by the British courts and they were given asylum.

    The fact that the British court accepted this claim is proof that the majority of Tamil’s were brought over by the British government. Otherwise, it is abit silly to accept, now wouldn’t it?

    Also recently, the History professor of the University of Jaffna. Said clearly regarding the finding of a small temple built by Raja Raja in Delft that the Tamil’s would have known if this monument was built during the Dutch and British period. Hmmmmm, Wonder why they wouldn’t know what was built during the Portuguese and before…Could it possibly, is because, they have only been present in Lanka since the Dutch and British periods?

    Saying that, it’s amazing how, the Sinhalese know what king’s had built what. Whatever village you go to and even temple hidden forest’s, people would tell you ‘o there is temple built by such n such king’ and do you why that is? Its called memory, memory of events that have been pasted down for not just centuries but for thousand’s of years.

    That is roots!!

    Belle,

    Please keep staying over their…

  • A Guy

    Burning Issue,

    Ravana and Kuveni stories are myths; there are no evidence whatsoever to prove that these people really lived; please do yourself a favour, just get real! Also please prove on this forum with evidence when exactly Buddha visited the island.
    “Also as I said before, Sinhala people have been found to have the dental traits of the Balangoda man(40,000 yrs)

    In the case Ravana, their are seven medical books, Siva Tanadava sloka and also place names asscociated with him. Myth’s don’t write books!!

    Kuveni, their is sel lipi written by her father and even temple that belong’s to her. Kinda difficult for a myth to that.

    But let’s talk what and who their is no evidences of;

    Their is in fact no evidences of a Vijaya..only the Mahawamsa. Which is a dynastic book written in the 4th century AD by a Soli priest pressent at Mahavihara.

    Their is fact NO evindeces for an Elara but their are 14 sel lip written Dutagemanu.

    Neither is their any evidences of a Pandukabaya, the decendent of Vijaya story.

    Their is sel lip by Devanpiyatissa, Kavantissa etc etc…and regarding the arrival of the Buddha, their is in fact Sel lipi that speak of his arrival and even the name of the Sinhala king of that period. Also their is river in Mahiyangana, that bore his name before the British either delibartely or not knowing, changed the name. No nation, can have so many tradition’s and places of asigned to someone that never came. These are historical sites, built during those times and accepted by all..except obviously Christain nutcases!!

    When the Sinhala name came about is not the issue even though, Chandragupta’s writting state Sinhaladipa and talk about the Sinhala but you are trying to escape the fact that Balangoda man and Sinhala, Veddha match. While Tamil’s don’t! So obviously if Sinhala and Tamil’s are the same people, as some of you claim, then the Tamil’s would have matched as well, wouldn’t they daaaaaaaahh!!

    The name of Sinhala would not have exited 40,000yrs and that was never my claim. My statement, was quite simple and quite explanatory!

  • jasmine

    A guy,
    I don’t know if you are accurately reporting the incident of the SL Tamil refugees. I have lots of questions about that. How do you know that they were SL Tamils and not the ‘estate’ Tamils who were applying for asylum? Also, don’t assume that whatever is said in court, especially in asylum applications, is the truth. If they were indeed SL Tamils, they may have found out from lawyers that claiming to be ‘estate’ Tamils could ease their application for asylum, i.e. they spotted a loophole in British law. SL Tamils often flushed their passports down the loo when they arrived at Western airports, seeking asylum. There would have been no way for the British courts to know whether they were ‘estate’ Tamils or SL Tamils if they had no identification papers on them. The British court accepting their claims is in no way “proof” that the majority of SL Tamils only came over during the colonial period. Your leaps in logic are quite remarkable. it only means that the British court had no way of determining if they were plantation Tamils or not.

    Having said that, I find your claims of Sinhalese exclusive claims to SL tiresome and totally irrelevant. A nation is a modern political formation. You could give yourself a real education by reading your Constitution and laws regarding citizenship. Somebody is no less a citizen if their ancestors arrived a decade ago to the country or whether they arrived millenia ago–as long as they have citizenship papers.

    If your purpose in trying so desperately to prove the prior arrival of Sinhalese to Sri Lanka is to argue that SL Tamils have no right to claim separation since they weren’t the original settlers, then it’s time you realise that long settlement is not the only basis on which people demand a separate nation. They can make it on the basis of discrimination, threat to life, threat to their cultural preservation, etc. Jinnah didn’t argue for a separate nation for Indian Muslims based on long settlement. Rather he argued that Indian Muslims were a separate “nation” from Indian Hindus in that they had a different culture, different perspective on life, etc, and that as a numerical minority, they would always be marginalised in a Hindu-dominated India.

    So please, save the forummers here unnecessary angst in having to argue against your half-baked, pastiche understanding of history, which clearly flouts all common sense, not to mention breaking all the protocols of the professional writing of history. One isolated text here, another isolated anecdote there does not a history make. I mean, honestly, I won’t be surprised at all if one day you claim that some old man wandering along the coast told you that Sinhalese emerged from the coconut trees of Sri Lanka, and so Sinhalese must therefore be considered to be the original settlers of the island.

    If you are so concerned about the ethics of original settlement, then take that idea to its logical conclusion and give Sri Lanka over to the Veddahs.

  • Burning_Issue

    A Guy,

    To be honest with you I know very little knowledge about Balangoda Man; However, my intuition compels me to challenge your claim that “dental traits of the Balangoda man” a: validity of the scientific study that led to authenticated proof beyond doubt. B: whether the sample is sufficient to deem that the entire population or greater proportion was of the prehistoric Sinhala.

    I have read many publications on the subject of Sri Lankan history including that of Kartihesu Indrapala, Evolution of an Ethnic Identity,(2005); I did not come across any material that would support your claim. I am away from home at the moment thus solely relaying on the internet for sources!

    Please see the following website, where S. U. Deraniyagala, Director-General of the Archaeology:

    http://www.lankalibrary.com/geo/dera2.html

    “These anatomically modern prehistoric humans in Sri Lanka are referred to as Balangoda Man in popular parlance (derived from his being responsible for the Mesolithic ‘Balangoda Culture’ first defined in sites near Balangoda). He stood at an estimated height of ca. 174 cm for males and 166 cm for females in certain samples, which is considerable when compared with present-day populations in Sri Lanka (v. Deraniyagala 1992:330-4). The bones are robust, with thick skull-bones, prominent brow-ridges, depressed wide noses, heavy jaws and short necks. The teeth are conspicuously large. These traits have survived in varying degrees among the Vaddas and certain Sinhalese groups, thus pointing to Balangoda Man as a common ancestor. It needs to be borne in mind, however, that there would have been unimpeded gene-flow between southernmost India and Sri Lanka (in both directions) from the Palaeolithic onwards, and that future research will probably reveal a whole range of genetic clusters in the prehistoric populations of this region, which would invalidate the concept of Balangoda Man as a homogeneous ‘race’. Meanwhile, Balangoda Man continues to be a useful working concept, referring to the island’s late Quaternary humans.”

    Obviously, this is an official version of Sri Lanka; there must be some twists in the piece to promote Sinhala Buddhism; however, he has claimed that, there would have been steady stream of migrations from India to Sri Lanka and vice versa; thus it cannot be deemed that the country was populated homogeneously with Weddas and Sinhala! In effect, South East Asia requires more archaeological findings and investigations under a common authority to establish the type peoples that lived in the regions.

    Basically, you have cherry picked here and there to support your bigoted claims!

  • Burning_Issue

    A Guy,

    “In the case Ravana, their are seven medical books, Siva Tanadava sloka and also place names asscociated with him. Myth’s don’t write books!!”

    Did you mean that, Ravana wrote books? Hindu religious Hymns and names of places do not support your claims; please get real! I was born in a Hindu Family and an Atheist; please do not come up with such mythical stories to support your Sinhala supremacy!

  • Burning_Issue

    Wijayapala,

    I do understand your point; but we cannot cherry pick from what the British did; we need to look at the whole picture. If they had not amalgamated all three regions into one, there would not be Sri Lanka as we see today! Moreover, as Huh claimed, if they had grated federalism to Kandyian region, what would have been the outlook today?

    Yes, the British did create a communal tension, but they handed over a single country under a secular constitution for the Sri Lankans to move forward; we cannot point our finger at the British; it is we who screwed up and not the British!

  • A Guy

    Jasmine,

    O dear….I will do my best to get a copy of the actual court reading of that and also NO government in the world provides asylum without proof of identity and place of origin. Don’t you know that?

    Also I recommend you to do some reading on British administration report’s and by the way their are in fact documentary evidence’s regarding how and why whole Tamil villages were ordered to be brought settled into Ceylon. The best detail’s are during Torrington’s governorship and where Tamil’s were brought and settled into the North-Central and Eastern areas in 1848-onwads. Only after this do we here of Tamil villages in the East…Their are non recorded by the Dutch nor by the Early British and in fact two English priest’s, who travelled through the East in 1816, say clearly that the only Malabar presence is of the slaves located at the fort in Batticalao. So NO offense but I don’t listen to crack pot historian’s like you do…instead I try and look at records from the concerned period in time and especially if they are EYEWITNESS ones!!

    I have never said that Tamil’s cannot live here but all I have said is that they have NO right to claim this country as theirs. Can the African’s, who have been in Britain for nearly 500yrs or more…Claim Britain as their Traditional Homeland and ask for a seperate state because of enormous amount’s of racsim and discrimination that they face???? A very BIG …NO!! It’s laughble that you think that, it’s actually a possiblity lol!!

    Been the original people does count actually…As in the UN, its accepted that those that built a civilization, are those who have a right to that country…Give an odd example…Take US, are whites natives???? No…The first people to build a civilization on their, are the native tribes and so they are the natives…Other examples can be given e.g. Fiji.

    You cannot claim a separate nation, out of a country that you were brought over too by another foreigner…!!

    And your reference to Pakistan, show’s really how stupid you are;

    Pakanistanis are the same people as the majority of North India, only difference is religion. They are not a foreign community that was brought over to India by another foreign invader…Completely different set of circumstances!!

    ps

    Considering the Veddha and Sinhala people have both the traits of anceint man, that itself is a valid 50/50. So both have equal right to be in this land and claim this land!

  • A Guy

    Additionally;

    Post Independent and British India are essentaially a Colonial creation. All the Rajput’s, Sultanites and the former Mughal empire, amalgamated to create it.

    Unlike in Lanka, where in 1833, becuase of the Colbrooke reform’s, what was a single unit was dismemebered into 9 provinces.

    I know their are people who belive, that the British infact united the nation but this is in fact completly aganist all known historical records eg;

    The Dutch goverment’s letters to the Kandian King dated 1609, state clearly that he is the King of Kandy, Trinco, Jaffna, Sette Corles, Mannar, Chilaw, Cota, Batecalo, Punte- Gale.

    This is a letter by Maurice de Naffau from the Hague Oct 05 1609.

    Also

    In 1612 Sept 23,

    According again Dutch sources, the Kandian King ordered a meeting of all the district leaders under his command.

    Their is list off all that came;

    All area’s incl Jaffna, Batecalo, Panama, Trinco, Cottirama, Mannar, Chilaw, were all represented..This show’s that Ceylon was infact a united nation not fragmented one, as some like to think!

    Again according more Dutch sources, in 19 Aug, 1613. All district leaders accepted the administration of the nation been given to the Princes of Migonne and Ouve. Again all area’s of what is today Northern province and Eastern Province, were present!

    Ok….

  • Observer

    burning issue/heshan,

    How about just killing people of the land they occupied as they saw fit to ruin a country? How about slavery, herding people from country to country like they were live stock for their purposes? How about stealing resources of the countries occupied? Do you think the brick and motar they left behind is any significance to us? You’d have to be joking! Do you think the imbalance of power and disproportionate vaccum they left behind was helpful? Do you think we really appreciated divide and conquer rule that polarised our communities?

    I personally think UK has no right to voice any opinion about SL until the Queen her self issue and unreserved apology to Sri Lanka for the atrocities committed against the locals during occupation.

    Sri Lanka is not without faults. There are no excuses really for the shape of Sri Lanka today. Sri Lanka’s history isn’t over yet. It’s still being written.. Give it a chance.

  • SomewhatDisgusted

    Dear A Guy,

    Your objection is to an Eelam isn’t it? That’s all very good, don’t care for that concept at all myself. Let’s talk about equal rights. What is your stance on that? Do you accept that each and every citizen in Sri Lanka should be entitled to the same rights as human beings or do you require special privileges on account of being Sinhalese? Are you claiming, like Susantha, that Sri Lanka belongs to the Sinhalese?

    Dear Burning Issue,

    Well argued posts. I hope you continue to blow the specious arguments of some of these people, on both sides of the “divide”, out of the water. Quite a few of them seem to have been born on the wrong side of this millennium, if you ask me.

    cheers,
    /SD

  • Humanist

    I am not sure why some people here keep harping on Balangoda man. How many jaws of Sinhalese, Veddahs and Tamils have Deraniyagala compared with that of Balangoda man to come to his tentative conclusion?

    The evidence for the genetic affinity of the Sinhalese and Tamils is far greater than anything we have for the genetic affinity of Balangoda man to either the Sinhalese or the Veddhas.

    This discussion is really deteriorating. Let’s stay with the point that DJ argued in this article – greater/unequal political power for the Sinhalese within a unitary state but equal rights for all as citizens. My position remains that Sinhalese should not have special political rights, and certainly not exclusive rights – whether they are related to Balangoda man or not. What a spurious argument.

    The question is: can everyone have equal rights as citizens if one group has special political power? Moreover, the problem remains that a lot of Sinhalese (not just Susantha and a guy) believe that they have special or exclusive rights to Sri Lanka. Can we move these people to the position of equal rights for all, as long as the Sinhalese have special political rights? That’s what many of us are interested after all, since I don’t really see any eelamists here.

  • Susantha

    Humanist
    SO you say that even if the sinhalese can prove that they decend from the indegenious people of sri lanka or at least partly decend and if they can prove that sinhalese have ruled this island since time immemorial they still cant say that sri lanka rightfully belongs to sinhalese?

    more than anything the reason why sinhalese rule this country is because they are the overwhelming majority in the country (75%+) so the President who will be elected will be a person who represents the Sinhalese and the parliament will consist of a majority of Sinhalese majority of the armed forces will also be Sinhalese and majority of the judiciary will also be Sinhalese so forget history democracy allows Sinhalese to rule Sri Lanka and history also does

  • Burning_Issue

    Observer,

    “How about just killing people of the land they occupied as they saw fit to ruin a country?”

    Just to remind you that the LTTE and GOSL have killed 100 times more people than the British killed!

    “How about slavery, herding people from country to country like they were live stock for their purposes?”

    The IDPs were treated far worse than the British ever did to any sole!

    “How about stealing resources of the countries occupied?”

    The Jaffna peninsula has been robbed from trees to doors, doorframes; anything that was transportable has been taken out; by who do you thing?

    “Do you think the brick and motar they left behind is any significance to us?”

    Come on man; the country was left by the British as one unit with a good set of infrastructure; it was like giving a flower garland to a monkey, the country was handed over to unscrupulous politicians!

    “ Do you think the imbalance of power and disproportionate vaccum they left behind was helpful? Do you think we really appreciated divide and conquer rule that polarised our communities?”

    Why don’t you accept the fact that we Sri Lankans screwed up big time; we were not and are not politically mature enough to govern; we do not understand democracy; we simply do not understand the concept live and let live! If there was disproportionate power distribution, it is our duty to rectify; how many times Sri Lanka changed the constitution since 1948; we just do not know how to get it right as a country; why don’t you admit it?

  • Burning_Issue

    Dear SomewhatDisgusted,

    A Guy is inimitable; he has gone beyond the usual Mahavamsa mindset; he has authenticated the Sinhala as the original people of Sri Lanka by “specious” association with the Balangoda man. Since it was 40,000 years ago, the Mahavamsa has become unreliable all of a sudden!

    I as a Tamil can live in Sri Lanka but I cannot claim it as my country; this is his position! How many like this guy are around in Sri Lanka; I think that the number is much higher than what is perceived.

  • Humanist

    Might is not right.

  • wijayapala

    Dear A Guy

    The name of Sinhala would not have exited 40,000yrs and that was never my claim. My statement, was quite simple and quite explanatory!

    Not really. Having the same teeth as Balangoda Man is hardly something that makes me proud to be a Sinhala. Does that mean we are less evolved than current homo sapiens??

    Did the study compare Sri Lankan Tamils’ teeth to Balangoda Man? I would like to think they’re as genetically backward as we are.

    Or at least did the study compare our Sinhala teeth to the Tamils’? What kind of teeth would somebody like Podiappuhamy Piyasena have? Did anyone in 1983 bother to check the teeth of alleged Tamils before killing them?

    I fully agree with you that the Sinhala culture began when Buddhism came to SL in the 3rd century BCE. We may have had ancestry predating Buddhism, but those people had a culture that is now lost.

  • wijayapala

    Hi Susantha

    more than anything the reason why sinhalese rule this country is because they are the overwhelming majority in the country (75%+)

    So are you saying that because the Tamils are the majority in the N-E, they have the right to rule that region to the exclusion of Sinhalese?

  • A Guy

    Every democracy in the world is ruled by the majority, be it in Asia, Europe or the America’s. It’s how things work…

    Taking on the comment’s made regarding equal rights, lets see;

    Tamil people make their percentage in every department be it in Business and in fact they makeup 7 out of the top ten richest in Lanka. The Tamil language is given more airspace on TV than their percentage. In the Profession’s, they make up their percentage and also in Goverment…You Tamil’s vote for your leader’s, if they don’t get in large numbers, that isn’t the fault of the Sinhalese!!

    They are infact more distributed and are found in every district of this country. While the Sinhelese and Muslim’s are discriminated against been the North and I don’t have to remind, how they were evicted by the Eelamist’s in the 90’s. Thus making the North an exclusive Tamil Zone!!!!

    Tamil language has been made a national language, which I personally think is ridicules. Not even India has given any of its regional languages a national status.

    Their is no other minority community in the world, that has these rights and the cry for more and more is nothing but GREED!!

    PS

    Sinhala people made the civilization of this country…Every invader accepted this fact, by the simple fact that no one challenged the name of this country…Sinhale. I don’t have to point out, that the Tamil name for Lanka is derived from Sinhale;

    The Pattuppatti, a Tamil poetical work mentions Sinhaldavipa as Iilam in the following line, Ilatkulavum u- rice from Iilam. Iilam also occurs in an inscription of Rajaraja Chola discovered at point Comarin in India, The relevant line runs thus, Murattolil Singalar Iilamandalum. The earliest reference to Sinhala in the garb of Iila is found in two cave inscriptions in South India. They are written in Brahmi script and their language shows affinities with archaic Tamil. The Tirappanguram cave inscription also in this locality has the wording , Ilakutumpikanam… husband from Sinhala. It is followed by the Kalugamalai inscription which mentions, Ilan kanikan to mean Kanikan from Iila (Sinhala). Puttamittarar, (Buddhamitra) in his Grammar, Virasoliam states, Singalavan pesavadu Singalan- language of the Sinhalas is Sinhala. These instances clearly show the stand taken by the Tamil authors ,when they make reference to our island. K. B. Subramanyar Ayyiyar, eminent epigraphist in India says,’ It (Ilan with long i)is the Tamil adaptation of the word Sinhala passing through the intermediate forms, Sinhala and Ilan (with short i)’.

    Enjoy…

  • A Guy

    Additionally;

    You cannot give equal right’s, which in laymen’s terms 73%=13%. Which is ridicules and making morking, how a democracy function’s.

    Does the US which has a Latino population of 15%, have equal rights…NO

    Does the US which has a Black population of 13%, have equal rights…NO

    More than 20% of the White population is German decent..Do they even have Langauge rights…NO

    So please, seriously wake up and realise, the world does not function, the way you think it does!

  • SomeOne

    Dear Susantha,

    “…majority in the country (75%+) ….”

    Why don’t you make it 100% or almost 100%. It could be a “win – win” situation. We are in a “loose-loose” situation, at the moment, I guess.

    Cheers

  • Huh

    Dear A Guy,

    what did you mean when you said:

    ” Does the US which has a Latino population of 15%, have equal rights…NO

    Does the US which has a Black population of 13%, have equal rights…NO”

    ?

    As an American-Sinhalese citizen, I find this comment pretty interesting, to say the least, so it would be cool if you could explain it.

    Thanks

  • wijayapala

    Dear Huh,

    A Guy didn’t make a lot of sense in his comparison to the US, which incidentally has a Black president. The bit about German descent was irrelevant because none of those white Americans speak German today.

    The only relevant part was on the Latinos, as Spanish language is not formally recognized in the US. However, I don’t think A Guy realizes that the US does not have any “official” langauge, although English is the de facto language of the country. Non-English speakers are often able to access government documents in other languages like Spanish or Vietnamese.

  • wijayapala

    Dear A Guy,

    You cannot give equal right’s, which in laymen’s terms 73%=13%. Which is ridicules and making morking, how a democracy function’s.

    Here is your fundamental misunderstanding of what democracy is: it is majority rule balanced by minority rights (here “majority” does not mean ethnic majority, but rather the section of the population who has the votes to elect the rulers). Without these rights, you have not democracy but “mobocracy” or mob rule.

    What these minority rights exactly entail is open to debate, but no democracy can function without them.

  • wijayapala

    Another observation for A Guy:

    Tamil language has been made a national language, which I personally think is ridicules. Not even India has given any of its regional languages a national status.

    India compensates for this by giving the major regional languages their own state: Andhra Pradesh for Telugu speakers, Maharashtra for Marathi speakers, West Bengal for the Bengalis and so forth, and in each of these states the regional language is official. In Tamil Nadu you will be very hard-pressed to find a single sign in Hindi.

    Hence for the SL Tamils, it was quite logical for them to call for Indian-style linguistic federalism AFTER 1956 Sinhala-Only.

  • jasmine

    A guy,
    ‘I have never said that Tamil’s cannot live here but all I have said is that they have NO right to claim this country as theirs.”

    Who are you trying to kid? All your hysterical mis-reading of history is designed, not to argue against partition, but to justify domination of Tamils and all other non-Sinhalese communities by the Sinhalese. The Tamils are in no position, either legislatively or militarily to attain Eelam. The international community is pussy-footing around the issue. You and your ilk are bringing in all these nonsensical re-visionings of history simply to stop equal rights being given to anybody but yourselves. You do that by pretending that the Tamil community in its present state is capable of doing harm to the Sinhalese , by raising the futile spectre of Eelam, by pretending that it is a real threat. It is your kind of talk that led to massacres of Tamils in the past. But this is the 21st century, so don’t think the world will respond in the same indifferent way that it used to. Since 2005, the UN has been empowered by the “Right to Protect” declaration that allows the international community to intervene to prevent a government from committing massive crimes against its own citizens. You should know too that the discourse of the “remedial right to secede” is gaining in strength in international law circles, where it is considered that discrimination against any group, especially involving human rights violations, and threat to life, gives it a right to unilateral secession. No, you don’t have to live in a country for centuries to claim this right–the community just needs to be citizens.

    Why do you think there has been so much interest among the international community in investigating war crimes in Sri Lanka? What do you think they plan to do with that information, if and when they get it?

    Nobody gives a hoot when the Sinhalese came to Sri Lanka. That is entirely irrelevant, given that the country has already been constituted as a multi-ethnic democratic nation, with all groups being given the “fundamental right” to equality. You can read that to mean that, constitutionally speaking, no community owns the country, neither the Tamils nor YOU. But of course it’s clear that your government and many of its people have no regard for their own Constitution. You can indeed own the country–through murder, genocide, re-settlements, and whatever other tricks are available, and I am sure you and your ilk have the full criminal capability to do that.

    What a sad people you are, lacking the ability to live peacefully among others. What’s the point of boasting about a grand past civilization when you hardly even know how to be human anymore?

    You said: “As in the UN, its accepted that those that built a civilization, are those who have a right to that country”

    Can you please quote the part of the UN Charter that says that? Does the charter say anything about those who CAN build a civilization being given the rights to that country? Because then, you’d clearly be disqualified.

  • niranjan

    ” I am simply making the irrefutable observation that British administration of the island was far superior to what one finds in SL today. “- agreed

  • Humanist

    How do Susantha and a guy think that the Sinhalese got to be 75% of the population of Sri Lanka? Because they were always 75% from the time of Balangoda man?

    They are sadly mistaken. There are 75% Sinhalese now because of 20+ centuries of assimilation by Tamils into the Sinhalese liguistic group plus 30 years of civil war that forced Tamils to leave the country.

    Do they want the remaining 15-17% of Tamils to assimilate into Sinhalese or to leave the country? Then there can be a 100% Sinhalese unitary state and no citizen needs to have any rights at all. Because who needs any rights if the country is 100% Sinhalese? They can all wave flags as the king drives by…

  • Humanist

    Susantha and a guy,

    This land is YOURS, MINE and OURS!!

    No amount of your convoluted logic about Balangoda man and 75%-13% will change that.

  • Huh

    Dear Wijayapala,

    Thanks for your response, I was confused till you made clear A Guy’s intent when he wrote that. And yeah, a lot of people are unaware of the fact that America has no official language.

  • Susantha

    wijayapala
    there was never a sinhala only act in the first place.The act only made sinhala the national language and made tamil the 2nd language before that it was English that was the national language so how can tamils be discriminated by this 1956 act.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbL5E5naR6s

    and to your question about tamils being allowed to rule the north and east..the north and east are part of Sri lanka and tamils now dont make the majority in the east and Sinhalese have all the rights to claim the north east as their homeland and tamils dont have a single historical document to make claims to the north so they cannot rule the north east as it is not a separate country

    Humanist
    You look at the country’s constitution first.Chapter 2 says state shall give foremost place to Buddhism and the Constitution clearly state that the country country’s national anthem should be in sinhala.SO how can Sri lanka not be a Sinhalese Buddhist country.Look at the national flag do minorities have equal space and prominence on the national flag ?does other religions have the prominence Buddhism has?
    Minorities can have nothing more than their due place in Sri Lanka.Tamils are nothing more than just a minority community in SL they are not superior to muslims,bughers,malays etc

  • Huh

    Susantha,

    To be fair, the Tamil Language(Special Provisions) Act was never approved in the north and east due to Siramavo’s 1960-1965 government. Even the administrative language of the courts was in Sinhalese and this really ticked off the Tamil people in that area. Read this:

    http://www.pjeganathan.org/south-paw/2009/5/17/sri-lankas-conflict-an-interview-with-pact-part-iii.html

  • Burning_Issue

    Susantha says:

    “You look at the country’s constitution first.Chapter 2 says state shall give foremost place to Buddhism and the Constitution clearly state that the country country’s national anthem should be in sinhala.SO how can Sri lanka not be a Sinhalese Buddhist country.Look at the national flag do minorities have equal space and prominence on the national flag ?does other religions have the prominence Buddhism has?”

    This individual is ignorant of what Democracy is! In 1948, the Sinhala leaders assured the minorities that they would not be harmed by the Majority! In fact, the same majority decided to form a constitution to suit them; prominence to Sinhala Language, prominence to Buddhism; the national flag was tampered with projecting Sinhala Buddhism! This pathetic individual claims that this is democracy!

    Let me quote DR. N.M. Perera during the debate of Sinhala Only – 1955:

    “If democracy is to be treated as an arithmetical concept that whatever majority decides must be accepted that if the majority decides that the majority religion must prevail it must be accepted merely because they have got superiority in numbers, that is not democracy. Where you have different religions, the sovereignty of the majority is automatically checked by those inalienable rights that the minorities have which cannot be overridden by the mere whim and fancy of a majority. The test of a democratic decision is morality of the law. It is not merely a counting of heads but whether in point of fact the minorities are given full consideration of their points of view

    Democracy means an adjustment of different points of view, it means giving full weight to the rights of minority communities. This is what democracy means, it not merely counting of heads”

    Based on the above what DR. N.M had eloquently outlined as to what Democracy is; Susantha must at least concede that, the inalienable rights the Minorities had, had been taken away from them as a direct result of Majoritianism and not through democracy! He should acknowledge that, Sri Lanka abused the minority rights. Especially the Tamils became a minority only after British amalgamating the separate regions in 1833!

    What Susantha has uttered can be done by any majority and there is nothing to be proud of; what is the big issue about passing constitution and changing the national flag to suit a majority? The fact that, the majority amply manifested their weakness and there is no moral justification whatsoever.

    Susantha tried the Sinhala Buddhist historical reasoning first; he could not get away with it! Now, he is trying the constitution, religion, and the flag! This is why, it is paramount that, the constitution must be secular and the ilk of Susanthas are not empowered!

    Susantha said:

    “Minorities can have nothing more than their due place in Sri Lanka.Tamils are nothing more than just a minority community in SL they are not superior to muslims,bughers,malays etc”

    Of course that the Tamils are not superior to the Muslims, Bughers, Sinhala, and Malays; no Tamil claims as such! However, it is you who claim that the Sinhala Buddhists are superior to all! Basically, you do not want to be equal but superior, and thus you are a Sinhala Buddhist Chauvinist in true colours!

  • jasmine

    Susantha,

    The long title of the 1956 Act was “AN ACT TO PRESCRIBE THE SINHALA LANGUAGE AS THE ONE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF CEYLON AND TO ENABLE CERTAIN TRANSITORY PROVISIONS TO BE MADE.”

    There is no reference there at all to Tamil as the “Second Language”, as you claim.

    How was it a discrimination? One of the “transitory provisions” that were made was to render the SL Civil Service entirely Sinhalese. SL Tamil civil servants lost their jobs because they apparently didn’t have fluency in your precious language. That is DISCRIMINATION.

    The discriminatory meaning of the Act is contained in the act itself and in all the “transitory provisions” that were carried out in its name, not in some inconsequential interview given to the media by Bandaranaike.

    “You look at the country’s constitution first.Chapter 2 says state shall give foremost place to Buddhism and the Constitution clearly state that the country country’s national anthem should be in sinhala.SO how can Sri lanka not be a Sinhalese Buddhist country”

    Sri Lanka is not a Buddhist country simply because the term “Buddhist” does not appear in its name, which is “the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka”. There is no provision in the Constitution for Buddhism to be part of governance, i.e. it is not run by a theocratic government. The religion is merely given special protection. It is not even designated the official religion of the country. Even Malaysia is not considered to be an Islamic country despite Islam being named as “the religion of the Federation”. That’s because it is not run by a theocratic form of government. Please note that all countries known as Islamic have that descriptor as part of their name, and they are ruled by Islamic principles.

    There is nothing in your Constitution that says that the national anthem “should be” in Sinhalese.

    “Minorities can have nothing more than their due place in Sri Lanka.”

    Yes, I think that is what the Tamils want. According to the Constitution, they have claim to “EQUAL RIGHTS”.

    “and to your question about tamils being allowed to rule the north and east..the north and east are part of Sri lanka and tamils now dont make the majority in the east and Sinhalese have all the rights to claim the north east as their homeland”

    Yes, it is illuminating how it happened that a long-time Tamil majority area is no longer so. Did you know that it is in your Constitution, Schedule 9, Appendix 2, on “Land and Land Settlement”, that “National policy on land use will be based on technical aspects (not on political or communal aspects)”?

    CPA hints at the unconstitutionality of recent practices in the Eastern province when it recommends in its May 2010 report of “Land in the Eastern Province: Politics, Policy and Conflict” that “There needs to be full implementation of existing provisions and amendments in the Constitution and ordinary law, as well as a comprehensive land policy introduced by the Government setting out State policy.” Seems some provisions and laws are not being implemented.

    So, why would you need Tamils to provide historical documents making their claim to the north when Sinhalese can use even unconstitutional means to make their claims?

  • SomewhatDisgusted

    Dear “A Guy”,

    You said: “You cannot give equal right’s, which in laymen’s terms 73%=13%. Which is ridicules and making morking, how a democracy function’s.”

    Since Wijayapala and Burning Issue have already addressed the misconception you have about democracy, I won’t harp on it further. What I will say is, it doesn’t require a genius to see that just going by the will of the majority will *always* be unfair to some minority and can therefore never be the basis for a just and fair society. And I assume that you don’t want to be part of an unfair society? That’s why it’s a matter of justice to ensure that minority rights are always taken into consideration, without letting things deteriorate into a mobocracy, which seems to be what you and Susantha have misunderstood democracy for. It’s not about convenience for many, it’s about justice for all.

    Assuming that the issue above has been sufficiently cleared up (and indeed you should tell us clearly whether or not you have understood the core of the argument and agree/disagree with it), you have not addressed another question I raised. Do you expect special privileges on account of belonging to a particular race, in this case Sinhalese, or do you intend to compete fairly with other citizens in this country and earn whatever it is that you deserve to get?

  • Observer

    “To name a few, Singapore, America and India are doing quite well.”

    Heshan, HA!! I present you this…

    http://beta.thehindu.com/news/article450768.ece?homepage=true

    I request you to take a look at the Global Peace Index and see how many ex colonised countries are at the bottom. Although I think SL rank should improve in the next round. Who knows it may go over India even!

    Singapore? That is a country which is keeping people in strict order under draconian laws that go against basic human rights. I honestly would not want to live in Singapore!

    America flourished because they became the next bully! Your arguments never make any sense to me.

    On another note, American FBI has now arrested the military analyst who leaked the war crimes video footage of US forces to Wiki Leaks.

    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/leak/

    HA! De Ja Vu anyone? Isn’t it utter hypocrisy when we arrest Gen Fonseka for lying (not even presenting any evidence) US would like to have an opinion. HA! I say shove that opinion back up their _____

    Read some of the comments to that article. Quite interesting views. How people feel about war!

  • Observer

    Burning_Issue said,

    Observer,

    “How about just killing people of the land they occupied as they saw fit to ruin a country?”

    Just to remind you that the LTTE and GOSL have killed 100 times more people than the British killed!

    I highly doubt that! Just dropping the 2 nukes on Japan which UK was part of the allied forces would blow the SL figures out of the ocean. Let alone the ethnic cleansing during colonisation, wars fought to keep the empire, the other more recent wars and the current battering against the Muslims

    “How about slavery, herding people from country to country like they were live stock for their purposes?”

    The IDPs were treated far worse than the British ever did to any sole!

    Rescuing them from LTTE clutches and providing them temporary accommodation, food, medicine while their home regions were de-mined was treating badly? I agree it wasn’t the Four Seasons treatment but what could be afforded. I can assure you they weren’t treated like someones b1tch! Which is what colonisation was.

    “How about stealing resources of the countries occupied?”

    The Jaffna peninsula has been robbed from trees to doors, doorframes; anything that was transportable has been taken out; by who do you thing?

    By the war LTTE wanted! Don’t bark up the wrong tree.

    “Do you think the brick and motar they left behind is any significance to us?”

    Come on man; the country was left by the British as one unit with a good set of infrastructure; it was like giving a flower garland to a monkey, the country was handed over to unscrupulous politicians!

    It was all underwritten by so much blood! And it is not something we wanted. We would have been quite happy them never sailing on to our shores. Thank you very much! For starters we would have like Veera Kappetipola in one piece. Not his head separated from his body.

    “ Do you think the imbalance of power and disproportionate vaccum they left behind was helpful? Do you think we really appreciated divide and conquer rule that polarised our communities?”

    Why don’t you accept the fact that we Sri Lankans screwed up big time; we were not and are not politically mature enough to govern; we do not understand democracy; we simply do not understand the concept live and let live! If there was disproportionate power distribution, it is our duty to rectify; how many times Sri Lanka changed the constitution since 1948; we just do not know how to get it right as a country; why don’t you admit it?

    Sri Lanka has screwed up big time over the times. No doubt. What I am saying is we’re finally on a course that is more optimistic as opposed to previous times! Give it a chance!

  • Observer

    Humanist
    You look at the country’s constitution first.Chapter 2 says state shall give foremost place to Buddhism and the Constitution clearly state that the country country’s national anthem should be in sinhala.SO how can Sri lanka not be a Sinhalese Buddhist country.Look at the national flag do minorities have equal space and prominence on the national flag ?does other religions have the prominence Buddhism has?
    Minorities can have nothing more than their due place in Sri Lanka.Tamils are nothing more than just a minority community in SL they are not superior to muslims,bughers,malays etc

    Susantha, I know that reply is to Humanist, but if I may butt in…

    Does the US flag reflect native Indians?
    Does the Australian Flag reflect the native Aborigines?
    Does the New Zealand flag reflect the native Maoris?

    No all those flags reflect the majority. In case of Australia and New Zealand the Southern Cross and Union Jack which is the British heritage. In US the colours of the Union Jack and their independent states. No minorities what so ever let alone the natives, most of whom that were culled like pests!

    The Sri Lankan flag at least acknowledges it’s significant minorities to its credit!

    It’s silly to complain that a nation is portraying it self as the majority. That is what defines a nation. It’s majority.

    In relation to religion, it’s never equal. Western countries still have special place for Christianity. God Bless ______ (fill in the blank). God save the ______ (fill in the blank).

    Do Muslims have really equal place in Western countries?
    Minarets banned in Switzerland,
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8385069.stm

    Burquas banned in France, Belgium.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aLulC6.qxrMs&refer=europe-redirectoldpage

    Muslim Clerics expelled from Australia on national security grounds.
    http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/44176
    (Quote: He appealed to the Federal Court in 2005, but it ruled national security considerations overruled any notion of procedural fairness or natural justice.)
    I am shocked, I always thought Australia was a fairly liberal country as opposed to US/UK.

    So what they say is national security over rules it all!! Just like how the wiki leaks military analyst will most likely be court marshalled for revealing the truth! Labeled with treason and sent to jail most likely.

    But we have jump through so many hoops and put put up with silly questions from BBC Hard Talk about court marshalling Fonseka. If the law the land is death by hanging for treason then what’s left there to explain??

    Muslims racially profiled and targeted in US/UK. (No need to provide links to this one!) It’s shocking really. These are only few examples.. There are many, many more how minorities are treated so badly in the West. It’s just they’re very polite and PC when it comes to racism, discrimination that it can almost go unnoticed!

    Anyway Sri Lanka’s constitution is admittedly bit crude, but it’s not the worst nor unusual!

  • Observer
  • Observer

    sorry i posted a completely irrelevant link in relation to France/Belgium burqa ban. here are the right links

    http://news.oneindia.in/2010/04/30/belgium-complete-burqa-ban-from-jul.html
    http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/01/26/france.burqa.ban/index.html

    everyone knows this. links are not really needed anyway.

  • Humanist

    Some commentators here seem to think that constitutions are written in stone.

    I am not sure why people are always comparing Sri Lanka with US, UK or Singapore. If Sinhalese and Tamils belong to such ancient civilizations, shouldn’t they be doing better -much better- than any of these countries when it comes to constitutions or flags for that matter?

    If we are as “civilized: as some people here claim us to be, we should be able to outdo the South African constitution – acknowledged as one of best in the world. Why are we aspiring to lesser constitutions?

    There is, of course, Costa Rica – they don’t have any sellipi but actually they are quite civilized because they manage to do without an army and instead spend their precious resources on their people and their environment.

  • jasmine

    Observer,
    To your questions “Does the US flag reflect native Indians?
    Does the Australian Flag reflect the native Aborigines?
    Does the New Zealand flag reflect the native Maoris?”

    The native Indians, Aborigines and Maoris do not want to be part of the White nation. They want their own lands. Obviously, you know very little of these Native peoples and their political stance. They want no part of Western culture and capitalism because these go against their core beliefs, especially about treatment of the environment. To put them on these national flags would involve disrespecting their wishes.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    America flourished because they became the next bully! Your arguments never make any sense to me.

    How many first-world nations were colonized by Britain? That’s all that matters:

    USA
    Israel
    Singapore
    India (not first-world, but becoming a global power)

    Also, Britain was not the only nation that colonized. Why don’t you blame the French, Dutch, Spanish, Portugese, Chinese etc. The Chinese have invaded and are colonizing Tibet in 2010… seems like you focus on the USA out of jealousy because S. Lanka is a MESS that can’t get its act together! Maybe you should tell Mahinda not to reject the visa of the Dalai Lama next time he applies to see S. Lanka!

    Did you also forget that Mahinda’s friend Japan tried to take over all of Asia during WWII? I doubt you would even exist if those two bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had not been dropped.

    It’s pretty obvious you have no knowledge of world history. Just be glad that S. Lanka was not invaded/colonized by Muslims. Your precious friends in the orange robes would have gone up in flames, as would have your temples… Muslims don’t care about Mahavamsa or trying to make you speak English and go to a school…. they wouldn’t have brought TEA, they would have imported executioners to chop your head off for refusing to convert to Islam. You’ve forgotten that even your racist champions Dharmapala and S.W.R.D were ex-Christians – talk about a liberal religion. They had to become hardcore Sinhala-Buddhists to really turn the flames up! Unlike those pansy Christian British who actually tried to do something useful for the country…

  • Burning_Issue

    Observer,

    For your alias sake, you need to observe things objectively!

    You said:

    “How about just killing people of the land they occupied as they saw fit to ruin a country?”
    I said:

    “Just to remind you that the LTTE and GOSL have killed 100 times more people than the British killed!”

    You replied:

    “I highly doubt that! Just dropping the 2 nukes on Japan which UK was part of the allied forces would blow the SL figures out of the ocean. Let alone the ethnic cleansing during colonisation, wars fought to keep the empire, the other more recent wars and the current battering against the Muslims”

    Are we discussing Sri Lanka and British colonisation or what the west did around the world? Isn’t it a fact that, in Sri Lanka, both LTTE and GOSL killed far more people than all the colonial masters did in Sri Lanka? Please; before you point your finger at a foreigner for killing their colonial subjects, you need to ask about the killings of your kith, kin, and fellow citizens that perpetrated by your own country men!

    You said:

    “How about stealing resources of the countries occupied?”

    I said:

    “The Jaffna peninsula has been robbed from trees to doors, doorframes; anything that was transportable has been taken out; by who do you thing?”

    You replied:

    “By the war LTTE wanted! Don’t bark up the wrong tree.”

    What logic! So the LTTE started the war; all the robbing from Jaffna is justified!

  • Heshan

    Rescuing them from LTTE clutches and providing them temporary accommodation, food, medicine while their home regions were de-mined was treating badly? I agree it wasn’t the Four Seasons treatment but what could be afforded.

    Observer is really twisting the facts. The S. Lankan Government first off all ignored all the rules of modern warfare and killed 30,000 odd Tamils to win its racist war…. the remaining 300,000 survivors were locked up in barbed wire camps that were funded entirely by foreigners and foreign organizations. Even the food was provided by foreigners. Meanwhile, Observer and his peasant friends were busy with their Lion-flag parties in Colombo, even forcing Tamils to contribute (kappam!).

  • Susantha

    Burning issue
    first of all the minorities were added to the national flag only after 1972 before that it was the same flag that the sinhala kings used that was the flag of SL.
    you say
    “British amalgamating the separate regions in 1833!”

    but Sinhalese don’t accept it Sinhalese regard the whole island as belonging to them
    I have provided enough and more evidence here and “a guy” has provided more to prove this point but you people don’t give a proper answer. Scotland and England were united about 100 years before 1833 yet they have a historical document to prove it and even a parliament act known as the ‘Treaty of Union 1706″ but eelamists and NGO vultures that claim the regions in Sri Lanka were united by the british don’t have any solid proof.

    Jasmine
    SL tamil civil servants lost their jobs but so did so many Sinhalese as those who were in government departments were English educated people Sinhalese and tamils both.So is that discrimination against tamils?If u say its discrimination against English speakers then I can agree ?Were Tamil speaking tamils affected by this act?

    the constitution clearly states that the national anthem should be in Sinhalese and if the constitution does not give prominence to Buddhism why do the eelamists,jihadists and Christian fundamentalists demand to remove this clause

    Look at the coat of arms of Sri Lanka it too carries ONLY Sinhalese and Buddhist symbols

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Sri_Lanka.svg

    and about the eastern province I don’t have the exact figures and there was no census done after 1981 in 1981 the Sinhalese population percentage was 25% after mahaweli project and other settlements it increased to about 33%.Is allocating land for landless people and to people who loose land due to government reservoir projects communal or political aspect according to the self styled academics at CPA.Most of the unused lands in the country are available in the North and east and Sinhalese have a right to be allocated a fair share of the unused lands in these 2 provinces.

    you ask for equal rights but how can a demand for autonomy in a country you cant prove a history be a demand for equal rights?

  • Burning_Issue

    Observer,

    You said:

    “It was all underwritten by so much blood! And it is not something we wanted. We would have been quite happy them never sailing on to our shores. Thank you very much! For starters we would have like Veera Kappetipola in one piece. Not his head separated from his body.”

    It is astonishing that you talk of this way! If we did not have the British, it would have been someone else; that was the way things were. If we had had the French, they would have left us with minimal infrastructure!

    However, you as a Sinhala need to be thankful the Colonial Masters of Sri Lanka for the following:

    1. There was a time when the Muslims were making inroad in Sri Lanka; the Colombo district was virtually dominated by them when The Portuguese arrived; this trend was reversed.
    2. The high caste Kandyan kingdom would never have been part of Sri Lanka proper if the British had not taken over!
    3. The Buddhism would have been just confined to Kandy only.
    4. If the British had not amalgamated the three separate regions into one in 1833, Sri Lanka would not be one unit today. There would have been a Tamil kingdom/territory.
    5. If the British had conceded to the demand of Kandyans for a Federal state, it would have been the end of the Unitary State concept for Sri Lanka!

    Basically, you have Sri Lanka as it is today in terms of territorial integrity because of the colonial ruling especially the British! If you were to Observe such things objectively, I am sure you would not have come up with your conclusions!

  • Huh

    Heshan:

    ” Also, Britain was not the only nation that colonized. Why don’t you blame the French, Dutch, Spanish, Portugese, Chinese etc. The Chinese have invaded and are colonizing Tibet in 2010… seems like you focus on the USA out of jealousy because S. Lanka is a MESS that can’t get its act together! Maybe you should tell Mahinda not to reject the visa of the Dalai Lama next time he applies to see S. Lanka!

    Did you also forget that Mahinda’s friend Japan tried to take over all of Asia during WWII? I doubt you would even exist if those two bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had not been dropped.”

    Thank you for this. I fully agree with this rebuttal. Have the nations colonized by the British really done any worse than those under the French, Portuguese, Chinese, etc.
    ? I think not. If anything, at least there are SOME nations colonized under the british which have succeeded, the USA being the prime example. And it always surprises me when people refer to the dropping of the Atomic bomb as a bad thing. Obviously, it lead to a lot of death and destruction but if that was not done, the Japanese would have signed a phony peace treaty with the allies, and then, they would have gone and killed millions more Chinese people and would have been the imperial rulers of the East even to this day! And America did NOT become successful by becoming the next bully nation. Obviously, the country has strayed in the past 60 years from the ideals the founding fathers laid out(mostly demonstrated in its messy foreign policy). However, the United states BECAME a wealthy, powerful nation largely due to it’s puritan/quaker work ethic, open nature to immigrants, and progressive nature, and let’s be honest, some of it was due to the killing of the native Americans, which allowed for westward expansion.

  • A Guy

    wijayapala,
    In India, it’s logical that such a system is adopted for the simple fact it is nation created by sticking together many different nation’s that existed for hundreds if not thousands of years. Plus India has only done this policy in the area’s that certain groups pre-dominate but in Lanka, it’s the whole Island but in truth if one looks at the document of the two languages policy, its only meant to be in the Northern province and Eastern Province.
    The case in Lanka is very different. We have a foreign minority, who was brought over by another foreign minority. So because of this, they have right claim a federal structure in this nation but requesting it out of the nation that brought them over to this country e.g. in Britain. That is a not only a moral right but also can in fact be a logical one.
    Also can I ask you concerning Obama, as you so pointed out that he is black president;
    1. Did Obama use his African language to walk into the White House…No…He used the language of the Majority!
    2. Born a Muslim and a Muslim for more than half life so far. Did he walk into the White House as one…No…He became a part of the Majority religion.
    3. Even during his campaign, he was shown wearing his traditional garb of turban and shroud…Did he wear this when he walked the White House…No…He wore the clothes, which represent the White man, the Suit n Tie.
    So where apart from his skin colour, does he differ from the White majority????
    He became, as much as possible representing the Majority to be elected!!!!
    Also concerning what you said on languages;
    My point exactly, English is still the language of administration of the nation and others have only language accessible at special levels and that it. No special treatment of them!!!!
    You also said;
    What these minority rights exactly entail is open to debate, but no democracy can function without them.
    I agree but in every democracy, in the world, minorities have citizenship rights e.g. to be protected for freedom of religious worship. What is demanded by in Lanka is way beyond any citizenship rights.
    SomewhatDisgusted ..Please tell me; what are these special privileges, which you claim that the Sinhalese have??
    jasmine said,
    You are so clueless…Native Americans to this day are in the reservations that they were put into, by the White’s…and it isn’t by their CHOICE!!!!

    jasmine
    So according to you, using resources by actual eyewitness, colonial records and even archaeological remains, is considering by you as been… ‘hysterical mis-reading of history’..Hahaha…I think the phrase is..Who are you trying to KID!!
    Burning_Issue said,
    1. There was a time when the Muslims were making inroad in Sri Lanka; the Colombo district was virtually dominated by them when The Portuguese arrived; this trend was reversed.
    2. The high caste Kandyan kingdom would never have been part of Sri Lanka proper if the British had not taken over!
    3. The Buddhism would have been just confined to Kandy only.
    4. If the British had not amalgamated the three separate regions into one in 1833, Sri Lanka would not be one unit today. There would have been a Tamil kingdom/territory.
    5. If the British had conceded to the demand of Kandyans for a Federal state, it would have been the end of the Unitary State concept for Sri Lanka!
    Hmmmm, interesting stuff;
    1.There was a time when the Muslims were making inroad in Sri Lanka; the Colombo district was virtually dominated by them when The Portuguese arrived; this trend was reversed…..;
    When the Portuguese arrived in Colombo, it was still apart the Kotte Kingdom, and thus far the physical evidences go it, didn’t have ANY permanent Muslim settlement’s only traders. The place that had a Mosque though, according Portuguese records was Galle.
    As an example of his, Robert Knox, clearly states, that the Muslim’s are only merchants and own NO lands.
    2. high caste Kandyan kingdom would never have been part of Sri Lanka proper if the British had not taken over!….;
    It was the different Colonial powers that ate up the Sinhala Kingdom and by 1815, confine it to an area in the centre. So in fact, if the British, Dutch and Portuguese, hadn’t not arrived, it was drtainly be a different case also the majority of Tamil’s in this country wouldn’t exist either!
    3.The Buddhism would have been just confined to Kandy only….;
    Hahahaha…are you this ignorant????
    During the Portuguese era, there was enormous persecution of Buddhists in all areas of the country but the Dutch era, many reconverted back to Buddhism and throughout this country there was Buddhism.
    4.If the British had not amalgamated the three separate regions into one in 1833, Sri Lanka would not be one unit today. There would have been a Tamil kingdom/territory.
    O dear;
    In the Letter of Don Dhramapala to the Spanish King, handing over his Kingdom to him…is listed all area’s under the Control of the Kotte Kingdom. These incl Jaffna and Mannar and all areas of the East.
    In 1593…Portuguese clearly state, that Jaffna is very much a part of the Sinhala Kingdom.
    In 1609…The Dutch government’s letters to the Kandian King, state clearly that he is the King of Kandy, Trinco, Jaffna, Sette Corles, Mannar, Chilaw, Cota, Batecalo, Punte- Gale.
    This is a letter by Maurice de Naffau from The Hague Oct 05 1609.
    Also
    In 1612 Sept 23,
    According again Dutch sources, the Kandian King ordered a meeting of all the district leaders under his command.
    There is list off all that came;
    All area’s incl Jaffna, Batecalo, Panama, Trinco, Cottirama, Mannar, Chilaw, were all represented…This show’s that Ceylon was in fact a united nation not fragmented one, as some like to think!
    Again according more Dutch sources, in 19 Aug, 1613. All district leaders accepted the administration of the nation been given to the Princes of Migonne and Ouve. Again all areas of what is today Northern province and Eastern Province were present!
    So, wondering where exactly you got this notion of the British putting together different nations?
    4.If the British had conceded to the demand of Kandyans for a Federal state, it would have been the end of the Unitary State concept for Sri Lanka!
    This reason for this demand was based on the idea, that there is such thing as Up Country and Low Country Sinhalese. This idea was in fact generated by Arunachlam in his Census report in 1912. It was suggested as a joking idea by Frank Modder, who was the GA in Kurunegala. The joke unfortunately was used, as a way to divide the once united Sinhala people. As before this period, in all Records and Censuses, there is NO such thing as an Up Country and Low Country Sinhalese!!

  • A Guy

    Ok…How silly…I have miswritten my own work lol;

    ‘So because of this, they have right claim a federal structure in this nation’

    This is meant to be;

    ‘So because of this, they have NO right TO claim a federal structure in this nation’

  • jasmine

    A guy,

    “You are so clueless…Native Americans to this day are in the reservations that they were put into, by the White’s…and it isn’t by their CHOICE!!!!”

    Yes, hard thought it may be for you to believe, it is Native Americans’ choice to live in reservations. That’s how they maintain their refusal to assimilate, and more power to them.

    “We have a foreign minority, who was brought over by another foreign minority.”

    And Sinhalese came from India too originally, so what’s your point? And, in your mind, citizens can be considered to be “foreign”?

    “So where apart from his [Obama's] skin colour, does he differ from the White majority???? He became, as much as possible representing the Majority to be elected!!!!”

    How do we know so much about Obama’s father and his Muslim heritage? It was Obama himself who highlighted these by writing a book about it even as he decided to run for President. You seem to have forgotten too his famous speech criticising African-American fathers, made just months before his election, clearly underlining his own African-American identity to White voters before they went to the polls. He spoke in an African-American church. (So, he is Christian–lots of Africans are Christians, and no less African for that.) He got Jennifer Hudson to sing at the Democratic Party’s National Convention–again highlighting his African-American identity. Then, Beyonce was chosen to sing at his inauguration ball. An African American woman, Elizabeth Alexander, was selected to compose and deliver a poem for the inauguration, and Aretha Franklin sang at the inauguration too. What do you think all that stunning Black presence at the inauguration and in the lead up to his election was all about? Reminding everyone who wanted to forget that he was a Black man.

    Don’t try to take credit away from Americans for that. Whatever else they may have done, millions of White Americans went to the polls and voted for a Black man, who repeatedly reminded them of his Blackness, to take up the highest office in their country. Does it make you feel bad about your community? It should. Hell will freeze over before they ever vote for a non-Sinhalese even for a minor office.

  • Heshan

    Huh,

    Thank you for this. I fully agree with this rebuttal. Have the nations colonized by the British really done any worse than those under the French, Portuguese, Chinese, etc.
    ? I think not. If anything, at least there are SOME nations colonized under the british which have succeeded, the USA being the prime example. And it always surprises me when people refer to the dropping of the Atomic bomb as a bad thing. Obviously, it lead to a lot of death and destruction but if that was not done, the Japanese would have signed a phony peace treaty with the allies,

    Well-said. The A-Bomb was quite a complex affair. It was not a decision made overnight. In the first place, it was initiated because it was thought that Nazi Germany was also building one – there was a race to see who could build one first. In fact, it was Einstein who first wrote to Roosevelt warning him of Germany’s nuclear ambitions. Secondly, the A-bomb was put together by a team of international scientists financed by the US Government/military. To name a few: Enrico Fermi, Hans Bethe, John Nash Jr…. without all these first-class international scientists working in conjunction, the A-bomb would not have succeeded or else have taken much longer to build – certainly beyond the period that WWII lasted. And the last point is that Japan was given many opportunities to surrender before the A-bomb was dropped. By the time the A-bomb was actually dropped, Japan was mobilizing its civilian population to fight against any land invasion from the Allies. If the Allies had tried to invade Japan by land, the casualties on both ends would have easily exceeded 1 million. Remember that the Japanese did not simply fight – they fought to the death and intentionally chose to die for the Emperor. It is precisely to avoid these high casualties that the A-bomb was dropped.

    Unfortunately, Observer does not comprehend the historical background of the A-bomb. He does not realize that the Japanese were even more brutal than the Nazis (with whom they formed an alliance). I doubt he has heard of “Nanking” or what the Japanese did in Korea, Burma, the Phillipines, etc.
    The Japanese ambition to conquer extended to all of Asia, including India, and also to Australia.

  • Heshan

    Burning_Issue:

    Yes, the British did create a communal tension, but they handed over a single country under a secular constitution for the Sri Lankans to move forward; we cannot point our finger at the British; it is we who screwed up and not the British!

    Exactly. I am not sure what these people complain about. Kandy did not even fall to the British until 1815 (less than 200 years ago). If the British had stayed away from Kandy or stayed away from the island altogether, it is unlikely that this fake state called S. Lanka would exist today. If anything, the British were foolish to leave all power in the hands of Sinhalese nationalists at the time of Independence… if anything, the British have an obligation (towards Ceylon Tamils) to come back and clean the mess they started. They ought to invade, correct their mistakes, then leave again. Unfortunately some of the native ppl they left behind are still stuck in the Mahavamsa mindset…

  • Burning_Issue

    A Guy,

    You write without any substance! It is sad that you possess unparalleled bigotry; your Specious attempt to authenticate Sinhala Buddhists as the sole owners of the island is ridiculous! You move goal posts on issues that have been accepted by scholars! If you can bastardise the events that took place during that 17th century onwards what you can do to the ancient history!

    I tell you what, what don’t you walk around, in Colombo for instance, with billboard strapped around your body stating that, the Sinhala Buddhist own this Island; we are the original people with connection to the Balangida man. The minorities have no claim to this island, and we will show them where their place is

  • Observer

    Heshan,

    Also, Britain was not the only nation that colonized. Why don’t you blame the French, Dutch, Spanish, Portugese, Chinese etc. The Chinese have invaded and are colonizing Tibet in 2010… seems like you focus on the USA out of jealousy because S. Lanka is a MESS that can’t get its act together! Maybe you should tell Mahinda not to reject the visa of the Dalai Lama next time he applies to see S. Lanka!

    Haha trust me it’s not out of jealousy! My focus is only on the hypocrites. If the US/UK go about their business in the killing fields of Iraq & Afghanistan murdering in the name of oil minding their own business then I have no issues! If they have the sheer audacity to lecture about wars to other countries then I find that very annoying and hypocritical. French, Dutch, Spanish, etc have not been very vocal about SL and thus I am not so inclined to discuss about them.
    Heshan, At least we create a MESS in our own country only. Where as US/UK have been stiring unimaginable messes in 2 foreign countries atm! Mess…LOL!

    “I doubt you would even exist if those two bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had not been dropped.”

    Really? I doubt that. By the time they dropped the nukes, Germany was more or less defeated and Japan was still fighting a losing war out of pride. Allied forces were unable to defeat them in conventional war fare because they were suffering huge casualties and then BOOM went for the easy kill. Civilians…Disgusting! The strategy was really how many civilians can you afford to lose before you lay down your arms? It’s absolutely disgusting, outrageous war tactic and probably the lowest point of humanity in the recorded human history! It was really a Nation cleansing!

    Also, you just essentially justified that killing unimaginable numbers of civilians are justified in the name of ending wars. I can say that I would have had grave concerns for the next generation of Sri Lankans had not this war been ended RIGHT NOW SWIFTLY!

    It’s pretty obvious you have no knowledge of world history.

    If I don’t subscribe to your twisted version of history, then so be it!

    Just be glad that S. Lanka was not invaded/colonized by Muslims. Your precious friends in the orange robes would have gone up in flames, as would have your temples… Muslims don’t care about Mahavamsa or trying to make you speak English and go to a school…. they wouldn’t have brought TEA, they would have imported executioners to chop your head off for refusing to convert to Islam.

    You talk asif the Inquisitions never happened. You talk as if Christians haven’t killed in the name of religion! I wonder who crusaders are. lol
    Muslims have long had ties with Sri Lanka, Serendib is the name Arabic/Persian world referred Sri Lanka to back in the days. Yes that name came before CEYLON! ooOOooOOooo So clearly they knew about us. not only that Muslim traders have long sailed into our country and done trade in spices and what not. Like you said my knowledge of history is pretty weak according to you, so take this with a grain of salt! :P

    Point is Muslims have sailed on to Sri Lankan shores long before the Western colonials and they never killed masses and tried to make us their b1tch. They just did honest trade and went back home. Not only that some of these trader even settled here and that’s how we have a Muslim/Moore community in Sri Lanka. They have been absolutely non violent in Sri Lanka. I guess back then some people practiced Muslim the way it is supposed to be and were not crazy Jihadists!

    Even Chinese came did honest trade and went back home. They never had a small penis syndrome that they wanted to conquer and feel bigger, although they easily could have! Chinese had a naval fleet that could obliterate Asia!

    So really Heshan, you learn some history before evaluating my history knowledge!

    You’ve forgotten that even your racist champions Dharmapala and S.W.R.D were ex-Christians – talk about a liberal religion. They had to become hardcore Sinhala-Buddhists to really turn the flames up! Unlike those pansy Christian British who actually tried to do something useful for the country…

    These people were at a time when Sri Lankans were dusting off from all the brain washing and grooming of us by the British to be some people we;re not. We were born to wear the Sarong and eat rice not wear Pants eat Sandwiches! People were sick and tried of being lackies of a Christian administration and bowing to some lady in a throne thousands of miles away. They wanted to go back to their roots after the British had left. They could have gone about it a better way but oh well… just excused knowing the circumstances

  • Observer

    Heshan said,

    Observer is really twisting the facts. The S. Lankan Government first off all ignored all the rules of modern warfare and killed 30,000 odd Tamils to win its racist war…. the remaining 300,000 survivors were locked up in barbed wire camps that were funded entirely by foreigners and foreign organizations. Even the food was provided by foreigners. Meanwhile, Observer and his peasant friends were busy with their Lion-flag parties in Colombo, even forcing Tamils to contribute (kappa!).

    Buddy, who’s twisting the facts here? 30,000 is not a fact! It’s a bloated estimate, first coined by a tabloid news paper in UK (we all know who they’re and what sort of credibility they have). An estimate which is not based on solid grounds. Even that many would say that is the upper edge of the envelope. If you use that as fact then you are the one twisting facts.

  • Observer

    They ought to invade, correct their mistakes, then leave again. Unfortunately some of the native ppl they left behind are still stuck in the Mahavamsa mindset…

    We look forward to the day. Let’s settle this man to man. Because I’m sick and tired of unnecessary deaths in mass wars, I propose that British and us we pick 3 of our best warriors and then have basic armament combat to death. Who ever wins (left standing) can have their way! Let;s settle this and move on!

  • Observer

    burning issue,

    before you point your finger at a foreigner for killing their colonial subjects, you need to ask about the killings of your kith, kin, and fellow citizens that perpetrated by your own country men!

    burning issue, humanity has no race nor creed! humanity has no allegiance but to humanity it self. so your argument is a fluff one.

    It is astonishing that you talk of this way! If we did not have the British, it would have been someone else; that was the way things were. If we had had the French, they would have left us with minimal infrastructure!

    burning_issue, would have, could have, should have, all hypothetical isn’t it? sri lanka was a pawn of the naval elites power games during the colonisation period. it’s unfortunate we got raped by 3 colonial masters. we live with those scars. as a small nation with insignificant population we were always doomed and up for grabs, but somehow thanks to the patriots who fought through thick and thin we didn’t make it easy for them to rape us completely and held on until they left due to the inevitable decline of the british power.

    both heshan & burning issue,

    for your information british do not get the credit for SL being a unitary state. we always were this island. we had many names before we had ceylon! In fact one of our earliest names were Thambapanni! and no Thambapanni did not refer only to parts of sri lanka! sure we have had many kingdoms over time but so did great britain and most other countries! nation hood, sovereignty are all recent concepts. so you can’t talk about all these old kingdoms and argue the countries were separated. if that’s the case then UK was never a unitary state either. but now they are, and so are we! if you don’t respect this sovereignty then we can wage wars and we will defend the nation without hesitation! you have the absolute right to challenge our sovereignty, we don’t deny that to anyone. but please understand our right to defend it! and don;t be baffled when we do!

  • Observer

    Heshan,

    And the last point is that Japan was given many opportunities to surrender before the A-bomb was dropped.

    LTTE was given many opportunities to surrender during the war at many stages, at the start, during and even 24 hours prior to the final siege! But they refused to surrender and kept using civilians as human shields by retreating with civilians as a buffer. This significantly slowed down SLA progress and drew out the war.

    By the time the A-bomb was actually dropped, Japan was mobilizing its civilian population to fight against any land invasion from the Allies.

    LTTE was recruiting children and just anyone at the last minute (as they always did) when they were trapped in NFZ pretty much war weary and going crazy! Not only that the LTTE was shooting willy nilly at people trying to escape their clutches.

    If the Allies had tried to invade Japan by land, the casualties on both ends would have easily exceeded 1 million. Remember that the Japanese did not simply fight – they fought to the death and intentionally chose to die for the Emperor.

    Hardcore LTTE carder did not simply fight, but they fought in a suicidal mentality for their dear leader Prabhakaran! They would intentionally chose death by cyanide than surrender. Unlike the allied forces SLA still refrained from heavy weaponry use in NFZ while the LTTE was still firing artillery shells from the NFZ. SLA was taking mass casualties due to this disadvantage, which not many give due credit for. Instead SLA crossed the Nandikadal lagoon under the cover of darkness and took out the remaining LTTE head honchos in a surgical assault operation using small arms.

    It is precisely to avoid these high casualties that the A-bomb was dropped.

    Does that mean dropping an A-bomb or less destructive high powered bomb in the NFZ would have been justified in the SL war?

    Of course SLA wasn’t that irrational or insane but I’m trying to follow your twisted logic.

  • wijayapala

    Dear a guy,

    The case in Lanka is very different. We have a foreign minority, who was brought over by another foreign minority.

    Wrong. The Tamil and Muslim minorities came on their own. When the Portuguese came to Jaffna, they found a basically Tamil kingdom not a Sinhala one.

  • wijayapala

    Dear Prof Heshan,

    Glad to see you defend the use of the A-bomb against Japan that killed 180,000 civilians. No doubt you are also now justifying the SLA’s final offensive that finished off the LTTE forever.

    There are people who say that the LTTE by May 2009 was a spent force and no harm to anyone- just like how Japan by 1945 had lost its navy and only controlled its home islands; *no harm to anyone*. But clearly you have rejected both these arguments and have embraced Gotabhaya.

  • Observer

    Forget the World Wars and Allied forces, NATO forces to this day still use heavy weapons in civilians areas! By means of drones and fighter crafts. Time to time these strikes go horribly bad and the Pentagon would just express its regret at the losses or the collateral.

    Now why in the god’s name isn’t ICG, Louise Arbour’s posse not writing a war crimes special report on using heavy weaponry be it drones or arial strikes in known populated civilian areas? I guess deep down we all know why. Some of us have other agendas to accept the reasons!

    [Edited out] The ICG report- nothing of substance. [Edited]

  • Huh

    Dear Wijayapala,

    Just to give you a head’ up…A Guy will ask for proof of the claim that when the Portuguese came, they found a tamil kingdom, not a sinhalese one. Hurry, quick! You better post some proof or you will endure the wrath of Susantha and A Guy calling you a Cholan imperialist. lol

  • Heshan

    Nice try, Wijayapala. Unfortunately for you, the Japanese killed 23 million Chinese during WWII – if they had actually conquered Ceylon, I doubt you would be alive today, period.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    There is no comparison between the Japanese and the LTTE. First of all, the LTTE was the product of decades of discrimination by right-wing Sinhalese politicians. No one provoked the Japanese. Secondly, the Japanese goal was to conquer all of Asia… the goal of the LTTE was only to secure a piece of land that Tamils had lived on for 2000 odd years. Thirdly, Japan was an industrialized nation, recognized by the rest of the world, with an army, airforce, and navy. The LTTE was a band of guerillas outlawed by most of the world.

    All of your comparisons are childish, show a total lack of understanding of World War II, and are not even worth commenting on further. Unfortunately, I can’t find a more polite way to say it.

    By the way, I have already mentioned that the Japanese killed 23 million Chinese. I did not include the number of Filipinos, Burmese, Cambodians, Koreans, and Australian/American/British POW’s that were also killed in cold blood by the Japanese. If the LTTE had killed 23 million people, no one would be shedding crocodile tears for them.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    for your information british do not get the credit for SL being a unitary state. we always were this island. we had many names before we had ceylon! In fact one of our earliest names were Thambapanni!

    Then how do you explain the lack of Tamil Buddhists, and the lack of Tamils in the North who speak Sinhalese, in general? I have been to Europe; most people there can speak 3 or 4 languages with ease. So if Tamils and Sinhalese had this close relationship like you claim, the evidence of their interaction should be plain as daylight. The fact of the matter is, they lived as two separate groups on the island.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    I promised not to comment on your childish comparison, but I found this comment rather annoying:

    LTTE was recruiting children and just anyone at the last minute (as they always did)

    20,000 ex-LTTE were rounded up after the war… apparently 10,000 of them are now in secret detention camps (e.g. Boosa, etc.). They have no access to lawyers, courts, etc. So before you claim that the Sri Lankan Government somehow “freed” these people, you should first of all tell us exactly where all these people are, if they are even alive! If you “liberate” someone and then torture them to death at Boosa, then it doesn’t make a difference if they chose to join the LTTE.

  • wijayapala

    Dear Prof. Heshan,

    Unfortunately for you, the Japanese killed 23 million Chinese during WWII

    So just as the LTTE also murdered people and deserved to be annihilated whatever the cost, the Japanese also murdered people and deserved to have 2 atom bombs dropped on it. I see your argument.

    Where did you find this number of 23 million anyway?

    If the LTTE had killed 23 million people, no one would be shedding crocodile tears for them.

    Sorry to burst your bubble, but no one is shedding crocodile or any other tears for the LTTE!

  • Observer

    …and are not even worth commenting on further. Unfortunately, I can’t find a more polite way to say it.

    Sorry Heshan, I don’t think I left anything for you to respond to. Sorry I can’t find a less arrogant way to say it!

    Your selective historical references, selective amnesia, gaps, inaccurate facts and the BS narrative you want to construct just doesn’t cut it with me personally! I’m done responding as well. And as always lets agree to disagree and move on to more productive affairs. Good day!

  • Susantha

    jasmine
    I posted a reply to you earlier but the admins didn’t approve it
    regarding the CPA views of Eastern Province land allocation. census in 1981 says the sinhala population of the eastern province as 25%..the Mahaweli project was completed after 1981 and after the Mahaweli settlements almost 1/3 of the east were Sinhalese.with the rise of terrorism it fell to about 25% again so is it wrong to settle back these people who were driven out by the LTTE.does providing land to landless people or to people who lose land due to reservoir projects a communal or political aspect?In Trincomalee at present there is huge competition for land as Sinhalese are massively buying lands in Trincomalee and the land value is very high, I myself have invested on land in Trincomalee district.
    The largest amount of unused land in the country is in the north and the east and Sinhalese are entitled to be allocated a fair share of the lands in these areas.

    also please look at the coat of arms of Sri Lanka it has only Sinhalese and Buddhists symbols..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Sri_Lanka.svg

    Burning Issue
    Lets look at the UK..a country which was truly made up of regions united and adequate powers devolved to these regions now.When scotland and England were united 100 years before the “fictitious ” unification of kingdoms in sri lanka…there is even a statute to prove it ” act of union 1706″ but for the tamils they dont have a single historical document to prove it.Look at India The hindi speaking people do not claim historical rights to tamil nadu But In SL Sinhalese have a big problem with the tamil claims and don’t accept it

  • Heshan

    It may be pointless to try to establish which World War Two Axis aggressor, Germany or Japan, was the more brutal to the peoples it victimised. The Germans killed six million Jews and 20 million Russians [i.e. Soviet citizens]; the Japanese slaughtered as many as 30 million Filipinos, Malays, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Indonesians and Burmese, at least 23 million of them ethnic Chinese. Both nations looted the countries they conquered on a monumental scale, though Japan plundered more, over a longer period, than the Nazis. Both conquerors enslaved millions and exploited them as forced labourers—and, in the case of the Japanese, as [forced] prostitutes for front-line troops. If you were a Nazi prisoner of war from Britain, America, Australia, New Zealand or Canada (but not Russia) you faced a 4% chance of not surviving the war; [by comparison] the death rate for Allied POWs held by the Japanese was nearly 30%.[23]

    – Historian Chalmers Johnson

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

  • Observer

    lol Heshan, again you’re off your wagon. I was not taking the side of Germany and Japan. No where in groundviews I have defended them as any sane person would.

    However, both sides committed war crimes. This is my point Allies and the Nazis. Well it is a well established fact that Germany, Japan and others who joined the Nazis have committed vast atrocities. No one denies the Holocaust unless you’re a covert Nazi.

    But since they lost the war those countries got aptly punished for their crimes. Maybe… its debatable. What’s very important here is that the victors did not get punished for their war crimes.

    This is exactly the point touched by the defence secretary him self at that time Mr. Robert McNamara in the documentary Fog of War. I think the man who was the architect has a more of moral centre on this issue than you do. So that is why I take your arguments not very seriously. No offence to you Heshan, it just comes down to who is more authoritative here to have a better opinion.

    You can argue how brutal the opponent is but that doesn’t justify the targeting of civilians! Especially with atrocious weapons like nuclear bombs which not only kills at the time it is dropped but generations to come!

    If this is your argument people should not complain that SL used heavy weaponry around the NFZ which is not true. You very well contradict your self here as wijayapala also alerted you about!

    So save your history lesson. We know! It’s your one sided historical interpretations that I don’t agree to.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    Your selective historical references, selective amnesia, gaps, inaccurate facts and the BS narrative

    I have nothing to hide. You are trying to the claim that the atom bomb was dropped on Japan for no reason. The war crimes of Japan during WWII are well known. I have already pointed out that they killed 30 million civilians. Instead of disputing this fact , you call it “inaccurate.”

    Do these pictures look fake to you?

    http://www.nanking-massacre.com/content_images/nanking_massacre_Rape_of_nanking_killing_children.jpg

    http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2184/2102464618_458fc21557.jpg

    http://cultureofsoccer.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/rape_of_nanking.jpg

    http://www.tribo.org/nanking/heads.jpg (Dismembered heads)

    http://mylittlestar.info/Prose/Power/Images/Nanking.jpg

    http://www.taiwantoday.tw/public/data/98413461371.gif (Women forced to be sex slaves -“comfort women” for Japanese during WWII)

    JAPANESE EXPERIMENTS WITH BIOLOGICAL/CHEMICAL AGENTS, USING CHINESE CIVILIANS


    In the last days of World War II, as the Japanese retreated from the Soviet army’s advance into Japanese-occupied China, great care was taken by the Japanese army to destroy certain of their bases in dozens of Chinese cities. Red Army soldiers, arriving at these sites, discovered mass graves, many of the bodies still warm. The Japanese retreat was hasty but highly methodical. There was something they wanted to keep secret.

    US and Soviet military investigators soon began piecing together the ugly story of Japan’s biological warfare (BW) research in China, including experiments on humans. Sheldon Harris has meticulously documented the gruesome story in Factories of Death.

    Field trials of delivery mechanisms (bombs, aerial spraying, poisoning of water and animals) were conducted against victims tied to stakes, and against whole Chinese villages and cities. Epidemics raged. In Nanjing, during the two-month slaughter and rape-fest of 1937-8, Chinese POWs were given dumplings laced with typhus and released to spread the disease. Children were given chocolate infected with anthrax. In border skirmishes with Soviet troops, pathogens were spread to thousands of Red Army soldiers.

    Around 30,000 to 50,000 people are estimated to have been killed from the experiments alone in the BW bases, while victims of the open-air field trials reached six-figures. The human suffering was incalculable.

    http://nrhj1.blogspot.com/2007/04/why-us-let-japanese-war-criminals-go.html

    PICTURES OF VICTIMS OF JAPANESE BIOLOGICAL WARFARE:

    http://www.google.com/images?q=japanese+biological+warfare&um=1&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=isch:1&sa=N&start=0&ndsp=18

    Come on, Observer. Try harder. Did the CIA come up with all the above pictures just to make the Japanese look bad?

  • Observer
  • Heshan

    *You are trying to make the claim

  • Observer

    Heshan, this is just to clarify about Thambapanni, I personally hate referencing Wikipedia but since you’re so liberal with it, I am not going to fire up an academic search right now.

    Founding and Location

    The Kingdom of Tambapanni was founded by Vijaya of Sri Lanka, the first Sinhalese King, and 700 of his followers after landing in Sri Lanka in a district near modern day Mannar, which is believed to be the district of Chilaw,[3][4] after leaving Suppāraka.[5] It is recorded the Vijaya made his landing on the day of Buddha’s death.[6] Vijaya claimed Tambapanni his capital and soon the whole island come under this name. Tambapanni was originally inhabited and governed by Yakkhas, having their capital at SirÄ«savatthu and their queen Kuveni.[7] According to the Samyutta Commentary, Tambapanni was one hundred leagues in extent.

    Before the landing of Vijaya both Greek and Indian literature of the period made references to the island and considered it as a kind of fairyland, occupied by Yakshas or non human beings. According to a story of the Jataka, which calls the island Tambapanni, and mentions Nagadipa and Kalyani, states the island inhabited by Yakkhinis or she demons.[2]

    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Tambapanni

    So in effect a proper civilisation in Sri Lanka was first established with Sinhalese kingdom of King Vijaya. It is said it was island wide, and united under the Singha flag. This is basic history anyone know. And yes we have had many, many invasions from South India and even the West over times since then. The kingdoms have shifted, shrunk, new ones established, old ones grown back, reunited, all this action. But the core has been always there defending the civilisation/nation established in Thambapanni – the Nation of Sri Lanka (what ever name you prefer, if it is Ceylon so be it). Those that came to our shores in peace like honest traders have peacefully accommodated in to our country and not had any issues. But those that came with force have had to experience bitter experiences. Are you surprised?

    As I have said initially I am not really a slave to the history and believe in who ever is in this island right now must peacefully coexist as equal citizens with equal rights but I can’t bare see history being omitted or twisted.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    Buddy, who’s twisting the facts here? 30,000 is not a fact! It’s a bloated estimate, first coined by a tabloid news paper in UK (we all know who they’re and what sort of credibility they have). An estimate which is not based on solid grounds. Even that many would say that is the upper edge of the envelope. If you use that as fact then you are the one twisting facts.

    If the 30,000 is a rubbish estimate like you claim, then let there be a proper investigation. All it takes is one investigation, then all these people who make accusations (including myself) will have nothing more to say, should the investigation prove the innocence of the Sri Lankan Government.

    On the other hand, when you prevent any investigation and then call those ask for investigations LTTE supporters/foreign imperialists/Christian missionaries/Western puppets etc., it becomes rather obvious that you are hiding some dirty linen in the closet. :)

    You know, it would be much less costly for the Sri Lankan Government to go ahead with one impartial investigation, then take all the heat generated from the negative publicity over the war. If it was really innocent – in my opinion – that is what GOSL would do. On the other hand, an investigation would reveal what really happened, and what really happened would send the Rajapakses out during the next election.

  • Heshan

    *than take all the heat generated

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    You talk as if the Inquisitions never happened. You talk as if Christians haven’t killed in the name of religion! I wonder who crusaders are. lol
    Muslims have long had ties with Sri Lanka, Serendib is the name Arabic/Persian world referred Sri Lanka to back in the days. Yes that name came before CEYLON! ooOOooOOooo So clearly they knew about us. not only that Muslim traders have long sailed into our country and done trade in spices and what not. Like you said my knowledge of history is pretty weak according to you, so take this with a grain of salt! :P

    Yes there was a time when Christian fundamentalism was a threat to the world, but that time has long passed… now the dominant threat to world stability is Islamic fundamentalism. Not only the West, but also India is fighting against Islamic fundamentalism. I guess the Sri Lankan “Daily News” forgot to inform you that India has had many Hindu-Muslim rights over the past 15-20 years? You should also keep in mind that even though the Christians did the Crusades for the Pope, the Muslims do jihad for Allah himself… this is why you don’t find Christian suicide bombers, but you find (in the news everyday) stories of suicide attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Your view of Islam is confined to a few traders selling cinnamon – a rather simplistic view. In fact, jihad goes back to the Prophet Muhammed himself. In the Q’uran it is written that Prophet Muhammed personally participated in the violent sacking of such cities as Mecca and Medina. Religion is all about imitation. The reason that Christians tried so hard to convert people is because *Jesus* said he is the only path… likewise, a Buddhist will try to imitate Buddha (compassion/kindness/etc.) Prophet Muhammed did not condemn violence… this is the real reason why Islam has not become liberal like Christianity, despite the evolution of technology, science, free public education, etc. You are welcome at a Christian church, or a Hindu kovil, or a Buddhist temple, but as a non-Muslim, you are banned from entering a mosque. That is not my opinion, that is the way things really are.


    Even Chinese came did honest trade and went back home. They never had a small penis syndrome that they wanted to conquer and feel bigger, although they easily could have! Chinese had a naval fleet that could obliterate Asia!

    Yes yes… the Chinese are doing an “honest trade” in Tibet – so honest that the Dalai Lama can’t even live there. Destroying Buddhist temples, putting monks in jail, and doing whatever they want (exploiting) the natural resources of Tibet. China is also doing an “honest trade” in S. Lanka. The brother of the “King” is getting fat from all the commissions.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    What’s very important here is that the victors did not get punished for their war crimes.

    The Americans and British did not commit war crimes during WWII (unless you count the bombing of the German city of Dresden, which was a one-time thing). The Russians, Germans, and Japanese were the ones who committed war crimes.

    The dropping of atomic bombs is not a war crime… even though you claim that 188,000 civilians were killed, I have already made the point that the Japanese killed 30 million civilians (more than 150 times the number of people killed by the two atom bombs), the Japanese intended to capture all of Asia , the Japanese refused to surrender (even after the first atomic bomb was dropped), and the Japanese were planning to use their entire civilian population in the defense of Japan, in case of a ground invasion by the Allies. By “use” I do not mean “shield” such as the LTTE did.. the Japanese intended to put a gun in the hand of every one who could hold one and fire accurately.

    Your claim that the Americans could not win in a land invasion of Japan is entirely off the mark. Not only the USA, but also the Soviet Union declared war on Japan. If the USA had not finished the job, the Russians would have.

  • Heshan

    The Russians, Germans, and Japanese were the ones who committed war crimes.

    I have already mentioned the Russians (USSR) were (and still are, if you look at Chechnya) uncivilized when it comes to war. On other hand, it would have been impossible to punish the Russians for war crimes committed during WWII, as the losses they took from the Germans were catastrophic – more than 20 million. After WWII, the question was not so much about punishment, but occupation of Germany – how to divide it up.

    As I said, the Russians have not changed their behavior since 1945.. along with China, they helped to prevent a UN investigation into S. Lankan war crimes.

  • Observer

    If the 30,000 is a rubbish estimate like you claim, then let there be a proper investigation.

    I have made my views clear on this matter in the following discussion.

    http://www.groundviews.org/2010/05/13/who-guards-the-guards-the-need-to-move-swiftly-on-removing-the-erpta-from-the-sri-lankan-constitution/#comment-19348

    Anyway Heshan, what happened to “I ain’t gonna respond to your childish comparisons!!”.

    “All of your comparisons are childish, show a total lack of understanding of World War II, and are not even worth commenting on further….”

    “I promised not to comment on your childish comparison….”

    I thought we were going to move on to more productive things in life :-P lol

  • Observer

    Also refer here Heshan,

    http://www.groundviews.org/2010/05/13/who-guards-the-guards-the-need-to-move-swiftly-on-removing-the-erpta-from-the-sri-lankan-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-19101

    read if u can be bothered.. you might find it bit inferior to your intelectual level and i do apologise (childish so to speak)…

  • jasmine

    Susantha,

    “also please look at the coat of arms of Sri Lanka it has only Sinhalese and Buddhists symbols..”
    Why should I look at the coat of arms? For evidence of your character? What it tells me is that you are a racist community, who are clearly dishonest in that the coat of arms expresses a Sinhalese nationalism that is proscribed in your Constitution. Also expressing your core dishonesty: the lion bearing a sword, symbolising a commitment to violence as a means to power, contradicted by the surrounding lotus, a symbol of the highest development of spirituality, which in Buddhist philosophy includes values of peace, non-violence, compassion, and rising above material desires. The lotus stands for pristine purity rising out of mud. They say the mud doesn’t stick to the lotus! That brilliantly captures the massacre of Tamils your community has accomplished without having to account for any of it. Yup, you’re certainly a community who knows how to shake off the mud. The very idea of a coat of arms for a Buddhist people, a violence-abhoring religion, is nonsensical, but considering that you are not very Buddhist in your attitudes (of eschewing desire and ego), that fundamental contradiction seems to escape you. You sure know how to pervert your Buddhist symbols.

    It is that same dishonesty that is now trying to justify a blatant attempt at Sinhalicizing the Eastern province as something that is about giving land to landless people and those displaced by the LTTE. It is not landless people who are being settled in the Eastern province. From 1881 through pre-independence days, Sinhalese comprised under 4% of the Eastern Province areas, according to the Censuses of the time. Changes in population of the province since that century, the increased numbers of Sinhalese there, have been entirely due to Sinhalese-government intervention. Isn’t it strange that after a Civil War that took place in Tamil-inhabited areas, displacing hundreds of thousands of Tamils, the priority is to give land to poor landless Sinhalese people?

    Kind of convenient that in a war, people tend not to carry their title deeds with them as they run from the guns. Makes it so much easier to steal land from them, doesn’t it?

  • Heshan

    Observer:


    Founding and Location
    Vijaya claimed Tambapanni his capital and soon the whole island come under this name. Tambapanni was originally inhabited and governed by Yakkhas, having their capital at Sirīsavatthu and their queen Kuveni.[7]

    I checked the references for 7:

    7: ^ “Tambapanni”. palikanon.com. http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/t/tambapanni.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-06.

    *
    Tambapanni

    The name given to that district in Ceylon where Vijaya landed after leaving Suppāraka (Mhv.vi.47; Dpv.ix.30).

    So this “Tambapanni” illusion is a product of none other than Mahavamsa and Deepavamsa !

    Using Mahavamsa and Deepavamsa to prove that Sinhalese arrived on the island first does not constitute a valid historical argument.

    Anything else?

  • Observer

    “The dropping of atomic bombs is not a war crime”

    On EFFIN CIVILIANS IT IS! Don’t EFFIN go to war if your soldiers aren’t man enough to fight face to face!

    Enough said. I’m done here, truly. Go ahead write more crap see if I could care…

    You subscribe to your sordid history, I’ll subscribe to mine.

  • Observer

    Oh and I just noticed that you may have not seen my previous post at the time of your last diatribe

    http://www.groundviews.org/2010/05/27/from-necessary-war-to-sustainable-peace-in-sri-lanka/comment-page-4/#comment-20343

    since comments here get approved in batches. even more confusing is that sometimes some comments get approved and some much later, adding even more new comments in the middle of the timeline of comments. this creates so much confusion.

    anyway, so really you could have saved your self posting images of Nazi war crimes and explaining it, because I am agreeing with you there! DUH! and I have made clear what my point is in the above post.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    On EFFIN CIVILIANS IT IS! Don’t EFFIN go to war if your soldiers aren’t man enough to fight face to face!

    Considering that at least 500,000 more civilians would have died had the atom bomb not been dropped, the atom bomb actually saved lives… like I said, you are entirely clueless as to how the Japanese fought. When the Americans fought the Japanese island to island, many times the Japanese hid in fortified bunkers. Instead of coming out waving a white flag, the Japanese simply fought to the death… the situation was such that the Americans had to throw grenades into the bunkers. Kamikaze’s (suicide planes) were another tactic.. in this case, the Japanese simply crashed planes into American ships…

    You have also not answered the question as to why the Japanese did not surrender after the first atom bomb was dropped. And you have not explained why they (Japanese) killed 30 million civilians. Like a brain-dead parrot, you keep harping about the atom bomb.

  • Heshan

    By the way, I have not posted any images of Nazi war crimes… all of the pictures shown relate to Japanese atrocities.

  • Heshan

    Oh and I just noticed that you may have not seen my previous post at the time of your last diatribe

    I am not clicking on a link and searching through the whole page. It’s a pretty simple idea. If the Sri Lankan Government is innocent, all it has to do is allow one impartial investigation. If the investigation proves GOSL is innocent, then no more questions. As the saying goes, guilt is difficult to hide, whereas innocence is easy to prove!

  • Huh

    Heshan,

    People just DON”T get that if America had not dropped the atomic bomb, much of Asia would be under the dictatorship known as Japan. Who knows how many more millions they would have killed!!! If we dropped the atomic bomb on Germany, if the Germans refused to surrender, would we even be having this debate? I doubt it.

  • wijayapala

    Dear Prof. Heshan,

    The Americans and British did not commit war crimes during WWII (unless you count the bombing of the German city of Dresden, which was a one-time thing)

    Couldn’t we argue that the deaths at the end of the SL war were also only a “one-time” thing- given that the war is now over and civilians are no longer getting killed?

    Considering that at least 500,000 more civilians would have died had the atom bomb not been dropped, the atom bomb actually saved lives

    You didn’t answer my question why conduct a land invasion if the Japanese Navy was wiped out? By the time Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed, Japan was no longer a threat. The US Navy could have maintained a blockade without killing 180,000 people.

  • SomewhatDisgusted

    Dear Heshan,

    You said: “Considering that at least 500,000 more civilians would have died had the atom bomb not been dropped, the atom bomb actually saved lives”

    The situation you describe seems to fall well within the rationale you’ve expressed for the Japanese situation.

    How many more lives would have been lost if the Sri Lankan war had continued for another 30 years with a non-negotiable terrorist business enterprise?

    And you said the Japanese refused to surrender. The same can be said of the LTTE, which not only used human shields instead of surrendering, but hung on to hopes of international intervention even after suffering a convincing defeat.

    So I personally believe that the end of the war did save lives in the long run and hopefully arrested further erosion of society, both in the north and the south. Someone had to do the dirty work for that though, and in this case, it was the Rajapakse brothers. Others can now take the moral highground and vilify them for it, but the moral peaceniks had *no real solutions on offer to solve the problem*, other than a pointless disposition to lament the continuous death of civilians for another 30 years perhaps? I personally don’t think our country could have taken it.

  • Heshan

    SomewhatDisgusted:

    You don’t seem to get it either. The Japanese killed 30 million civilians and tried to take over an entire continent. This is not some petty civil war confined to the borders of a tiny landmass. If the LTTE had actually posed a threat to nations outside of Sri Lanka, the world would not have waited 1 year, 10 yrs, or 30 years to see its demise. The Japanese, on the other hand, were fully industrialized and posed a direct threat to practically every Asian nation, as well as Australia. The Japanese successfully invaded many, many Asian nations.

    There is another important difference as per the LTTE – the LTTE could never win, at least not in the conventional sense of militarily defeating Sri Lanka. Just like the Viet Cong (North Vietnamese) guerillas, the only way the LTTE would have won is if the SL Army simply packed its bags and went home. If the LTTE could never win, this leaves Sri Lanka with two options: (1) either confine them and somehow strange them (what Ranil W. attempted to do economically, or (2) launch a brutal campaign to crush them, ignoring the extremely high civilian toll. Also, I urge you to recall how the East was won – it was largely due to the defection of Karuna and his 20,000 or so odd men, made possible only by the CFA. So, it is possible to create disorder within the ranks.

    Whether or not the LTTE would have surrendered is difficult to ascertain. Without Prabhakaran around, one can speculate that it might have gradually collapsed for lack of leadership. More than 10,000 LTTE members willingly surrendered after the war.

    By the way, the Sri Lankan military killed many, many more civilians than the LTTE. Let’s not forget the JVP youth they killed. If we use Observer’s logic, then it is the Sri Lankan military that should be wiped out at all costs!

  • Heshan

    *and somehow strangle them

  • Heshan

    Somewhat Disgusted:

    As I once said on this forum, despite the hysteria over LTTE suicide bombs, a Sri Lankan had a better chance of getting caught to a moving vehicle while crossing one of those poorly constructed Colombo intersections, than getting caught to an LTTE bomb.

  • Heshan

    Couldn’t we argue that the deaths at the end of the SL war were also only a “one-time” thing- given that the war is now over and civilians are no longer getting killed?

    “Considering that at least 500,000 more civilians would have died had the atom bomb not been dropped, the atom bomb actually saved lives”

    You didn’t answer my question why conduct a land invasion if the Japanese Navy was wiped out? By the time Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed, Japan was no longer a threat. The US Navy could have maintained a blockade without killing 180,000 people.

    — iot Wijayapala:

    Again displaying your total lack of knowledge. Bombing a city from the air to disrupt a major communications network is different from telling civilians to go to a NFZ and then firing mortars and shells at them.

    A naval blockade would not have stopped Japan. Perhaps it is not written in Mahavamsa that Japan controlled an empire; go to a real library and read a real book.

    “Marshall’s tribunal declared that no extraordinary decision was made to single out Dresden (e.g. to take advantage of the large number of refugees, or purposely terrorize the German populace). It was argued that the intent of area bombing was to disrupt communications and destroy industrial production. The American inquiry established that the Soviets, pursuant to allied agreements for the United States and the United Kingdom to provide air support for the Soviet offensive toward Berlin, had requested area bombing of Dresden in order to prevent a counter attack through Dresden, or the use of Dresden as a regrouping point after a strategic retreat.[120]”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II

    Go and ask the Russians why they requested Dresden to be bombed. Or is it the case that since Russia licks Mahinda’s rear, anything Russia does is okay (e.g. terrorize Afghanistan in the 80’s, which Observer completely forgets to mention).

  • Observer

    LTTE was responsible for the most civilian deaths and it was violating all rules of war in every offensive/defensive operations and used the “guerilla” tag as an excuse.

    (e.g. terrorize Afghanistan in the 80’s, which Observer completely forgets to mention).

    well US has taken over that batton now! it is regurgitating all the weapons it gave to taliban during the soviet era. what irony.

    “As I once said on this forum, despite the hysteria over LTTE suicide bombs, a Sri Lankan had a better chance of getting caught to a moving vehicle while crossing one of those poorly constructed Colombo intersections, than getting caught to an LTTE bomb.”

    I can’t speak for others, but as someone who’s had the unfortunate experience of identifying a corpse of one of these “remote incidents” by the ring on a finger, since there wasn’t a face to it, I find what you said VERY VERY OFFENSIVE. If that was said to my face, a very ugly side of me would be on display.

  • Heshan

    LTTE was responsible for the most civilian deaths

    If the LTTE was responsible for the most civilian deaths, the Tamil diaspora would not have funded the LTTE. The LTTE could not have existed without the funding of the Tamil diaspora. Every Tamil person I have spoken to says that the Sri Lankan Army/military is responsible for the most civilian deaths.

    well US has taken over that batton now! it is regurgitating all the weapons it gave to taliban during the soviet era. what irony.

    The US invaded Afghanistan because the Taliban refused to hand over Osama Bin Laden, mastermind of the 9-11 attacks. Not only did Bin-Laden attack America once, he promised more attacks. So the invasion of Afghanistan is fully justified.

    I can’t speak for others, but as someone who’s had the unfortunate experience of identifying a corpse of one of these “remote incidents” by the ring on a finger, since there wasn’t a face to it, I find what you said VERY VERY OFFENSIVE. If that was said to my face, a very ugly side of me would be on display.

    Statistics are a neutral and objective measure. If you put the statistics of suicide bombings next to pedestrian injuries/deaths, and compare them to each other, you will find that the number of pedestrian injuries/deaths is much much higher. Perhaps the government should declare a war on terrorism against poorly constructed intersections and bad drivers!

  • Heshan

    I have managed to get a copy of data pertaining to traffic accidents in Sri Lanka:

    Here is a brief list:

    TOTAL NUMBER OF FATALITIES (E.G. DEATHS)

    1989: 1596
    1990: 1795
    1991: 1532
    2000: 2058
    2001: 2118
    2002: 2160
    2003: 2096
    2004: 2214
    2005: 2304

    http://www.iatss.or.jp/pdf/research/30/30-1-12.pdf

    In fact, between 1989 and 2005, close to 20,000 people died from road-related accidents, which proves my point that one had a greater chance of getting in a traffic accident than getting caught to an LTTE bomb. . Remember, I did not include the figures from 2005-2010, assuming the trend of 2000 annual deaths holds, then that is 10,000 more deaths, bringing the total figure to 30,000 over a 21 yr period. Keep in mind that the war has killed approximately 100,000 people during a similar time-period.

  • Heshan

    Correction: Remember, I did not include the figures from 2006-2010

  • Heshan

    Actually I did not include the numbers from 1992-1999.

    Here they are:

    1992: 1515
    1993: 1421
    1994: 1611
    1995: 1681
    1996: 1755
    1997: 1835
    1998: 2023
    1999: 2059

    http://www.iatss.or.jp/pdf/research/30/30-1-12.pdf

    TOTAL NUMBER OF TRAFFIC-RELATED FATALITIES BETWEEN 1989 AND 2005: 31773

    So now it is very fair to assume that at least 40,000 people have died in road-related accidents between 1989 and 2010, assuming the trend of 2000+ fatalities we see beginning in 1998 holds for 2006-2010.

    In other words, the total number of fatalities due to traffic-related accidents is almost 1/2 the total number of casualties due to war.

  • Observer

    do you ever listen to your self heshan? traffic stats? why not cancer stats? diabetes stats? why not include all possible ways of dying? thankfully at the moment more people die due to other reasons than war or a plague! whats ur point?

    The US invaded Afghanistan because the Taliban refused to hand over Osama Bin Laden, mastermind of the 9-11 attacks. Not only did Bin-Laden attack America once, he promised more attacks. So the invasion of Afghanistan is fully justified.

    again listen to what you’re saying! have you ever listened to prabakaran’s mahaveera speeches? there’s enough threats in there to wage 100 wars! not only did prabakaran make these threats but he brutally carried out attacks on civilians! god!

    and btw, if US forces were so good, why couldn’t they send some recon scouts to locate Bin Laden and then send in a team of Seals to take him out??? i guess i over estimated their capacity. instead of rambo and commando, they should make hollywood movies based on drones.. lol because apparently that’s what gets the job done!

    and to the commentzar here, the daily show links were related to the point i made. this censorship gets ridiculous sometimes! you’re essentially editing my expression.

  • Observer

    so heshan, if your sister was killed due to a terrorist act tomorrow (god forbid!) would you accept it in the name of your statistical reality? tell me man!

    personally, it would motivate me to do everything in my power and dedicate my life to not let that happen to another person’s sister…… SLA forces are full of people with such motivation. that’s a mother of a force to comprehend let alone face!

    this is why LTTE had its day coming…

  • Observer

    If the LTTE was responsible for the most civilian deaths, the Tamil diaspora would not have funded the LTTE.

    that’s simply a statement by you isn’t it? give me one reason why i should believe that? if they had half a brain, then the LTTE being classified as a terrorist outfit by “civilised” governments all over the world not ring any alarm bells???? you’re the brains here, so pl do tell me….

  • Observer

    So this “Tambapanni” illusion is a product of none other than Mahavamsa andDeepavamsa !
    Using Mahavamsa and Deepavamsa to prove that Sinhalese arrived on the island first does not constitute a valid historical argument.
    Anything else?

    FYI,

    Thambapanni by no means is an illusion. If you don’t believe Mahavamsa, it’s existence is backed up by Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC) in his book De Mundo (The Universe) in which he identifies Sri Lanka by the name Taprobane [1] well after King Vijaya’s landing and well before Mahawamsa was written! Taprobane was the Greek derivation of Thambapanni.

    [1] http://books.google.com/books?id=MWY-AAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=taprobane&f=false

    Also no one claims Sinhalese were the first inhabitants. Everyone agrees there were indigenous people. But they were neither Tamil nor Sinhalese.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    Looks like you’re unable to dispute the statistics. In fact, I did not even provide the number of pedestrians (people simply crossing a road) killed due to poorly constructed intersections, and the like. Although such data is readily available at my disposal, I will spare you the embarrassment. :)

    In regards to Afgahnistan/Iraq, you fail to understand the dynamics. A single example by itself is useless because a single example fails to give context . The USA has never colonized any nation. However, they have occupied a few. The two examples that I like to bring up are West Germany and Japan. Even though you keep parroting about atomic bombs, you have forgotten to mention that it was essentially the USA which built Japan after WWII:

    “As expressed by Kawai Kazuo, “Democracy cannot be taught to a starving people,”[10] and while the US government encouraged democratic reform in Japan, it also sent billions of dollars in aid.[11]
    Douglas MacArthur and Emperor Hirohito.

    Initially the US government provided emergency food relief through GARIOA funds. In fiscal year 1946, this aid amounted to US$92 million in loans. From April 1946, in the guise of LARA, private relief organizations were also permitted to provide relief. Once the food network was in place, at a cost of up to US$1 million[citation needed] per day”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Japan

    What about economics?

    “During the Occupation, GHQ/SCAP successfully (if not entirely) abolished many of the financial coalitions known as the Zaibatsu, which had previously monopolized industry.[16] Along with the later American change of heart, however (due in part to the need for an economically stronger Japan in the face of a perceived Soviet threat)”

    What about the Japanese Constitution?

    “Democratization

    In 1946, the Diet ratified a new Constitution of Japan that followed closely a ‘model copy’ prepared by the GHQ/SCAP (namely the organization headed by Gen. MacArthur that was responsible for conducting the Occupation)[19], and was promulgated as an amendment to the old Prussian-style Meiji Constitution. “The political project drew much of its inspiration from the US Bill of Rights, New Deal social legislation, the liberal constitutions of several European states and even the Soviet Union..”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Japan

    What is the difference between Japan and Afghanistan/Iraq? There is only difference that really matters: Afghanistan and Iraq are Muslim, whereas Japan was not.

    How did I reach the above conclusion? Simple. The USA has poured more money into Iraq and Afghanistan than it has into Japan. The USA has tried to create a new Constitution for both of those countries. And also, Japan is a land which is totally lacking in natural resources. How is it that Japan can become a superpower, while Iraq and Afghanistan with their vast amounts of oil and – in the Afghani case – trillions worth of minerals, remain third-world nations? The only explanation is religion (Islam). It has nothing to do with America. Even if America left today, these countries – Afghanistan and Iraq – would have internal warfare. In fact, Afghanistan was having internal warfare not too long before the Americans came.

    So to keep this short, you can blame the failure of Iraq and Afghanistan all you want on the USA, but the fact of the matter is, Germany is leading Europe today, and Japan is a superpower. By way of example, the USA has done very well in terms of occupation. Unfortunately, American ideology and Islamic (Muslim) ideology are polar opposites, and it is precisely the lack of consensus between the two that prevents Afghanistan/Iraq from moving forward.

  • Heshan

    Observer:

    that’s simply a statement by you isn’t it? give me one reason why i should believe that?

    It’s called “common sense.” The Tamil diaspora would not support the LTTE if the aim of the LTTE was to kill Tamil civilians.

    Thambapanni by no means is an illusion.

    The fact that it was called Thambapanni or any other name does not prove that the whole island was united.