Sinhala nationalism, civil society organisations and the future
Repost This ArticleNationalism in our post-modern era is an extremely suspect concept. It smacks of homogeneity, patriarchy and insularity; all ideas and concepts that our generation has learned with good reason to suspect. Most difficult of all, it has often been anti-minority. My intention in this article is not to defend nationalism but rather to inquire into the particular characteristics of Sinhala nationalism and to interrogate the relationship of Sri Lankan civil society organisations and movements with it. I would also like put forward some ideas regarding ways of engagement as part of civil society in these times of totalitarianism and government supported racism. By civil society organisations and movements I mean those that purport to be an alternative voice to the state. They may also differentiate themselves from regular political parties although most of them will have explicitly political agendas and strategies.
As pointed out by many historians, Sri Lanka’s leaders at the time of independence did not lead a mass anti-colonial movement like in neighbouring India. We were pretty much granted independence and universal franchise in the teeth of hesitation by our leaders who had to be convinced reluctantly that the masses were ready for democracy. Sri Lanka’s nationalist struggles were rooted more in relation to a revival of Sinhala identity, culture and the Buddhist religion. While a similar revival was also taking place within the Tamil population, I am only concerned with the characteristics of Sinhala nationalism in this article.
Recent analysts have been pointing out that Sinhala nationalism has never been only or even primarily anti-Tamil. In fact its main fight has been against westernised elites, colonialism and neo-colonialism. These elements are linked to the strong feeling of past injustice that informs the Sinhala Buddhist identity. This is linked to the notion that successive waves of foreign domination displaced the Sinhala Buddhists from their ‘rightful’ place and that the state has a responsibility to redress these grievances. There is a material basis for this: demographic and socio-economic changes that resulted from free education policies, better health care facilities and the crisis in the agriculture sector created a large group of rural, vernacular educated youth seeking to move out of agriculture. But a stagnating economy meant that aspirations and expectations could not be met easily. Government jobs were the main source through which these aspirations could be met. It is in such a context that language became a key issue around which nationalist sentiments were most strongly expressed. English represented the language not only of the coloniser but of the local elite who maintained status and class inequalities through their political, economic and cultural domination symbolised by language. The English speaking, ‘westernised’ elite was able to access opportunities that were denied to the vernacular educated masses. Perceived imbalances in the representation of Tamils in the government sector and in the universities added an anti-minority element to the language problem. But the main grievance was against the state and a leadership that was alienated from the culture and values of a considerable section of the population. The 1956 political campaign of SWRD Bandaranaike managed to capitalise on these grievances and to promise a leadership and a state that would work differently.
The fact that the state was evaluated and legitimised on the basis of its ability to address the historical grievances of the Sinhalese meant that successive political parties campaigned on the basis of promises to satisfy the majority community. And it appears that the more unpopular the policies of a government have been, the more aggressively it has played the nationalist card. The government of J R Jayawardene is a classic case in point. This most liberal, pro-western government was preaching a Dharmishta Samajaya while busily dismantling democratic institutions, consolidating power within the Executive and launching a series of reforms that in the long term was to make Sri Lanka one of the countries in the Asian region with one of the fastest growing gaps between the rich and the poor. It was also during JR’s watch that the ethnic conflict took a turn from simmering tension and occasional skirmishes to one of protracted violence and terror.
It is not difficult to see similarities with the regime of JR Jayawardence and the Rajapakse regime. Even more consummately than the Jayawardene regime, the Rajapakses have managed to present themselves as ‘authentically’ Sri Lankan. The elitist, cosmopolitan image of Ranil Wickramasinghe, whose obvious discomfort with anything to do with people, let alone the local, has served as a superb counterfoil to the ‘authenticity’ and common touch of the Rajapakses. Their intransigence in negotiating with the west, diatribes against neo-colonialism, the aggression against the ‘interference’ of foreigners in the affairs of a sovereign nation have nicely chimed with the sense of historical grievances that is embedded within Sinhala nationalism. They have managed to maintain this image while implementing policies that will surely increase hardship and suffering for a majority of people in this country. For there is no doubt, the kind of development envisaged by the Rajapakse regime is not about a fairer, more just world but perpetuating the exploitation of the vulnerable.
But to come back to the problem of civil society, its intellectual disdain of nationalism as a concept has meant that it has also failed to grasp that within the ideas of Sinhala nationalism lies a very real problem of a society that is mired in privileges and connections. That apart from the idea of historical grievances, the fact that post-colonial Sri Lanka has failed to establish institutions and systems that are not rooted in feudalism, patronage and elitism is what drives the nationalist imagination. The dependence on social connections has become so much a part of our lives that most of us operate in that system unthinkingly. Most of us would not think twice about doing favours for a ‘known’ person or would not dream of attempting to do anything without first finding a ‘contact’ who can facilitate things for us; that who a person is, their background, their networks becomes a primary consideration in how we treat that person. This has meant that those who are without connections and who are not known, struggle at most things ranging from getting attention from a doctor to putting a child to school to getting a job to being heard in a seminar or workshop. Even if we look around most of our civil society organisations it is easy to see a pattern of old school, family and social connections. This has prevented civil society initiatives from being truly anti-establishment because whatever its pretensions to the contrary it remains very much a part of the establishment. This has meant that civil society organisations in Sri Lanka have never been able to lead or influence social movements; rather, civil society organisations are at best doing good work in an isolated little corner of their world or at worst project driven, aid-dependant NGOs.
If there is to be any genuine change in Sri Lanka, change that does not involve one cycle of violence followed by another, as part of civil society we need to engage in some serious reflection. How much have we been part of a system upholding the status-quo? How many of us can genuinely claim to have looked beyond the comfort zones of our cultural and social networks to reach places where our most taken-for-granted positions may be challenged? Even in our everyday practices and engagements, how much have we moved beyond our personal networks? And what kind of influence can we have if we do not? Let us be realistic; we do not have the power to change anything unless we can truly become a part of broader social movements.
If we are serious about the threat that faces Sri Lankan society today in the face of a totalitarian and corrupt regime, we may have to at least enter into dialogues with those beyond our immediate circles. We may need to examine more closely why ideas of the nation and nationalism mean so much to people; why a sense of historical grievance is so much a part of the national consciousness. This regime (like others before them) have tapped into the racist elements of nationalist sentiments. What I am suggesting here is that the more multi-dimensional nature of nationalist thinking is taken into consideration so that we can engage with it in a way that challenges all of us. It may require us to examine our privileged positions; and to ensure that we are not simply reproducing circles of privilege. It will be hard – not simply because of how it may challenge us, but because the euphoria of the end of the war, the short-term benefits of the big development projects that are being implemented, will mean that not many people will be ready to enter into a dialogue about social change. But there are dissenting voices. And those voices are not just within our circle of civil society organisations. In fact, they may be from among those we would in general not consider our allies. Maybe there won’t be complete cohesion among those voices; but unless we are willing to understand where they come from; what the commonalities and differences are among us, how we can challenge and change each other, we will be nothing more than ineffectual. And that is something we cannot afford to be. Not in these times.
Good analysis,but fails to mention that the pioneer of Sinhalese nationalism was Anagarika Dharmapala.He was one of the few people who was of the view that not only the mere independence that we were to fight for,but a total renunciation of colonial mind set which taught us to value anything “Western” and condemn anything indegenous.As Anagarika correctly predicted when the White Sahib left the shores of Sri Lanka,they left behind thousands of lackeys and parasites who continued to sing their song until now!
President JR jayawardene and Mahinda Rajapakse and DB wijethunghe, represented the Sinhalese properly that is why you people have a problem with them only and say that the other leaders are not bad even if they murdered their opponents,robbed 100s of millions of dollars or bought the countries economic growth to the minus range such people will be good as long as they believed in power sharing with tamils.
Since this author blames Sinhalese nationalism so much I would like to ask him/her a Question.Why do the tamils want the illegal 13 th amendment or federalism or any other thing that will rob the right of the sinhalese to every inch of Sri Lanka is it not because of tamil nationalism?
“President JR jayawardene…represented the Sinhalese properly”
haha what a joker you are Susantha. What did you think about JR inviting the Indian Army to Sri Lanka after telling the electorate for years that Sri Lanka will never bow down to the Indians???
I have few questions:
1. Does NOT agreeing to give or agree to Thimpu Principles , Oslo principles make an individual a RACIST. If so please explain how ?
2. Isn’t it correct to say that Tamils are being racist when then want the Northern, Eastern and Puttallam district Tamil majority areas in the forseeable future ?
3. Why do you have to have a territory or territorial claim to make the society JUST, EQUITABLE, and FAIR ?
>>>>”This is linked to the notion that successive waves of foreign domination displaced the Sinhala Buddhists from their ‘rightful’ place and that the state has a responsibility to redress these grievances. ” <<<<<<<
OFCOURSE, the Sinhalese who were the majority had to deal with foreign invasions from all sorts of peoples' throughout the history because it is an ISLAND with no strong army and navy. So anyone coming through sea was in the island in no time with no restrictions or resistance.
The SInhalese people regards the WHOLE of Sri Lanka as THEIR homeland. The Tamils want the SInhalese to NOT regard Northern Province, Eastern Province and the Puttallam district as part of the Sinhala homeland (let me remind you the SInhala people regard the whole island as their homeland. It does not matter whether there are Tamils , or Punjabis, or Iraqis in the Northern, Eastern province Sinhala people regard the WHOLE ISLAND as their HOMEALND) ……
CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHY SHOULD THE SINHALA PEOPLE REGARD THE WHOLE ISLAND AS THEIR HOMELAND/ HOME COUNTRY. Considering that they are citizens of Sri Lanka and that Sinhala has originated and deveopled in Sri Lanka and the neighboring attols of Male……
I would warn people to use the word RACIST selectively in describing Sinhala Nationalism as WE SINHALESE DO NOT CONSIDER US TO BE SUPERIOR TO ANYONE,ANYWHERE, ANYTIME….THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF A RACISTS. TO say that one is superior to another based on ethnicity/race.
Ofcourse, there are political problems beteween Tamils and the SInhalese and Sinhala-Buddhist….But do not say that Tamils are less racist than the Sinhalese. GO and live in a Tamil majority country and then do comment on such things.
the economic growth in sri lanka at the moment will develop the nation and the fruits will go to the people. the government is building hospitals, school, roads and power stations throughout the north east. how is that going to be bad for the people?
A very superficial analysis. The sinhala nationalism like JRJs Dharmishta society is a red Herring. It is aspirations of the sinhala educated that is being highjacked by the politicians with promises. That is why we have already had 3 insurrections. On the contrary the problem of Sri Lanka is the lack of Nationalism. It emanates from the fact that the new political elite and the civil society is corrupt and wishes to embezzle the wealth of the country not invest in sustainable devolepment. Tell me one project that has been free of corruption with a decent return of equity from Mahaweli to Hambantota. It is SAD . Dont blame nationalism but blame lack of nationalism and corruption.
wijaypala
most marxists do not like JR ,Marxists and anti capitalists are also a part of the reason that sri lanka could not make it to the developed world during the last century.why did JR ask Indian troops to come into SL?he has no other option,no allies or anything even in such a situation he challenged india and ordered a SLN naval blockade to prevent Indian ships that tried to take aid to LTTe held areas he said he will fight till the last bullet,he had the courage to say that and until the last moment he was sending delegations to the US to get help against the indian imperialists.He was strongly against this concepts of power devolution etc.He helped to create massive Sinhalese settlements in north and east,He built the military if not for work done by him eelam would have been formed during the 80s and the SL military will never come to the present level if not for the foundation he gave.Who built the Commando regiment,STF,SBS,SF ?
Dear Susantha,
A lot more than a few Marxists didn’t like JR. If JR was so popular, then how come he didn’t run for a second term in 1988?
“why did JR ask Indian troops to come into SL?he has no other option,no allies or anything even in such a situation he challenged india and ordered a SLN naval blockade to prevent Indian ships that tried to take aid to LTTe held areas he said he will fight till the last bullet,he had the courage to say that and until the last moment he was sending delegations to the US to get help against the indian imperialists.”
So in other words, you’re saying that JR:
1) lied about “fighting till the last bullet”
2) totally failed to get help against the Indian imperialists
According to Susantha, JR was both a liar and a failure.
“He was strongly against this concepts of power devolution etc.”
Yet this is the same JR who gave us the 13th Amendment which every Sri Lankan loves dearly!! JR more than any other Sri Lankan leader contributed to power devolution. JR can best be described as the Father of Power Devolution. That must mean you Susantha are a big fan of Devolution.
The Sinhalese are not anti minority, they are selfish, greedy and anti Tamil.
They have shown by such behaviour that they have no sense of good governance. Sri Lanka has gradually fallen under India by not resolving this problem since 1958.
Obviously, the hidden agenda of India on Sri Lanka(SL) is to keep the country unstable and be the “Boss” over them, and to show the world that islanders do not know to govern themselves and are unfit.
Internationally, its agenda is to prevent the independence of Tamil Eelam(TE), which is the expressed legitimate desire of Tamils since 1976, and is the best for the peace and progress of the countries SL and TE in the island.
India wants to control the United States and other countries from bringing war crime charges against the war criminals and governments of India and SL.
India caused impunity and injustice to Tamils in SL, when they accepted de-citizenised Tamils, from “up country”, under Srima-Shashtri pact; manipulated the defeat of condemning war crimes in the UN Human Rights Council in 2009; prevented UN Security Council from giving humanitarian assistance during the last days of war in 2009; and will continue to promote military occupation of TE and subjugation of Tamils.
India likes to colonise TE with SL. It has got the oil deposits in Mannar and wants to colonise TE economically under the cover of peace.
Seeing the main article and and the comments made,I felt that what I think also may be of some value and relevance.What I am going to attach is an article I wrote, towards the end of war,and the LTTE was inching towards its defeat. Both Tamil and Singhalese people have no problems.They should be allowed to heal their wounds and work towards a better future.
The Article :
HOW MUCH ETHNIC IS ETHNICITY ?
( An insight into the Sri Lankan Scene )
By – Ananda Ariyarathne
GLOBAL POPULATION- GROWTH AND MIGRATIONS
Ethnicity remains to be felt only as long as it is referred as it is such references that will establish its presence. As long as we give it prominent attention, it shall never leave us and shall remain looming all over us.
Historically, it would have played a very significant role as it was an unavoidable way for survival. But today , with all the development and the globally accepted norms which are symbolised by Human Rights, do we still have to be conscious about ethnicity ? The essence of the Human Rights Charter itself is the best explanation as all the human beings are protected by that. At a time it is accepted that all the human beings are same, it is not only ironical but also illogical to give such prominence to this subject, in the first place.
The issue becomes complicated only when the matters are interpreted based on pure assumptions rather than on factual proof. When the interpretations are made in such convincing manner, it becomes soothing for all those who wish to believe. It is natural for anyone to feel high about his or her ancestry as it is directly connected to identity.
It is really interesting to note the inseparable historical facts that are connected to the migrations of people in all the regions in the world. But how many of us would venture to remember that the people who were known as Native Indians of the American Continents had their origins in Asia. Their paths stretched from Asia through Bering Strait linked by a land bridge then, through Alaska and spread down to the Southern Most Point of South America. It was always a gradual extension caused by the need for better Hunting Grounds initially. The knowledge in animal breeding and crop farming helped the formation of civilisations.
It is beyond anyone’s reach to know exactly how the populations grew in different areas as it always happened in two main ways. One being the establishment of New Colonies and the Other is through the existing communities through intimidation. While New Colonies preserved their Original Features the others who intimidated created a situation ideal for blending. When the Spanish came from Europe to Americas, it happened in two ways. While pockets of Spanish tried to preserve their original identities, the majority got mixed. But, the Language prevailed. Today, we see societies where Spanish is the main Language while Local languages may also be present. In North America, the mixing was first among the people of European Origin and English prevailed as the main language which is actually derivation of the original with influences from other European Languages. The Slaves who were brought from Africa were segregated initially but blended gradually to gain equal status with the white people. In the same manner the White People of North America had a variety of European Origins, even the slaves did not come from one region in Africa. Today they are very well accepted by each other, the mutual respect that developed has reached its pinnacle. A Black American is the President of USA., considered to be the most powerful nation in the world. If one takes a cross section of the American Society, what kind of ethnicity can he find ?
That does not mean that there are no other communities. There are, but all those have learned to live with others. That is a nation united in diversities. Where can they draw lines ?
Europe had its own blending too. Southern Europeans had African Influence and early North Africans had Influence from Greeks, Phoenicians ,and Romans and then again Arabic influence. When it happened in the South, the influence from Huns and the Mongols also continued. The Aryans who went to Persia did not stay there but went further to India. Even the Greeks did so. The people from various parts of India went on criss-crossing and that was how the influence from both North and South India came to Sri Lanka.
SRI LANKAN ETHNICITY
There is no reason for anyone to believe some special people came from somewhere and started colonies in Sri Lanka during Pre-Historic Times. What is in record related to archaeological findings is the fact that there had been colonies of people who came from North India. This agrees with the story of Prince Wijaya and his Seven Hundred Followers. The similarities in Singhala language indicate that possibility but it could not have been purely North Indian Influence. According to Mahawansa, it is clear that the Ruler of Lanka had good relations with Madurai which is a place in present day Tamil Nadu. Prince Wijaya arranged for a Queen for himself and seven hundred noble ladies from Madurai. Let us try to be impartial and if Prince Wijaya and his Seven Hundred Followers started the Singhalese nation, tribe or the race, cannot we see the irony of the situation. Singhalese started with Tamil mothers. Is not that a clear indication that the people got mixed right throughout the history. The blending with the Local tribes that could have been present on one hand and on the other Tamils completed the blend. Then how could it have been to have Singhalese people and Tamil people ? If we become emotional we shall not see the probable development.
CONTINUOUS INTER-ACTION
Sri Lanka’s geographical feature of being an Island affected that. Unlike on a continuous land, like in India, the migrations became restricted. That way, the influence can be seen appearing in waves and most of the time, Sri Lanka could develop independently. This isolation preserved and paved way for the Singhalese nation to grow with a special and a separate identity. Signs of the presence of the Singhalese civilisation could be found everywhere in the island and it was disrupted only during some periods when the Singhalese Kings became weak or the Tamil invasions from South India were stronger. This happened from time to time and how many times do we come across situations in the History of Sri Lanka where Singhalese Princes escaping to South India ,living in exile and coming with South Indian Armies to overthrow Singhalese rulers. Prince Mugalan came back with a Tamil Army and defeated King Kasyapa. Can we think that the Tamil Armies left Sri Lanka after the mission was completed ? The obvious possibility was the quiet and natural blending with the local scene.
What could have really happened was the prominence of the Cultural Features according to the prevailing power base. Predominantly Singhalese areas continued to preserve their cultural features and the people who were more exposed to influence from South India continued to acquire Tamil Cultural features. This can be accepted as the most logical possibility as the picture could have been different if it was otherwise. It was a case of the changing of rulers and the people lived in harmony until such time, it became confrontational . It was behind such, unification efforts came from time to time.
The presence of places for Buddhist Worshiping in the Tamil areas show the fact that it was only the administration that was changed. Only few Tamil invaders destroyed such places of worship. The practice of ruling regions through Regional Leaders who were mostly princes was common. That relationship prevailed as long as submission and acceptance of authority were there.
In the meantime, the common people blended and it could not have been treated as something wrong as it happened even at the Royal Levels. During the periods related to each Kingdom, the Tamil influence continued. We can see the climax when a Tamil prince became the King of Kandyan Kingdom. The significant aspect was that he did not try to keep a Tamil identity and that was why he became known as Sri Wickrama Rajasinghe. When the Singhalese Chieftains who did not like the authority of the King, it resulted in a betrayal when Sri Wickrama Rajasinghe was captured and sent into exile. Some of those Chieftains signed in Tamil showing its place in the elite where as Sri Wickrama Rajasinghe was well known as a poet who wrote in Singhala language.
All this point only in one direction and that is in the direction that the people of Sri Lanka did not have reasons to develop any animosity towards each other. This is amply proved by the unity the Singhalese and Tamil Leaders had in fighting for independence from British.
WHERE DID IT GO WRONG
It went wrong after the power struggle started among the Singhalese majority and when the Tamil Politicians who represented Tamil people got ignored politically. With the change caused by S.W.R.D.Bandaranaike when he could not become the Leader in UNP, started a new trend, wooing the Singhalese majority who knew only Singhala.The majority of the Singhalese majority put S.W.R.D.Bandaranaike in power and Sinhala language became the Official language. The Tamil politicians could not do any thing. This affected even education by way of medium giving reasons for Tamil people to be frustrated. The Tamil politicians reacted by organising protests and Singhalese extremists agitated .When the Tamil people in Singhalese regions were caused to suffer, it looked as if Tamils did not have anyone to turn to. The sense of self respect of Tamil people was shattered. But was it the Singhalese majority who caused it ? It was by some extremist Singhalese politicians but all the Singhalese got the rap. It was never a National Feeling or a case of Singhalese hating Tamils.
In the meantime, governments got elected in a competition between the UNP and Anti UNP of the Singhalese majority.
The indifferent attitudes of the Sri Lankan Governments that came into power made the Tamil youth to think different. By that time, the JVP, a Singhalese Community based movement took up arms and put up a disastrous struggle and had set an example. The Tamil youth also got motivated by that and we all know how LTTE came into being.
If we carefully, analyse, is it really the ethnicity that caused all those ? It was purely the absence of fair governance. Few fanatics among Tamil Diaspora saw the opportunity and Prabhakaran became the cat’s paw. Occasional assassinations became quietly transferred into conventional warfare .The Tamil Diaspora and the International speculators kept the LTTE active.
The strength of the LTTE remained and rested on the support the Tamil Diaspora got outside. And that in turn depended on the vigorous propaganda work by the LTTE. It was continuously publicised that the innocent Tamil people suffer because of Singhalese Monstrosities. The actual fact was that the majority of the Tamil people in Sri Lanka led normal lives and they were almost over 60% of the total Tamil population although the Tamil Diaspora was continuously crying foul.
More help came from the Diaspora and LTTE naturally felt confident. More propaganda and more help. The government did not do anything substantial through its Missions abroad to counter the Propaganda. What did it cause ? More suffering and more humiliation.
Then the inevitable happened. The result is that the LTTE is limited to a very small piece of land. But there is nothing to brag about as no one wins in a war. What a war gives are wounds, death and humiliation and dead or maimed heroes. Therefore, it should stop at least now. Learn from the history. But it is not something the government can do alone.
Victors should help the common people to rebuild their lives and it is encouraging to note that even the soldiers are doing their duty with a lot of self control in spite of the fact that they have to lose their comrades due to the manner the LTTE is using civilians as a human shield.
LTTE still resorting to such tactics show that there is no respect of for human life leave aside ,any ethnic consideration. Just like the few narrow minded Singhalese Politicians who contributed towards this meaningless clash, it was the extremists elements among Tamil people who made it worse, and no one can put the blame on one party as it had already become that egg orhen situation. But it is the common people who have got to face this social inconvenience. Those Ring Leaders could not have gone forward if the common people did not support. Will not they continue to support if the majority Singhalese give reasons to believe that there cannot be any solution to this rife.
Can we tag any ethnic reason to all these complications when we know that it was the total disregard shown by the past governments that failed, simply because they had no clear insight into the basics ? Do Singhalese behave as real racists? If one says yes, it is not being fair as the time after 1983 is proof enough to show they have no problems with Tamil people in general .Few narrow minded jokers who utter right things at wrong places and wrong things at right places cause lot of damage as they do not allow people to settle.
Individuals ,like J.R.P.Suriyapperuma who has now become a public figure appearing on a variety of programmes on visual media, who does not seem to have understood the gravity of his utterances, cause more damage than positive contribution. What the President needs now is not a set of Minstrels who sing Praise but who could find soothing solutions to Tamil people who suffered under LTTE’s yoke. Not over enthusiastic set of jokers who would give reasons to Tamil Diaspora to establish their claims that Singhalese Majority is racist.
The nation does not need such promoters as all know the value of peace and the necessity to have the terrorist problem solved. It is people like him who help in giving an Ethnic Face to Terrorism. It was due to people like him the past governments failed to establish real and meaningful democracy in this otherwise wonderful country. What the people need is their self respect and equal opportunities to live without fear and intimidation. Answer is good governance.
wijayapala
even very smart people fail sometimes especially when they have herculean tasks in front of them.Yet JR made the best decisions and saved the country from the greater evils.DO you expect Sri lanka’s small army to have fought the huge Indian army ?Even if Mahinda Rajapakse was the president he would have done the same.It is a well known fact that this 13th amendment was forced by Rajiv Ghandhi on JR.So if I have you at gun point and ask you to sign an agreement to hand over a part of your properties and you sign it.Can someone say that you handed over your properties to me willingly?
many sinhalese people do not understand the value of this great leader Its very sad he was able to get the LTTE crushed by the Indians without wasting a single sinhalese life or even firing a bullet .He caused the deterioration of the eelamist -India relationship which is one of the main reasons we could crush the LTTE last year
Of all thdiscourses on the ethnic issue, you have been very forthright and pragmatic in your comment.
This island had to deal with since independence the shackles of western colonialism and then the demand for parity among its indigenous Tamil minority.
Soulbury Constitution did not envisage the indigenous minority seeking separate homeland within this minuscule island. Ponnambalam brothers bartered their entrenched position in the Senate to pacify that all is well within this small isle.
Then came GG with his 50:50 representation in a majority Buddhist dominance.
It is reasonable and right that Sinhala majority needs majority Sinhala representation.
But this right should not preclude the rights of the indigenous minority who have every right to equal status.
How we rectify this anomaly is a conundrum the Sinhala majority government should address were it to avert another Tamil rebellion.
Dear Wijayapakla,
You have a true Sinhala Buddhist Patriot on your hand; good luck!
Hi Commentator
“Obviously, the hidden agenda of India on Sri Lanka(SL) is to keep the country unstable and be the “Boss” over them,”
How is Sri Lanka unstable? It is far more stable now that the LTTE is out of the picture. In fact there are some Indians who are worried that without the LTTE, they have no leverage in SL.
“Internationally, its agenda is to prevent the independence of Tamil Eelam(TE), which is the expressed legitimate desire of Tamils since 1976, and is the best for the peace and progress of the countries SL and TE in the island.”
I think you will agree with me that with the war over, this is the best chance for peace and progress.
Dear Susantha,
“He caused the deterioration of the eelamist -India relationship which is one of the main reasons we could crush the LTTE last year”
Actually JR created the Eelamist-India relationship in the early 1980s by getting close to the US and disrespecting India. Before 1982 there were no links between New Delhi and the Tamil militants.
“DO you expect Sri lanka’s small army to have fought the huge Indian army”
SLA would not have had to fight the Indian Army if JR had not made India the enemy.
“Even if Mahinda Rajapakse was the president he would have done the same.”
Actually Mahinda did the exact opposite of JR. He treated India very closely making frequent visits to New Delhi to keep the Indian leaders informed. Not once did he ever say anything negative about the Indians. Recently in an interview he said that Sri Lanka is India’s little sister. Therefore I assume that you entirely agree with this position.
“It is a well known fact that this 13th amendment was forced by Rajiv Ghandhi on JR.”
It is also a well-known fact that India did not begin to interfere with Sri Lankan internal affairs until after the JR-sponsored 1983 riots took place.
“Its very sad he was able to get the LTTE crushed by the Indians without wasting a single sinhalese life or even firing a bullet .”
Wrong. Indian intervention led to the 2nd JVP uprising where 40-60,000 Sinhalese were killed.
By the time that JR left the Presidency, Sri Lanka was on the verge of collapse with the LTTE, IPKF, JVP, and Tamil National Army running riot throughout the country. Premadasa brought things back under control after massacring the JVP and making a deal with the LTTE to chase away the IPKF. By all objective measures, JR was the worst leader in Sri Lankan history, almost comparable with King Sriwickremarajasinghe.
Burning_Issue,
Susantha is not a Sinhala Buddhist. I could tell the minute when he started praising JR who is loathed by all Sinhalese except for the UNP-Ranil Wickremasinghe bootlickers.
Nationalism is attached to the country whereas racism is attached to a race. There is nothing called Sinhala nationalism. It is Sri Lankan nationalism displayed by Sinhala people. There is another thing called ethno-nationalism’. This is nothing but racism with a fancy name because it is ethnicity centred. Nationalism although displayed by various ethnic groups to various levels towards the country, is not ethnicity centred.
For example, if I make Sinhala demands, Sinhala homelands, etc. that is Sinhala-whatever-ism. If I make demands for Sri Lanka as a whole completely forgetting race, that is Sri Lankan nationalism. Whether those demands favour one group more and another group less is another thing.
Due to democracy, in many instances the majority is aligned with nationalism.
For example if the American majority does not want American nationalism, it will not be there. Perhaps even America would also not be there.
wijayapala
Do you say there are no Sinhalese Buddhist nationalists in the UNP.Mr Ranil Wickremasinghe’s brother Shan Wickremasinghe is even a strong nationalist he has helped expand the Sinhalese presence in the eastern province and many of his relations are nationalist even Ranil Wickremasinghe holds an important position in the keniya viharaya.At present the only way UNP can win some votes is by getting the support of the minorities and Ranil is trying to be the minority leader so that he can have some votes not because He has any sympathy for the tamils.
with what base are you saying that JR sponsored the 83 riots.Is he responsible for the anger among the people created by tamil terrorists since 1940s.the IGP and six DIGs in the sri lanka police force at the time were tamils and these top cops made sure large amounts of tamils were promoted to high ranks in the police,was the police paralyzed is there any proof for that?RAW was helping the LTTE long before 83.India was worried that under JR Sl would become a developed country.
JR was also the first leader who handled this problem Mahinda was the 5th so Mahinda has seen the mistakes of the past 4.JR failed because of bad luck and today Sri Lanka is powerful than before India does not want China and PAkistan influence to increase in SL.and India is surrounded by enemies from North China from west pakistan from east Bangladesh and they dont want an enemy from the south side
the JVP were terrorists that destroyed the country and took the country’s economy about 10 years backwards and they were marxists so they too must be crushed but the 2nd JVP uprising should remind those people who promote devolution what would happen if ever any kind of devolution is given however I do not agree with the amount of force used by the govt to crush them much less force could have been used to crush them and it was not JR that used such force against the JVP it was premadasa
you say that JR is the worst president but what about the amount of challenges he had to face he was one of the most intelligent leaders in the whole world and I confidently say he saved Sri lanka from the greater evils he tried to build relations with India as well but it failed as he was keen on developing the country somehow and that did not go in line with the agenda of the Indian imperialists
the worst leader would be CBK as she had the whole world on her side and yet failed to crush the LTTE and tried to bring federalism which were should thank the gods that they didnt accept it she bought the country ‘s growth rate to minus figures and was one of the most corrupt governments
Susantha,may be Ranil’s brother Shan W’singhe is making amends for what his grand uncle (D.R. Wijewardena) did in 1920s in launching a vicious attack on Anagarika Dharmapala calling him a “lunatic”, and a “religious fanatic”, in his news paper,resulting in the exit of the great man from the Sri Lankan land!
OMG. Did I read that right, or did Susantha just say that the 83 riots were caused by anger towards Tamil terrorists since the 1940s???????? A few more Susantha like mindsets and could easily have ourselves another riot!!!
Kamal, I agree with you…..
It is the Sri Lankan Nationalism that is shown by the Sinhalese (may be Buddhists may be Christian) that is shown and criticised as Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism.
There are a silent majority of Sinhala-Christians who have this same “Sinhala-Buddhist Nationalism”.
What it show is that it is really Sri Lankan Nationalism.
I would like to ask this question again.
WHY is it that the Tamils want political rights in order achieve Economic Well being. The Tamils in the diasphora do not have political rights as they are insignificant minorities in most diasphoric countries in which they are residents in.
BUT they are economically well off than than most average long term residence and citizens in those countries.
If they concentrate on living peacefully securing their economic rights and well being along with ALL the other citizens in Sri Lanka who are not much better off than the average Tamil the WHOLE country Sri Lanka will be better off.
IF the Tamils continue on a path of POLITICAL RIGHTS ignoring the ECONOMIC benefits of a peaceful, stable environment in Sri Lanka then EVERYBOBY suffers and therefore the Tamils will receive their fair share of suffering…..
For example: If there was NO LTTE then Sri Lanka would have been a reasonable place to live for EVERYBODY including the the Tamils.
Remember LTTE violence was for a purpose. And that purpose was POLITICAL. Not Economic. If they the LTTE were serious about Economic well being of Tamils in Sri Lanka they would have never taken a violent path to POLITICS.
Susantha,
CBK was looking to resolve the conflict in a peaceful manner. That is why she did not pursue the war option in the manner that Mahinda did. She won a resounding victory in 1994 on a platform of peace. Many tamils supported her then.
Mahinda also invited the LTTE for talks at the begining of his tenure as President. But they refused. That is when he decided to go to war.
The President may believe in the 13 amendment and its full implementation. But there are those around him who maybe putting pressure on him not to devolve.
The SLFP should not stand for racism. They have done so in the past. It is time he got rid of the racial elements many of whom are not SLFPers. Felix did a similar thing to the marxists in the 1970′s. However, the problem is that there are no independent strong SLFP Ministers in this cabinet. Many of them cannot say “boo to a goose.”
niranjan,
It is a historical fact that he Tamil racism started well before the Sinhalese’ reaction against it well before 1956!
It started when the Tamil politicians envisaged that they would lose the special previledges they enjoyed under the British colonists.That’s why Chelvanayagum started his Federal party in 1947,even before the independence.
And they asked for 50/50 before the independence as well.
The British colonists gave the Tamils a “special treatment” for their “good behavior”,because it was the Sinhalese who staged the Wellassa uprising in 1818;it’s the Sinhalese who staged the Mathale uprising in 1848.
All along the Tamils were the obedient servants of the British Empire;even now they are the number one bootlickers of the “old blighty”!
When the Sinhalese got their due place,the racist,self consumed Tamil politicians saw it as “discrimination” against the Tamils.
So,is there a need for autonomy for Tamils?
‘we’ = civil society organizations???
Longus,
There is a need for autonomy for Tamils and the 13 amendment is the best option.
Dear niranjan;
“There is a need for autonomy for Tamils and the 13 amendment is the best option.”
How do you know ? Did anybody tell you in a dream?
Thanks!
Let me re-state the writer’s challenge – it is a personal one – and see how many intellectuals are interested
QUOTE
It may require us to examine our privileged positions; and to ensure that we are not simply reproducing circles of privilege. It will be hard UNQUOTE
please deal with this – just question yourselves – I have done so too
I salute this writer – this is the kind of moderation and self reflection that will save this country – let me repeat
SELF REFLECTION – OPEN YOUR SELF – THEN CHANGE WILL HAPPEN