Prospects For Post Conflict Reconciliation And Development In Sri Lanka: Can Singapore Be Used As A Model?
Text of a presentation as part of the Global Asia Institute Speaker Series (2010), National University of Singapore.
Introductory Remarks and Acknowledgements
Before turning to the question the title of this “conversation” poses, I want to express my appreciation for the privilege it is to be living in Singapore, and affiliated with the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, the Global Asia Institute and the National University of Singapore. Professor K.E. Seetharam, especially, has made this possible. This occasion provides me with an opportunity to both acknowledge the inspiration his leadership has provided and to thank him publically.
The other participant in this conversation, Ambassador Dayan Jayatilleka, whom I have known for more than 20 years, also deserves recognition. Anyone who studies Singapore’s development success-story well knows, as Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has emphasized, that human intelligence and productivity are its most important resource. Sri Lanka, too, has an exceptional cadre of highly educated citizens whose productivity and intelligence could produce development successes equal to or greater than Singapore’s. But sadly, mostly of those top performers are contributing their talents to Canada, the United States, Australia, Singapore and other nations. They migrated because their energy, talent, resources and connections provided opportunities to do so and because they saw no opportunities for themselves or their children in the country they love. Only a few of Sri Lanka’s very best and brightest have chosen to remain in their country devoting their talents, often at considerable personal risk, to creating a better future for all Sri Lankans. One of them is Ambassador Jayatilleka and I welcome this opportunity to publically acknowledge his contributions.
Are reconciliation and development possible?
My presentation today is about prospects for that better future, which virtually all Sri Lankans hope for, with varying degrees of optimism and pessimism. Confounding predictions of self-appointed experts, including myself, Sri Lanka’s armed forces achieved a total military victory over the LTTE. President Mahinda Rajapaksa then won a decisive mandate in a relatively free and fair election, contested by a strong opponent. An even more decisive victory by the United People’s Freedom Alliance party, in Parliamentary elections concluded just nine days ago, has consolidated his power.
In an ambitious pre-election manifesto, the Mahinda Chintana, President Rajapaksa outlined very specific and concrete goals touching on many aspects of Sri Lanka’s political economy and society – subjects included “a land of plenty,” “a disciplined and law-abiding society,” “clean water as Sri Lanka’s heritage,” “houses for all,” “electricity for everybody,” “a clean, green environment” and much more (p. 6). states in the Mahinda Chintana,”is to break the fundamentalist concepts of a traditional homeland and a separate state and empower the citizens of this country to arrive at a peaceful political solution which would devolve power to all its citizens.”(p. 52)
“For every failure we found a solution” -“ Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa Devolving some power to the Sri Lankan Tamil community, within the context of a unitary state deeply imbued with the symbolism Sri Lanka’s Sinhalese monarchy, is a challenge that President Rajapaksa’s predecessors as President and Prime Minister have faced and been unable to resolve. How might this be accomplished?
Perhaps a clue to the government’s strategy may be found in a recent interview for the Indian defense review, entitled “Nine Key Decisions that Helped Lanka Beat the LTTE,” given by Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Rajapaksa emphasized that as the first key decision, “The government took a careful review of all previous war operations and drew conclusions from them. For every failure we found a solution.”
Given this experience, it would not at all surprise me to learn that Sri Lanka’s new government, perhaps lead by Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa are reviewing previous failed attempts to simultaneously achieve three overarching goals spelled out in the Mahinda Chintana: first a strong unitary state “according Buddhism primacy of place as the state religion”, second a state that empowers “entrepreneurs with strength to conquer the world” and third a state that empowers Sri Lanka’s citizens “to arrive at a peaceful political solution which would devolve power to all of its citizens”.
It is in this spirit of drawing lessons from previous failures and finding solutions, emphasized so strongly by Defense Secretary Rajapaksa as key to the military victory, that I offer observations on possible lessons of relevance from Sri Lanka’s post independence history and from Singapore’s development experience.
Missed opportunities for reconciliation in Sri Lanka’s post-independence history
In my view, the period after 1985 has few useful lessons about achieving national unity, reconciliation and development to offer. During this period, it was the misfortune of successive Sri Lankan governments to have faced a militant group that was both extraordinarily well lead and, through the ebb and flow of violent conflict and negotiations, unwaveringly single-minded in its objectives. Repeatedly, Vellupillai Prabakharan-Ÿs unwillingness to accept political solutions, other than an independent Eelam, scuttled the initiatives of the two Sri Lankan Presidents and a Prime Minister who were willing to accept the substantial political risks that negotiation and peace-building seemed to require.
Rather it will be useful to seek lessons from periods when Sri Lankan political leaders, like President Mahinda Rajapaksa, had such overwhelming political support that they were in a position, if they chose, to expend political capital by taking concrete steps toward communal reconciliation that would have involved, at a minimum, a degree of regional power sharing as well as greater creativity and flexibility in the implementation of official language policies.
The three elections prior to the escalation of protracted conflict when a new government was swept into power with overwhelming political support will be well known to many in this audience. These were the Parliamentary elections of April 5-10, 1956, May 27, 1970 and July 21, 1977. In each, the party previously in opposition gained decisive power on a platform that 3 promised fundamental change. The 1970 and 1977 general elections were followed by new constitutions. After each election, there were missed opportunities for initiatives that could have addressed many concerns of Tamil community members, while simultaneously respecting the concerns of all but the most radical Sinhalese nationalists. In each instance, however, Sri Lanka’s political leaders chose not to expend their political capital in this way but instead, to accede to demands of the radicals.
Post 1956 -“”reasonable use of Tamil-Ÿ and the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam Pact
Choices made by S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, who came to power in a time of relative communal comity, when Sri Lanka was viewed as perhaps the most promising among newly independent nations, may have been the most tragic. Though Bandaranaike had promised to make Sinhala the official language within 24 hours, the draft of the Official Language Act for which Bandaranaike won support from his parliamentary group provided for “reasonable use of Tamil.” Bandaranaike backed down in the face of strident demands and demonstrations from communal nationalists, including some Buddhist priests.
This evoked violent demonstrations and counter demonstrations, which were made worse by Bandaranaike’s orders to Sri Lanka’s mostly unarmed police forces to exercise “maximum restraint” in restoring order. Threats of “direct action” by the Federal Party – it was not yet called the “Tamil United Liberation front” -“ led to the ill-fated Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam pact. Once again Bandaranaike backed away from a negotiated compromise agreement, a decision, which is still cited by Tamils among their litany of Sinhalese betrayals.
This marked the beginning of what James Manor has called a “poisonous” cycle in Sri Lankan politics that has damaged relations between Tamil and Sinhalese communities every since (1989, p. 269). When in power, leaders of both parties have often called for reasonable concessions on devolution issues to maintain national unity. But when in opposition many of the very same leaders have become uncompromising advocates of Buddhist-Sinhalese nationalism as a tactic to gain political support.
Post 1970 -“ The ‘Republican Constitution’
Limited time mandates that I gloss over many parallels between circumstances faced by the post- 1970 United Front Government and those presently facing Sri Lanka’s top leaders. Interestingly, the Mahinda Chintana seems to imply that this period was a golden age characterized by high levels of government integrity and public well-being. I 1977, however, an overwhelming number of Sri Lankan voters rejected Mrs. Bandaranaike’s bid for a second term in office.
For the poses of this discussion, suffice it to say that the Prime Minister did have options other than the communally divisive policies the -žRepublican Constitution-Ÿ codified and her government subsequently implemented. Memories of the 1971 JVP rebellion often highlight the actions of loyal Tamil officers in helping to restore order. Many members of the United Front Coalition, including a principal architect of the constitution, Colvin R. De Silva were only reluctant supporters of communalist policies or not supporters at all. Moreover restrictive import policies benefited Jaffna’s economy. Mrs. Bandaranaike’s government provided funds that supported founding of the University of Jaffna. In contrast to 1960, when she began her first term as Prime Minister, Mrs. Bandaranaike had become a courageous, tough-minded political leader, who functioned very differently than her late husband. She was willing take risks, act decisively face down opposition and stick with unpopular decisions.
My own view, detailed more fully in Paradise Poisoned, is that issues impacting communal relations in Sri Lanka simply did not command her full attention. In my appraisal of her second term I wrote this: (pp. 308-309). “In international settings, Mrs. Bandaranaike could speak movingly of oppression and its costs and of the feelings of oppressed people. -žOur self-respect demands that when we speak of self-reliance, we [in developing nations] should not have to address appeals to other nations for succour and sustenance, -Ÿ she told assembled UN delegates. These words were not so different from those of Tamil leaders expressing their aspirations for political freedom. Had Mrs. Bandaranaike brought the brilliance and energy to domestic communal problems that she brought to international affairs, I believe relations between Sri Lanka’s Sinhalese and Tamil communities might have followed a very different path.”
Post 1977 -“ Strengthened Presidential power under a “Gaullist” constitution
Let me next turn to the last Sri Lankan President, before President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who had sufficient discretionary power to reverse the trend of deteriorating communal relations in Sri Lanka. I refer, of course, to President J.R. Jayewardene. In 1991, it was my good fortune to spend a number of hours with President Jayewardene, discussing Sri Lanka’s post independence history and his Presidency.
Like President Rajapaksa, J.R. Jayewardene gained office with an overwhelming mandate. His avowed commitment to communal reconciliation and at least modest efforts to devolve power through “District Development Councils” appears to have been genuine. He believed that communal reconciliation was an important, although not the most important, element in an economic development program that was to be modelled in many respects on the economic development that had begun to successfully transform Singapore from -žthird world-Ÿ to -žfirst world-Ÿ status. He believed that rapid economic growth, with benefits widely shared among all Sri Lankans, would dampen communal tensions. He recognized the importance of good governance and promised righteous leadership based on Buddhist moral precepts. “The ideal man,” Jayewardene had written, earlier in his career, “is the man who is not addicted to wealth or possessions, to power and to the object of his desires. He serves others rather than himself. The ideal state -žmust be composed of ideal men; men without greed, hatred or ignorance.”(1982, pp. 66-67)
President Jayewardene was, however, a many faceted leader. He campaigned on an inspiring vision of an economically developed Sri Lanka. But in his climb “up the greasy pole” (to use K.M. de Silva’s phrasing) he had perfected, he believed, the ability to make realistic political calculations necessary to achieve visionary goals. Like many political leaders, he believed that relatively unfettered personal political power was prerequisite to realizing his vision of an economically developed Sri Lanka. When he was sworn in as Sri Lanka’s first Executive President, in February 1978, it appeared that he could do almost as he pleased.
The tragedies of communal relations under an administration that began with such promise are well documented and need not be discussed in detail. President Jayewardene saw himself as the quintessential political realist. He did not grasp that events in Jaffna, the seat of Tamil Militancy, could be more than a troublesome sideshow.
He knew that only three percent of Sri Lanka’ voters lived in Jaffna district and only two percent more in Batticaloa district, where there was also strong opposition to his government. He viewed most Tamils as law-abiding citizens who opposed violence and were ambivalent about separatism. He did not grasp the reality that security force detachments that were ill equipped, ill trained and almost entirely Sinhalese were more likely to stoke the fires of communalism, in both the north and the south, than to quell them. For him, as for his predecessors, the political main event continued to be in the South. His principal political adversaries continue to be Mrs. Bandaranaike and her allies. His political priority was to keep them demoralized, while his programs transformed Sri Lanka economically.
How could such an able political leader have miscalculated so badly? In a televised press conference, following the Indo-Lanka accord signing, President Jayewardene’s self-appraisal was candid. Responding to a reporter’s query about why he had not earlier reached agreement with Tamil political leaders, his self appraisal was candid: “It is a lack of courage on my part, a lack of intelligence on my part, a lack of foresight, on my part.” (De Silva and Wriggins, 1994, p. 645).
Does Sri Lanka’s history offer lessons that might be applicable to present circumstances?
It might seem premature to draw parallels between circumstances of the three political leaders I have highlighted and those facing President Mahinda Rajapaksa, but I believe it is realistic. Consider these parallels:
President Rajapaksa has an overwhelming mandate. The opposition is likely to remain splintered and ineffective for the foreseeable future.
Also, it seems, despite Sri Lanka’s complex proportional representation system, that President Rajapaksa’s United People’s Freedom Alliance will be able to command the 2/3 parliamentary majority necessary to pass constitutional amendments. How the government might use this opportunity to consolidate and perpetuate its power, in order to accelerate development, is an open topic of discussion.
There is also a real possibility that overwhelming presidential and parliamentary election wins, might represent the zenith of a UPFA government’s popularity. While there is optimism about Sri Lanka’s economic future, there are also vulnerabilities, most notably high government deficits, high inflation, the burdens of heavy defense expenditures and the possibility of international sanctions against Sri Lanka, affecting trade, foreign investment and the flow of funds from international donors. There are questions about how the government might deal with rising discontent produced by deteriorating economic conditions. This was a challenge that President Jayewardene’s government faced in 1982. Many believe it provoked the decision to hold a flawed referendum extending the life of Parliament (with its overwhelming UNP majority) for an additional term.
Facing these circumstances, the question becomes “how might President Rajapaksa escape the pitfalls to which predecessors fell prey?” How might he, in contrast to President Jayewardene’s self-acknowledged shortcomings, exercise “courage,” “foresight” and “intelligence” during his second term? In offering my reflections, I recognize for quite understandable reasons, there has been little receptivity on the part of Sri Lanka’s top leadership circle to recommendations from western scholars what should be done. I acknowledge that my views about the likelihood that Sri Lanka’s army could defeat the LTTE were wrong. Nonetheless, I believe my views on 6 development and reconciliation in Sri Lanka, based on more that two decades of study, may yet have something to offer. I have spent considerable time studying the Mahinda Chintana, which I see as a forward-looking, even visionary document. It provides a detailed, comprehensive cataloguing of the challenges Sri Lanka faces as well as concrete, specific goals. It recognizes that details must be fleshed in, over time and in consultation with various stakeholders in Sri Lankan society. What priorities should be emphasized in moving forward on this ambitious agenda?
Reconciliation should be acknowledged as a requisite of economic development.
First, I believe President Rajapaksa should continue his public acknowledgement that for Sri Lanka’s economic development to reach its full potential, communal reconciliation is essential. The greater the success in reconciling Sri Lanka’s majority Sinhalese and minority Sri Lanka Tamil communities the greater the probability that polices intended to develop Sri Lanka will succeed. Sri Lanka must, indeed, become “a united motherland -“ one nation with one vision.” To me this sounds very much like the agenda Lee Kuan Yew’s People’s Action Party proposed to Singapore’s diverse peoples as the new nation faced the challenges of survival, post independence.
At three previous junctures cited in this talk, Sri Lankan political leaders made political calculations that acceding to or encouraging communally divisive voices would best serve Sri Lanka. The temptation to use communalism as a basis for political mobilization, in order to secure or retain power, is always present. A quarter-century of protracted conflict, due in large part to decisions of leaders who could have chosen otherwise, should provide enough evidence that the short term political gains such tactics provide do not justify the long term, invariably damaging, consequences. To acknowledge this reality is not, for a single moment, to excuse or justify terrorism. Like many Sri Lankans, I have lost friends and mentors to the bullets and bombs of LTTE assassins.
There may be no developing country that, for its size, has a greater reservoir of professional talent among its Diaspora communities, both Sinhalese and Tamil. I believe Sri Lankans would return home, in large numbers, if they believed that economic opportunities in a secure, inclusive society focused on clear development goals awaited them. President Rajapaksa can provide leadership that creates such opportunities. For evidence, one need only consider China and India’s experience, where books such as Kishore Mahbubani’s The New Asian Hemisphere (2008) document the degree to which bright young men and women are returning home to fuel economic development.
Sustainable development should be Sri Lanka’s overriding national priority.
Second, I believe President Rajapaksa, should, indeed, make sustainable development Sri Lanka’s overriding national priority, as the Mahinda Chintana pledges to do. In pursuing this goal Sri Lanka’s leaders should be should be mandated by the President to emulate Defense Secretary Rajapaksa’s model for winning the war. They should learn from past failures and for every failure find a solution, drawing in part from the successful development experiences of others, especially in Asia. In the 1960s and 1970s, there was little consensus about the path to successful development. Experts from whom Sri Lankan leaders sought advice and academics who trained them, especially at the London School of Economics, differed widely. But now, there are success stories to be learned from. One of these is Singapore. In his succinct and lucidly argued 2007 volume, Singapore’s Success, development economist Henri Ghesquiere highlights three of the most important lessons that he gleaned from studying Singapore’s post-independence development trajectory. “First, Singapore followed an integrated approach to development. Outcomes, policies, institutions, social and cultural values and the political dynamics of implementation reinforced one another.-Ÿ [By pursuing an integrated approach to development, across a broad spectrum of policy areas] “-¦health, fiscal and monetary policy, education, transportation and the like,”-¦ “the government created an intricate network of mutually reinforcing linkages producing a powerful outcome.” (pp. 167-168).
“A second theme-¦was the distinction between basic principles or core functions-¦ and their specific application in the context of a given country-¦ Good institutions can take a variety of forms. Each country must fashion the specifics of its policies and institutions to its own geographical and historical conditions, while keeping to general principles that have proved to be robust over time and across countries.” (p. 169)
“Third, leadership is imperative for effective governance-¦ Singapore succeeded because its leadership was assiduous, highly intelligent in a practical way, determined to achieve shared prosperity and committed to act with integrity.” “Leading with vision and fortitude is possible,” Ghesquiere concludes, “Its benefits can be invaluable. That is Singapore’s ultimate lesson.”
None of these broad principles are inconsistent with the central messages of the Mahinda Chintana. Indeed, the Mahinda Chintana affirms them, while adapting them and highlighting their relevance to Sri Lanka’s distinctive spiritual, cultural, historical and context.
How might these lessons, and others, best be put to use? In the second volume of his remarkable autobiographical testament (2000) Singapore’s “Minister Mentor,” Lee Kuan Yew, described two key factors helping to shape his policies that seem particularly relevant to President Rajapaksa’s circumstances. Certainly no one would characterize Lee Kuan Yew as a pliant, uncritical emulator of Western developed-world practices, but he was open to learning about political economies of western nations in order to see what lessons could be appropriately be put to use for Singapore’s benefit.
In this learning process Minister Mentor acknowledges the “crucial” role played by Dutch Economic Advisor, Dr. Albert Winsemius. Dr. Winsemius served Singapore on a pro- bono basis for 23 years, working closely not only with the Prime minister but with the architects of Singapore’s economy, Goh Keng Swee and Hong Sui Sen.
Is there a highly respected, disinterested advisor who could provide a similar window of experience and knowledge to supplement the backgrounds of President Rajapaksa and his close advisors, especially his brothers Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa? In fact there is an individual with a background similar in many respects to that of Dr. Winsemius, deeply knowledgeable about the economic foundations of Singapore’s success as well as the global economic context in which success has been achieved. I refer to my Lee Kuan Yew School Colleague and the author of Singapore’s Success, Henri Ghesquiere. He is with us here today. Of course I cannot say President Rajapaksa could -“ or should – be prevailed upon to request his services. Nor can I say whether Dr. Ghesquiere would agree to play a role Sri Lanka similar to the role Dr. Winsemius played in Singapore. But these possibilities should not be ruled out.
Let me follow the parallels between President Rajapaksa’s circumstances in Sri Lanka and Lee Kuan Yew’s early years of leadership a bit further.
In 1968, not long after a decisive PAP election victory, Prime Minister Lee took a short sabbatical at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. He writes, “I had been in 8 office nine years, he and needed to recharge my batteries.” The lessons he learned from conversations at Harvard deepened his knowledge of American Society and international political economy. In particular, they provided “a valuable lesson on the ever changing nature of technology, industry and markets and how costs, especially wages in labour intensive industries, determined profits.” (2000, pp. 73-75).
Could there be a lesson here for President Rajapaksa, a highly gifted, visionary, political leader, but a product of Sri Lanka’s Singhalese heartland whose international political economic experience has been limited? If Sri Lanka is to become a home for “Entrepreneurs with strength to conquer the world,” perhaps a sabbatical in which Sri Lanka’s President seeks to deepen his understanding of the world Sri Lankan entrepreneurs are setting out to conquer might be invaluable. Sri Lanka’s present circumstances are probably more propitious than those Singapore faced in 1968, when Prime Minister Lee temporarily turned over the reins of government to his deputy, Goh Keng Swee.
Where might such a sabbatical be taken? In this era of the new Asian hemisphere, the National University of Singapore and, more specifically, the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, might be the ideal setting. But probably I am venturing too far into the realm of speculation.
My point bottom line point is this: the goals set forth in the Mahinda Chintana may seem fanciful, but certainly no more so that the goals Singapore’s leaders set for themselves in the years immediately following independence. Moreover, the lessons from Singapore and elsewhere are now available, which was not the case in 1965. They can be put to good use, especially in a country as advantaged as Sri Lanka, with a talented Diaspora, Tamil as well as Singhalese, whose members would love to return home, if given proper incentives.
Towards a bright future for Sri Lanka: Buddhism as a reconciling force
But how are the divisive fissures in Sri Lankan society that have hitherto poisoned promising development agendas to be overcome? The experiences of S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, Sirimavo Bandaranaike and J.R. Jayewardene might suggest that the obstacles created by these divisive fissures are insurmountable. I disagree. I believe that a gifted, powerful political leader such as President Rajapaksa can create a discourse in Sri Lanka through which Buddhism becomes a reconciling, rather than a divisive force. How might this be done?
The story in the twenty-fifth chapter of the Mahavamsa, describing how Sinhalese King Dutthagamini united Lanka under one rule, by defeating Tamil King Elara, is known to virtually all Sinhalese schoolchildren. The chronicle tells how, after winning his great victory, Dutthagamini experienced remorse. Speaking to Buddhist monks who had come to attend him, he queried “how shall there be any comfort for me, O venerable sirs, since by me was caused the slaughter of a great host numbering millions?”
The monks are said to have replied. “From this deed arises no hindrance in thy way to heaven. Only one and a half human beings have been slain by here by thee, oh lord of men. The one had come unto the three refuges; the other had taken on himself the five precepts. Unbelievers and evil men were the rest, not more to be esteemed than beasts.”
However another warrior king, the great Emperor Asoka is also revered by Sri Lankans. Some sources describe him as the greatest propagator of the Buddhist faith next the Lord Buddha himself. We know more of Asoka than most leaders of his time because of the unique method he 9 chose to chronicle his philosophy and instruct his subjects, through edicts that were etched on rocks and pillars throughout his realm.
There are parallels between the legend of King Dutthagamini and the ruler, who early in his reign was known as Asoka the Fierce but later as Dharma Asoka, Asoka the Righteous. His transformation is chronicled in perhaps the most widely quoted of the “Rock Edicts”, the Thirteenth. Like Dutthagamini, Asoka won a great military victory. It was over the rival Kalingas. Several hundred thousand enemy soldiers were slain and Kalinga civilians experienced severe privation. In is written in the 13th Rock Edict that following the victory, “There was remorse of His Sacred Majesty having conquered the Kalingas. For where an independent country is forcibly reduced, that there are slaughter, death and deportations of people has been considered very painful and deplorable by His Sacred Majesty.” Following the victory, the edict describes how “became intense His Sacred Majesty’s observance of Dharma, love of Dharma and his preaching of Dharma.” Missionary work throughout his realm and beyond became Asoka’s mode of conquest, “the conquest that by this (the Dharma) is won everywhere, that conquest, again, everywhere is productive of a feeling of love.” Asoka advises his descendents to forgo military conquests, however, “if a conquest is theirs (or pleases them) they should relish forbearance and mildness of punishment and that they should consider that only as conquest which is moral conquest-¦”
Asoka’s missionary efforts directed towards “the beauteous isle of Lanka” are chronicled in Chapters Thirteen through Nineteen of the Mahavamsa including the story of how the great Bodhi tree at Anuradhapura came to be planted. The agent of conversion is described as beautiful boy, Asoka’s son, who became “the great Thera, Mahinda, of lofty wisdom.” I am assuming, though I can’t say for sure, that most Sri Lankans know that their President is named after the monk who, according to legend, converted Sri Lanka to Buddhism, the son of Asoka the Righteous.
Is it beyond the realm of possibility, that President Mahinda Rajapaksa, architect of perhaps the greatest military victory in Sri Lankan history since that of Dutthugamini over Elara, could choose Asoka the righteous as a role model? It is possible that he could commit himself to a vision that was mooted by J.R. Jayewardene in his 1977 campaign but, sadly, became little more than a sound bite, the Dharmista Society? I refuse to dismiss this as impossible. Buddhist traditions and practices offer much in the way of guidance for reconciliation and for humane, sustainable development. As we know, there are countervailing Buddhist traditions and practices that have been influential as well. It is a matter of choosing.
Does this sound impossible? So did the military defeat of the LTTE not long ago.
Restoring Sri Lanka to its place as a development success-story for the world
My first contact with Sri Lanka was as a young scholar when I became personally acquainted with Morris W. Morris and with his classic, Measuring the Condition of the World’s Poor (1979). This path-breaking work was the first to highlight Sri Lanka as a unique development success-story: a country that, while achieving relatively modest levels of economic development, had successfully met the needs of virtually all its people for an acceptable physical quality of life. Later, in my co-authored book, Ending Hunger: An Idea Whose Time Has Come, I wrote about Sri Lanka’s rice ration program (later decried by development economists as unsustainable), which sought to make the principle of food sufficiency as a basic human right a matter of public policy.
Though we knew relatively little about the country, Sri Lanka was a beacon light for idealistic young development scholar-practitioners, such as myself. It has the human resources, natural resources and spiritual resources to play this role once again. Its contribution could be unique. It could bring to its development process lessons that success stories like Singapore have to offer. But the context in which those lessons are applied could be uniquely Sri Lankan; uniquely Buddhist. It could be a context that is humane, inclusive, forgiving and affirming; freed from anger and recrimination. These are themes that appear, again and again, throughout the Lord Buddha’s teachings. Exactly how such a context might take shape is not for me to say. This must be a task for Sri Lankans, not a foreigner. But I believe a very useful starting point could be the precepts and example of Asoka the Righteous.
John Richardson is author of Paradise Poisoned: Learning about Conflict, Terrorism and Development from Sri Lanka’s Civil Wars (2005). He is Professor of International Development, School of International Service, American University, Washington, D.C.; Visiting Professor, Lee Kwan Yew School of Public Policy, and Global Asia Institute, National University of Singapore.
60 Comments
Leave a Reply
Subscribe to Content Updates
iPhone app
Tamil refugees started to go into Canada and Australia about 30 years ago, because the countries belonged to the British Empire. Undoubtedly, they contributed economically to these countries.
As the wave of persecution against the Tamils became “tidal”, in the de facto state of Tamil Eelam(TE); with arbitrary arrests, torture, disappearances, murder and genocide; Tamils voiced their concerns internationally. But countries failed to take appropriate action and take the insane government of Sri Lanka(GOSL) to the “intensive care unit” of the UN and the Commowealth for proper “treatment”.
Obviously, Canada and Australia were gulping the blatant lies of the GOSL and were totally misled. Australia even permitted a war criminal soldier from SL, who could multiply lies, to be the High Commissioner.
Wrong information, wrong decisions and wrong values sent wrong message to SL.
On top of it , the PR firms in Britain namely Saachi and Saachi and Bell Pottinger, hired by the GOSL to do the dirty work, spread absolute lies against Tamil politics, TE leadership and Tamil refugees.
The dirty propaganda of Bell Pottinger was forcefully exposed in the British parliament last week.
Tamil squabbles are not “acts of terror”. Freedom fighters of TE are combatants and not “terrorists”.
It was logical for countries to question as to how the LTTE, considered fit to hold peace talks, became “terrorists” suddenly. But Canada and Australia blindly joined the band waggon without proper reasoning and branded the LTTE as “terrorists”.
Tamils are not against SL. They are for TE. Tamil refugees are not economic migrants and fleeing collectively is not “human traffiking”.
How could the opinion of the citizens be correct without leadership to the truth with human values?
Evil against Tamils done by any country, instigated by the GOSL and its PR firms is criminal and should be stopped.
Australia and Canada should study their past good actions against apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia and address the issues of the people of TE, putting their heart and soul together, with a will to judge themselves and be rational with morality.
Dear the Professor Richardson,
I am very pleased to be writing to you. From your name I am thinking you are white man. It is very hard to be telling these days. Sometimes some people having white name without white face. Like president Mahinda who is also called the Percy which is a fully White name. But the president we are all knowing is fully in the black.
Anyway I am thinking you are fully white and am writing to you pleased to be doing so. I like the white people. They are always happy. Always laughing at us.
I am very happy to be hearing that you are recognising Sri Lanka is Buddhist land. For 2500 years it is Buddhist. When the Buddha is passing away he is telling the Lord Sakra, please be looking after that island because that is where Buddhism is going to be, even if nothing else is going to be there.
I am also very happy that you are having the confidence in Sri Lanka to be Buddhist. For 2500 years we are having Buddhism but we are not able to be Buddhist. You are now having the confidence that what we are not able to be doing for 2500 years we are able to be doing now. I am very happy to be hearing that.
But, my dear professor let me be telling you, we are already fully Buddhist now. Under the President Mahinda we have become fully Buddhist, for first time in 2500 years. President is himself showing the way. He is showing good Buddhist example of forgiving, forgetting and the reconciliation. Let me explain how and why.
He is putting the Fonseka in the jail and saying you nasty fellow, beg for forgiveness and I will forgive you. But the Fonseka sitting in the jail calling president bandicoot and kalawedda, not begging for the forgiveness. This is showing that president having forgiveness. Only the Fonseka is too arrogant to be begging for it.
President is also showing he can forget. When he is young man he is going to the Geneva with petition to complain about disappearing people in Sri Lanka. Those days when he is hearing about disappearing people he is taking the sarong right up to the ear wanting to go and bash the government. That is why he is taking petition to the Geneva side to bash the government from the abroad. But today if you are saying Geneva he is looking at you like you are making joke and asking, Geneva? What Geneva? Is this Geneva man, woman or child? Then he is patting you on the back side and laughing. That is showing he is very forgetful man. Forgiving and forgetting also at the same time.
He is also for the reconciliation. He is already reconcilliating with the KP, the Karuna and the Pillayan. He is also calling the Ranil to the Temple trees for the reconciliation and Ranil is going and coming fully recociled to being in the opposition forever and ever. He is also calling other peoples from the opposition for the reconciliation. They are going to the Temple Trees and never coming back.
So as you can see professor we are already good Buddhist country with the president leading the way like ancient king. In fact he is better than ancient king because he is doing ancient thing in modern time. And please do not compare us to the Singapore peoples and our president to the Lee Kuan Yooo. We are having respect for the Chinese people and the Lee Kuan Yooo but everybody knowing we are better than the Chinese people. Chinese people always looking ahead, we are knowing that and we are respecting that. That is why the Chincese people having little eyes, like they are looking over the horizon for what is coming. But the Sri Lankan peoples are doing better. We are having big eyes like saucer because we are already seeing what is coming to us over the horizon and we are not liking it.
So once again professor, I Am thanking you for your kind words, but please be happy that in Sri Lanka we are already having Buddhism very very deep. So deep you are needing the bunker busting bombs to find it.
Post-conflict?
Is this post-conflict;
http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=9787
Challenge to good governance posed by budget, Jehan Perera, Chairman, National Peace Council, 25 October 2010:
”… When people are taken back and put into the midst of land in which all buildings and infrastructure is destroyed, and the jungle has grown, it is not resettlement where the government can wash its hands, and say that it has done its duty, and now the people must fend for themselves. It is indeed tragic that the government is prepared to devote so much of resources to satisfy the needs of its defence budget and so little to satisfy its war displaced people….”
http://www.groundviews.org/2010/09/23/submissions-before-lessons-learnt-reconciliation-committee-llrc-by-chandra-jayaratne/
Submission before Lessons Learnt & Reconciliation Committee (LLRC) by Chandra Jayaratne, 23 September 2010:
‘’… IDP’s being denied access to their former places of residence ….
Preventing willing and capable NGO’s/INGO’s, international community and Diaspora from helping people in need at their most vulnerable moment of need ….. Free availability of liquor, cigarettes and narcotics …..
Decision making in the hands of the military or officials from the Central Government ….. ‘’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11328159
Young Tamils in Sri Lanka ‘being held without charge’, 16 September:
.”… Mr Godage told the BBC he was especially angry about 500 young people who were being held purely on suspicion in a Colombo jail, Welikada, under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. ”
http://transcurrents.com/tc/2010/08/sinhala_nationalist_mind_set_s.html
Sinhala nationalist mindset seems incapable of comprehending what Tamils are articulating: Revisiting Jaffna BY Dushy Ranetunge, 14 August 2010:
‘’…The A9 highway from Omanthai until Elephant Pass is dominated by predominantly Sinhalese soldiers, who even operate the small restaurants by the roadside. This military presence seems overwhelming and stifling…. They also without exception viewed the many roadside bunkers in the Jaffna Peninsula and soldiers guarding most junctions as creating a perception of an army of occupation. ….
Our visit to Jaffna exposed and confirmed that all the conditions and discontent that led to the Tamil rebellion are still present today. The only ingredient that is lacking is the combustion of anti-Tamil riots such as in 1956, 1958, 1977, 1981, and 1983. …”
http://transcurrents.com/tc/2010/06/vanni_northern_sri_lanka_where.html
http://www.asianews.eu/news-en/Vanni,-northern-Sri-Lanka,-where-war-has-never-ended-18558.html
Vanni, northern Sri Lanka, where war has never ended, Melanie Manel Perera, 1 June 2010:
”The area is still actually in the hands of the military, which allowed the return of the population but force them to live in absolute poverty. The military blocks any attempts to improve their lives, but does not stop abuse and violence. … In view of the massive needs of the population for basic services and infrastructure, and the very weak civil administration and reluctance of the government to allow NGOs access to help those in need, people are compelled to depend on the military for even basic services like water…. Permission has been rejected for counselling, capacity building and empowerment activities.”
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWFiles2010.nsf/FilesByRWDocUnidFilename/SVAN-843LTD-full_report.pdf/$File/full_report.pdf
Banking on Solutions, A real-time evaluation of UNHCR’s shelter grant programme for returning displaced people in Northern Sri Lanka, March 2010: ”….The extent of shelter destruction appears to have been underestimated …. government restrictions on NGO access limited programming options, …. Movement along the A9 is also still restricted for international NGOs and UN agencies. …”
http://www.un.org/children/conflict/_documents/SriLankavisitReport09.pdf/
Mission Report: Visit of Major General (ret.) Patrick Cammaert, Special Envoy of the Special Representative for Children & Armed Conflict, to Sri Lanka, 05-11 December 2009:
‘’It should be noted that the problem of accessing camps for humanitarian personnel persists throughout the country.”
Dear Professor
How could you say post-conflict?
Please know the ground reality.
Tamils are very thankful to Tisaranee for baring the ground reality in many of her articles at a time when journalists have to get MoD clearance to collect facts and spend time on analysis.
http://transcurrents.com/tc/2010/08/displacing_northern_tamils_to.html
Displacing Northern Tamils to set up Sinhala military cantonments would increase resentment by Tisaranee Gunasekara, 1 August 2010:
‘’… Ragamwela villagers are Sinhalese; they can protest against the injustice done to them, still, without being labelled ‘Tiger pawns’. But protests are an unaffordable luxury for the residents of three Tamil villages in Murukkundi, displaced from their homes when the state confiscated 4,000 acres in Kilinochchi to build 12,000 prefabricated houses for military families. …”
Prof. Richardson,
You are putting the cart before the horse, talking about development a la Singapore, when thousands of Tamil families are still trying to get on their feet, left to fend for themselves in the jungles populated by snakes and some criminals, whether in the SLA or in the broader society at large, and seeking justice for war crimes. That your speech had not a single mention about justice for war crimes, is telling.
We don’t live in some mythical era where rulers can commit war crimes on the mere say-so of some ignorant Buddhist priests or advice from abominable hangers-on like Jayatilleka. Even as your speech appears on Groundviews, I see a Times of India news item that Mahinda Rajapaksa has had to cancel his visit to the UK for fear of being arrested as a war criminal under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction.
You couldn’t be more wrong in saying that talented Tamil expatriates are willing to come back to a developed country under the Rajapaksa regime (transformed or not). I stood first in Sri Lanka in the engineering stream and live in the US now. I happen to know many, many of those ” talented expatriates,” and I can assure you that 99% of them are not willing to go back as long as the current regime continues.
When there is some justice and accountability for war crimes, when there is a basic sense of concern for the rights of the Tamil people and return to the rule of law, they will consider it.
Richardson has conveniantly omitted mention of the most important promise in the infamous Chinthanaya – the abolition of the Executive Presidency.
This was totally ignored in the new Post-Election Edition of the Chinthanaya.
Mahinda Rajapakse knows very well that his main prop for repressive self-centered governance as of now, is the Executive Presidency, and that without it, he will not survive – nor will his relatives,cronies and sycophants inside & outside parliament, even for a short time.
I hope Richardson will visit, tour areas of, and speak with citizens of, the northeast without being accompanied by sri lankan intelligence officers and/or army personnel.
I also hope that he will read above two posts and also read fully:-
http://nesohr.org/hrr/?show=all
to learn what went on in sri lanka since independence.
“Abominable”? Haven’t heard that in decades. Reminds me of a charachter in one of the Enid Blyton stories ( perhaps the Twins at St Claire’s series) who was nicknamed ‘Mamzelle Abominable’ by her students:)
Sam Tambimuttu
When you say ,”As the wave of persecution against the Tamils became “tidal”, in the de facto state of Tamil Eelam(TE); with arbitrary arrests, torture, disappearances, murder and genocide;…..”, I thought that you were talking about the LTTE’s oppression of Tamils in the ”de facto Tamil Eelam”, as it was under the control of the LTTE!
For the sake of accuracy the rest of the article should be corrected as follows:
…..The Sri Lankans voiced their concern internationally. But countries failed to take appropriate action and take the insane Tamil Tigers(LTTE) to the “intensive care unit” of the UN and the Commowealth for proper “treatment”.
Obviously, Canada and Australia were gulping the blatant lies of the LTTE and were totally misled. Australia even permitted a war criminal LTTE bomb maker to squat free, who could multiply lies, to the Australian public.
Wrong information, wrong decisions and wrong values sent a wrong message to the international community.
On top of it , propagandists of the LTTE in Britain namely the World Tamil Forum and Adele Balasingham and, hired by the Tamil diaspora to do the dirty work, spread absolute lies against Sri Lankan politics, SL leadership about bogus refugees.
The dirty propaganda of the Tamil diaspora is not yet fully exposed in the British parliament last week.
Tamil terrorism is not child’s play; the terrorests who were fighting for TE are not “freedom fighters”.
It was logical for countries to decide how the LTTE, considered fit to hold peace talks, showed that they are real “terrorists” by going back to terror each time. But Canada and Australia blindly joined the band waggon without proper reasoning and branded the GOSL as “persecuting”.
The GOSL is not against the Tamils. It was fighting a war on terror. Tamil refugees are not fleeing alleged persecution, but collectively economic refugees and victims of “human trafficking”.
How could the opinion of the citizens be correct without leadership of the scandal laden Tamil diaspora open to the truth with human values?
Evil against Sri Lankan Sinhalese, Muslims and Tamils done by the LTTE, backed by the dreamers of a Tamil Eelam overseas is criminal and should be stopped.
Australia and Canada should study their past good actions against apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia and address the issues of the human smugglers from Sri Lanka, putting their heart and soul together, with a will to judge themselves and be rational with morality
Agnos
Why should the economic refugees return to Sri Lanka? They never will and never should! Sri Lanka doesn’t have the comforts like the USA! Please don’t talk rubbish! Do your job and lead your comfy life without talking hypocratical garbage!
Correction: My previous posting which appeared on Noverber 5,@ 9.21p.m. should be addressed to “Sam Thambipillai”, the writer of the first comment posted here!
Dear the Mervyn Silva
“Sometimes some people having white name without white face.”
How about “Mervyn Silva,” that sounds like a white name not Sinhala name. How did a descendant of King Dutugemunu come to be called “Mervyn Silva.”
Dear the Wijayapala,
I am thanking you for your response.
When you are coming down from so far away in the history it is very hard to be staying the same. Lot of mixings and matchings going on. Just like in the politics. If the Prabhakaran getting the Ealam and not big wound in head I am happy to say I am all the way from the Elara also. You are never knowing when you need the favour from the Jaffna side.
However, I am assuring you my friend, even though my name is white, my face – and my heart – are fully black.
longus,
“But countries failed to take appropriate action and take the insane Tamil Tigers(LTTE) to the “intensive care unit” of the UN and the Commowealth for proper “treatment”
Could you explain then how the LTTE came to be declared internationally as a terrorist group?
“Obviously, Canada and Australia were gulping the blatant lies of the LTTE and were totally misled. Australia even permitted a war criminal LTTE bomb maker to squat free, who could multiply lies, to the Australian public.
Wrong information, wrong decisions and wrong values sent a wrong message to the international community.”
Could you please give us some references to articles from the 1980s to 2009 in Canadian, Australian media that depicted the LTTE as the wronged party, and GOSL as the persecuting party? If the LTTE are hailed there as heroes, how is it that Canadians reacted so strongly against the Sun Sea arrival of SL Tamil refugees, suspected to contain former LTTE cadres? Similarly in Australia.
The main obstacle that hindered the progress of Sri lanka was the political battle/uncertainty for the power/supremacy by various groups in Sri lanka, in my opinion. During the periods that had no battle for political power the country prospered, you can see if you just go through the history. Therefore, the first condition for “prosperity”, definitely is nothing other than ” political stability”. Only a politically stable nation can produce a clear vision/ philosophy for the ” nation”. No “multi-headed animal” can find a single way to progress.
Now with the defeat of the LTTE, a powerful divisional element has been eliminated that the country has got a wonderful opportunity to form its vision based on its own philosophical heritage, while not forgetting and being on the surveillance of the alien divisional ideologies and elements. I think the national pride is being formed eliminating the ” barry- barry” ailment that had persuaded the nation for begging for the ideas and material resources from the so called “Mighty Nations” out side our country, which always considered examples to us. I think now the nation has realized that we are no second nation to any and we ourselves have the potential to form and realize our goals. I think this is the next foremost important requirement of a nation which aspire to go up in the ladder, upliftment of national pride.
With the establishment political stability and the national pride, that would formulate an appropriate national vision, needs some “practical step takings” in realizing the national goals of multifaceted development, not forgetting the priority, the economic development. I think following “shadow steps” are some of the essentials in a comprehensive programme.
1. “Formation of a Legal System (Constitution + ++)” based on justice and national aspirations.
2. “Strict adherence to Rule of Law” based on such a Just Legal system.
3. “Proper Human Resource Development Plan” to enhance the knowledge skills and attitudes of the people ( Mainly introducing changes to the Education and Training System of the country) to suit the aspirations of the nation.
4. “Proper Human Resource Placement Plan”, that ensures the due place to the proper person. ( which would ensure mobilizing of the valuable human resource of the country that is being used to “enrich the greener pastures” of the world.
Thanks!
It is not easy to win war
but to win war you need effective mobilization of hatred
to win peace you need to mobilize social capital – promote sanity (not insanity)
since may 19. 2009 there was a continuation of hatred and insanity – our leader is still at war
he is the first leader since Sri Wickrma to see enemies behind every bush – so now there is a khaki man behind every bush
the wheels are turning towards a police state – family dictatorship.
the norms of civility – civilized behaviour dont apply to those who are behind the president
our intellectuals are incapable of calling a spade a spade – I dont see much signs of intelligence and discipline – from the political leadership
I fully agree with great white man that everything can change miraculously and MR become Asoka – that is precisely one of the tales he would like us to swallow
you can be sure that you will remain a warmly welcome guest in this land for some time to come – for that I offer you my humble applause
when you come again to SL look hard for signs of buddhism – there is no buddhism left in the corridors of power and wealth – it has departed like all good things depart when conditions are not right
sri lanka LOST its buddhism with the drift to the south west after the polonnaruva period
that was also a drift from spirituality to materialism – now we can say with certainty that all traces of buddhism have been wiped out from institutionalized buddhism – the other buddhism – the spiritual and personalized and internalized buddhism LIVES but it will not be seen until it wishes to be seen
like the dalai lama sri lankans must now get out with whatever buddhism they have and save it.
we appreciate your positive thoughts – like a lot of people you need a reality check – but sri lanka like your thoughts is not a real place
it is an artficial pseudo community – a place that thrives on names and concepts and appearances
Buddha wanted sri lanka to show what samsara really is – and we have never let the Buddha down in this respect
we are mighty proud of this achievement
MG
It was due to Canada’s spineless immigration policy that they allowed the Ocean Lady to dock in Victoria in 2009, and treated them as “innocent people fleeing the persecution by the Sri Lankan government”, in spite of the warnings given by various sources. Now those who thus came are regugees in Canada living on ‘free money’.
When the Sun Sea came with its cargo of economic refugees and fleeing cadres, Canadian immigration officers just escorted them and allowed them to land. Once again they say these are the people who are ‘persecuted’ in Sri Lanka, when in fact this is part of a major racket of people smuggling. Now, of course as there is evidence of more and more ships coming to Canada there in opposition from thr public! Because it has come to a point that directly affect them.
This public sympathy towards the ‘human smugglers’, ‘economic refugee’ and the ‘queue jumpers’ is a direct result of governments falling prey to years and years of LTTE propaganda.
longus,
I would like some evidence of media reports from Canada and Australia that depict LTTE as the wronged ones, and GOSL as the persecutors, especially those that go back over the decades, since you say it’s been years and years of LTTE propaganda.
LTTE did not get classified as a terrorist organization because governments fell prey to their propaganda.
Canada is a signatory to the international Refugee Convention. It is obligated to process applications for refugee status no matter how the refugees arrive at their shores. It has nothing to do with their sympathy or lack thereof for the LTTE.
You think GOSL’s hands are not oiled by the human traffickers you talk about? How do people get on these ships given the overwhelming presence of the military in the north and north east?
If you can’t take care of these people, at least let them go elsewhere. Show at least that modicum of decency. Economic refugees indeed. People don’t risk their lives and those of children to make more bucks elsewhere. Only persecution and no other means of surviving could push them to this.
Longus,
Just to add, what you call “spinelessness” is what other people call the rules of civilized behaviour or humanitarianism. We all know what Sri Lanka’s ‘spinefulness’ entails.
M.G.
Further to what I said earlier…..
The Canadian government didn’t show the same kind od lenient attitude towards other regugee claimers who came in boats to Canada from China, for instance, a few years ago. this is because until recently(and still are..) the whole Western world was misled by the LTTE’s propaganda machine into believing that there were mass scale killings of Tamil civilians in Sri Lanka like in places like Darfur and Bagdad. That is why the former Liberal govenment of Canada tried to pressurize the Sri Lankan government to strike a truce in fighting with the LTTE. That is why Sri Lanka had to deport the Liberal opposition MP when he visited Sri Lanka in order to fulfill his deal with Canadian Tamil lobby. That is why the Canadian Louise Arbour was so vindictive of the Sri Lankan government. They were ‘fed’ by the interested parties overseas!
The Australian government has adopted a slightly different strategy regarding the regugee claimers, as they keep all of them ‘incarcerated’ in Christmas island and subsequently try to dispose them back to where they came from, and they have a deal with the Indonesian government in this regard. What angered the Australian government was the incident where some Tamil youth attacked and set ablaze a Sri Lankan group who were celebrating the ‘war victory’, thereby shattering peace and harmony in Australia as this event triggered off a series of attacks on Indian(by mistaken identity, of course..) and other seemingly ‘Indian looking’ migrants by the racist elements of the Australian public. Another factor is that until now, the LTTE remained unbanned in Australia, while Al-Kaida is banned!
Wijayapala
Dutugemunu’s descendant Mervyn’s ancester must have been asked by the Portuguese to make a choice ; to convert to Christianity and take a Portuguese name or lose his marbles. He would have made a compromise to take the ‘pariah’ name only!
The same must have happened to the ancester of the champion of ‘indigenous philosophy’, Dr. Nalin de Silva!
It’s high time they changed their ‘pariah’ names like Anagarika Dharmapala!
I don’t care for those peoples try to mud slinging at my face. My grand father’s history with great King Dutugemunu is well inscripted in various places and people who konw, no that Dutugemunu came from South.
This Wijayapala don’t no that several Silvas held cabinet minister posts in Dutugemunu’s ancient cabinet, and they too tied the bad people to trees like me!
The majority of Tamil and Sinhalese professionals who have left this country will not return to Sri Lanka. It is not economic factors alone that made them leave Sri Lanka in the first place.
Some of them wanted to get away from a feudal mentality stemming from an agricultural economy. That feudal mentlity is very much alive. Our leaders both present and past practised politics of feudalism.
We remain a feudal society in the 21 century.
@Agnos
“I happen to know many, many of those ” talented expatriates,” and I can assure you that 99% of them are not willing to go back as long as the current regime continues.”
There is some truth here, but an equal amount of myth as well.
Firstly, it has never been clear to me that these expatriots have talents that can be useful in the development of Sri Lanka. Sure, there are several examples of expatriate Sri Lankans doing well in the West – investment bankers, engineers, managers, medics and academcis – but they are employed in very supportive environments that have already developed and provide the infrastructure in which an individual can do well. It is a big stretch of imagination to assume that if you take one or more of these talented expatriates and put them in SL, they will be able to perform equally well. The environment there can utterly frustrate them and cannot get the best out of them.
Secondly, of the 99% that told you they won’t go back, how many of them have kids in college and mortgages to pay? You will find that the level of financial commitment they have around their lives in the West is so high that they just cannot go back. The notion of “as long as this regime is in power” is just a convenient excuse. For otherwise, many talented Sinhala expatriates who are supportive of the present regime might have gone back since the end of the war. Apart from a handful of examples, I have seen no such trend.
So the primary contribution of the talented expatriate is going to be tourism and investment in property — which will have some effect as economic stimulus; not much more.
“Australia and Canada should study their past good actions against apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia and address the issues of the people of TE, putting their heart and soul together, with a will to judge themselves and be rational with morality.”
lol here is a reality check sam! they don’t really like you! most of these countries only take in refugees to confirm to un obligations… there are way more european backpackers that over stay their visas than tamil refugees in both these countries. yet they scream for their lives when a boat with dark skinned people arrive. get a hint!
sinhalese are 100 times more accepting and willing to live with tamils than these europeans you want to go crying to! there’s a condition though… work with us instead of trying to kill us and demand your own country! tamil’s homeland is also sri lanka or what ever you want to call it… but it encompasses the whole island, and nothing less!
“Freedom fighters of TE are combatants and not “terrorists”.”
If you blast bombs in public places and kill innocent civilians then sir, you indeed are a terrorist! Legitimate combatants can only target armed troops only! Who’s spreading propaganda?? Bell Pottinger or you? Instead of crying about a PR firm I’d rather had tamil diaspora also got their own PR firm to push their agenda instead of financing terrorism and death!
Some of the Tamil migrants were caught red handed by respective law enforcement authorities in these countries raising funds under deceitful claims and procuring weapons that went to killing innocent civilians. You have to be so daft not to understand why they dislike more Tamil migrants coming in illegally. If you think a PR firm can override the independent advise they get from their intelligence agencies, then sir, you’re a fool! Add to that Canada already has to spend a good amount of tax payer money to keep a handle on some of the gang activities…when they’re not spending tax payer money to keep disruptive, futile protests at bay! I think Australians probably don’t want a similar situation on their soil as well!
“It was logical for countries to question as to how the LTTE, considered fit to hold peace talks, became “terrorists” suddenly.”
Well, although the common wisdom goes never negotiate with terrorists, it has to be tried at least once if you have half a brain. It is a better option than to waste lives and money unnecessarily. Even the US is secretly negotiating an exit strategy with Al Qaida in Iraq now… Who would have thought!
“But Canada and Australia blindly joined the band waggon without proper reasoning and branded the LTTE as “terrorists”.”
FYI Australia never banned the LTTE.
Just to help you out sam, your rant is all over the place. Almost fit to be published on Tamil Net…lol Time to brush up your propaganda template!
Longus,
“the whole Western world was misled by the LTTE’s propaganda machine into believing that there were mass scale killings of Tamil civilians in Sri Lanka like in places like Darfur and Bagdad.”
I keep asking for examples of media reports that show that the Western world uncritically bought LTTE propaganda, that they thought that there were mass killings of Tamil civilians in Sri Lanka through these decades, but you don’t seem able to do so. On the other hand, I could give you many Western reports that clearly and uncritically bought GOSL stories, without at all demanding to know the government’s role in incidents of violence.
So, there has to be “mass scale killing” like in Darfur and Baghdad before human beings can be viewed as a humanitarian problem? I would think that the fact that people are desperate enough to risk their lives and those of their young children on the high seas itself shows that they warrant humanitarian consideration.
The attacks on Indians in Australia has nothing to do with the SL issue. Maybe you can’t tell the difference between well-heeled Indians who are the target of the racist attacks and SL refugees, but I reckon white Australians can.
MG
OK, the white Australians seem to have spared you for some reason, but as far as I know, calling any brown-skinned person an “Indian” is a common form of lumping together you see in the Western countries. Maybe the white Australians that you are familiar with have that meter that recognizes Sri Lankan refugees!
Wait and see whether the ‘compassionate’ Canada will continue to welcome the Sri Lankan shiploads of refugee claiments right along. Already there are serious debates about Canada’s ‘spineless’ refugee policy on Sri Lankan Tamils.And there is evidence of Canadian influence in the recent arrests of probable Sri Lankan Tamil boat people in Thailand.
To show the slackness in the attitude of the Western governments towards to pro-LTTE demonstrations as opposed to Muslim terrorists you don’t have to dig into your old newspaper piles! It was amply demonstrated by the lack of police action against such activities (siting them as a legitimate agrieved party) and the participation of the British Prime Minister in anti-Sri Lankan, Global Tamil Forum nonsense in the recent past.
I almost stopped reading the speech after the 2nd paragraph which was probably the case for many readers.
John, I think you’ve done enough to earn Rajapaksa’s blessing. Don’t expect your ticket to be paid for but its safe to say you will be allowed in SL without any problems. You’ve signalled your onboard now and DJ will now vouch for you since you stroked his ahem
Here are some of my thoughts.
1. There is no culture of entrepreneurism in SL and the spirit and preconditions for it have never existed post independence. I’ve read entrepreneurial communities takes 20+ years to build. Any attempts to encourage entrepreneurship will be opposed by the “people” vehemently. I’m talking blood in the streets.
2. Sending MR to Kennedy’s mid career program as a solution is laughable. Why not suggest sending him to the centre of the universe in a spaceship made of coconuts? Was this a joke?
LKY is a visionary statesman who came up based on his own merit while MR came to power by appealing to racial hatred and ethnic supremacy.
3. Speak about “reconciliation” and “power sharing” in clear concrete terms. The GOSL has used persuasive definitions to make these words something that they are not.
4. I believe many in the Tamil Diaspora will come back and help our people, the Muslims and the Singhalese if given the opportunity to do so in a safe environment free of undue influence or rampant corruption (I know I am asking for the world
. A political solution is a precursor for most Tamils.
5. When talking about Singapore’s success don’t get fancy. First thing the culture in SL is different from Singapore and the “people” are not the Chinese. Adjust your expectations.
English as the link language and that of business. Meritocracy not Kleptocracy. Rule of law. Ultra high integrity leadership. Stop laughing.
6. Appealing to religion and conquerors for guidance is very dangerous given the mindset of the Rajapaksas’ and that of the “people”. You don’t having Buddhists in Singapore clamouring for primary of place. Why is that? If Rajapaksa should look to anyone for guidance it should be the Dalai Lama.
Longus,
“OK, the white Australians seem to have spared you for some reason, but as far as I know, calling any brown-skinned person an “Indian” is a common form of lumping together you see in the Western countries. Maybe the white Australians that you are familiar with have that meter that recognizes Sri Lankan refugees!”
This is not about race, but about class. Most people can tell the difference between a wealthy student type and a recent refugee, even if they are the same colour!
“And there is evidence of Canadian influence in the recent arrests of probable Sri Lankan Tamil boat people in Thailand.”
Seems you have just argued against yourself. Doesn’t this show that Canadian sympathy for Tamils is lacking despite your claims about the success of LTTE propaganda?
“To show the slackness in the attitude of the Western governments towards to pro-LTTE demonstrations as opposed to Muslim terrorists you don’t have to dig into your old newspaper piles! It was amply demonstrated by the lack of police action against such activities (siting them as a legitimate agrieved party) and the participation of the British Prime Minister in anti-Sri Lankan, Global Tamil Forum nonsense in the recent past.”
You do have to dig into newspaper files. You’re citing Western sympathy for Tamils post-conflict, ie after the decimation of the LTTE. The LTTE isn’t even around now to spread its propaganda. Only the newspaper files from previous decades will show whether or not the West bought the LTTE claims. It will be very evident if you do go through these files, that it was always GOSL’s perspective that prevailed in the world previously. LTTE propaganda, far from arousing Western sympathy for the Tamil cause, actually blinded the West to the injustices suffered by SL Tamils. Now that the LTTE is dead, the West is starting to take a good look at the ‘other’ side.
MG
Or, is it because the West’s ‘big attitude’ that other ‘third world paupers’ should listen to them, was hurt when Rajapakse didn’t listen to their advise, for instance even after coming all the way, to the shade of a ‘Siyambala’, tree in Embilipitiya in 2009, only to be bluntly told off?
The longus,
I am liking your postings very much. You seem to be patriotic person, like many peoples in th Sri Lanka getting excited by the little things the president is doing to excite the little people while doing the big things to keep them in the dark. The president is looking at the West and raising the sarong to the ears and people are clapping, thinking sovreignty is showing.
It was very excitng when he is calling teh Miliband to the Siyambala tree. Miliband coming like worm to where the president is sitting only to be hearing that president not listening to White man anymore. Miliband going back like worm and where is he now? Fallen from the government.Where is the president now? He is king now.
I am thinking President is too kind to the Miliband. He is only calling MIliband to siyambala tree, not tying him to it. If it is me who is siting under Siyambala tree I am definitely tying the man to tree. With his own belt. Many years ago the Angarika Dhrmapala saying if you are scared of the White man tie a scarecrow looking like the white man to tree and beat him. Nowadays we are not needing scarecrow. We are not scared of the White man any more. White people very weak now. Look at the America. Can’t even find White man to be ruling the country!
Some people saying President scared to go to the England now. He is thinking the Miliband’s people waiting to take the revenge because English peiple not like Sinhala people. They are full of evil, wanting the revenge and the retribution. Maybe, the president is thinking, the Miliband’s successor calling him to some little pub in the countryside like president calling Miliband to tree and embarrassing him for the weak English peoples to see how he is humiliating the king of the Sri Lanka and getting the English peoples excited about the sovreingty. This is embarrassing for president, getting humuiliated in little English pub. Big English pub ok.
But people are mistaking if thinking president is scared. This president not scared like previous presidents. If he is wanting to go the England he will go. If not by the plane then by the boat. After all it is like old country for the Sri Lankan rulers. That is where they are all coming from. What for you thinking president is called the Percy? What for you thinkibng I am called the Mervyn?
And if the president is still worried about going to the UK I am saying please be doing what the Anagarika is saying. No need to be making the scarecrow when you can make whole city now. Clear the jungle in the Hambantiota side and build big city like the London. Then you can be going to the London anytime you are liking. No Miliband like people to humiliate. Don’t be worrying about the cost. Sri Lankan people have plenty of money and they are very happy to let the president take it.
Longus,
So now you’re saying that Western opinion of SL has nothing to do with LTTE propaganda? Now we’re getting somewhere.
Also, maybe you’re impressed with what Rajapaksa said on that occasion, but I’m not. Maybe you see it as the ‘native’ whipping his ‘colonial master’ or some such fantasy but it’s basically a tin pot megalomaniac admitting that he can’t believe that people can wish to help others who are not of their community. It is the cynical expression of a confirmed racial chauvinist.
Dear the Longus,
I think what the president did tot he White Miliband under the Siyambala tree was very good. He is showing the White man we are not scaed. The Angarika Dhamapala saying long ago if you are scared of White man make scarecrow like White mn and beat the scarecrow. Nowadays we are not needing the scarecrow. We can be beating the white man ourselves.
It is good to be satnding up to the White peoples. it is giving thrill to the whole natin as I am seeing from youjr coment also. Doesn’t mater if the president is standing on their stomach when standing up to the White man. People will cheer. Some people will even offer head for president to stand on. I am often doing that myself because I am having thick head, like concrete. President liking it very much. That is why I can be doing whatever I am liking to anybody anytime and nothing is happening to me
The Mervyn Silva
First, I am thank you for your good humor comment! I thought reply to that MG who ask me question. You jump in between MG and I but I does not write with my both hand. I rite with my left hand only. Some peoples rite from their right hand or leg!
I no admire the president the rajapakse for all the bad manners and power use to affraid the common man! But I say ‘good’ to good.Bad to bad. The Siya-mba-laanduwa type action the Rajapkse did under the siyambala tree is good for me, because as you say the Milliband and that France man and the German man was acting too smart! Now we see how the ball rolling the way these White mans cutting our GSP! Why? Why? Because they are angry. They are thinking they no better than you, me or MG no? They say “humanright situation” in Sri Lanka are, bad no? But they also invading and killing people in Iraq and Afganistan,no? And you saw Tony Blair telling that commission that he was wrong by send army to Iraq! He can tell that now but who told him that at that time? Who told? Who told? Even Russia told and China told. Did he listen? Did He listened? He listen to Bush and sending the NATO army because the UN not giving the vote for him to sent the UN army! Did our rajapakse went under the pine tree to tell Blair to stop the war? Did he? Did He? No. Aaaannna dekkada? If we stoped the war to allow Parabakaran to run the Milliband and the other band will be happy. They told no, that the LTTE can’t be beaten. They told no, that it should not be done, because then the Siri Lankan government don’t fear. They told that in the British parliament.
The White men were telling to us, ‘truce, truce’ when we was about to shot the Parabha’s head. But the same white person were tolding when the Af-gun government declared truce with the Thalibaaan ‘no truce, they will get re-group and stronger and attack us’. What for the telling,white person is always like this to us! He can only kill the peoples in the ‘war on terror’
You can think if Ranil Thuma was there as president at that time how he will do. He will calling milliband and the two White man to biggest hotal. On red carpet and conch shell blow and drumming and all to listen to that advice! Respect no? White persons coming to solve our problem to stop the war?
You tell that Anagarika Dharmapala told to tie such peoples to trees as you are doing now, no? Yes yes! This Ranil is such a brown sudda who can be easily tied!The kalu suddas never liked Anagarika because he was calling them “wal aliya” and “gon thadiya”! They affraid of the white man and that is why Anagarika asking them to make that scare-crow and hammer it daily! Gandhi too asking Indians to spit on the roads no? To hate the white man. Aaaannna dekkada?
Yes, Oba Thuma say that English name in Mahinda’s name dont match him. Pol true, true,true! That is because you can’t be throwing all the cars, trousers, ice-cream, pizzas, telephones, computers out side from the window just because they come from the white person! Then I can’t rite this in good English to you now! Moda Kathaa! But we have to scold the white person when he try to do sodomizing to us. Not only to us;any poor small country must scold him!
That is why I told good to rajapkse, not because I agreeable to him when he is sstanding on the stomachs of Siri Lankan peoples and steel their steel and money to grow his family in the backside!
MG
There is no “one reason”. Heart attack is one of many causes of death in people! The West bought the story of the LTTE (I didn’t say without a question!) and acted in the way they did. They tried to stop the war at a crucial point, which no responsible government would do.(Please see my response to ‘The Mervyn Silva’) When we defied their indirect threat they tried to defeat us at the UNHRC. When that failed they continued to hound us like wolves and showed their ‘supremacy’ by withdrawing concessions.
Then you say:
“Also, maybe you’re impressed with what Rajapaksa said on that occasion, but I’m not. Maybe you see it as the ‘native’ whipping his ‘colonial master’ or some such fantasy but it’s basically a tin pot megalomaniac admitting that he can’t believe that people can wish to help others who are not of their community. It is the cynical expression of a confirmed racial chauvinist.”
Of course I was impressed with what Rajapkse did! And do you believe that the ‘natives’(as they used to call us) should not put their ex-colonial master in his place when he oversteps? It has nothing to do with “the cynical expression of a confirmed racial chauvinist”, as you say, but everything with the “right to assert” against high-handedness! You seem to have mixed up anti-colonialism with chauvinism, like many other Sri Lankan liberal thinkers.
“…he can’t believe that people can wish to help others who are not of their community…” Oh! my foot. That’s the way they ‘helped’ Iraq and Afganistan?
Dear Right. Hon. “The Mervyn”, Longus and MG
This is a very humorous and interesting back-and-forth indeed. Unfortunately, what English I know is slipping away as I read! However, it might transform itself to a far more enjoyable form, so I don’t really mind.
Not to interfere in the discussion, but merely to provide some input – can you define whether you are talking about the west, pre-conflict, post-conflict or both?
Also, does the whole western sympathy thing have to be an either-or proposition?
W.r.t to MG’s question: “Could you explain how the LTTE came to be declared internationally as a terrorist group?”When suicide bombs go off in the middle of civilian areas, does any western government really have a choice other than to declare them terrorists? I mean, isn’t that a plain as day fact? But they resisted quite a bit didn’t they?
The reverse situation, with regard to the crimes of the govt., is clearly a more difficult case, hence the (understandable??) confusion in the west. Our governments in the past have given one ample pause to wonder whether the LTTE cause is indeed legitimate.
Longus, perhaps this is where western condescension towards us stems from? A lack of credibility? Not to imply that other factors should be ruled out, but merely to point out that this too was a significant factor in the continued success of LTTE propaganda?
Personally though, I agree with Longus that Rajapakse did the right thing in asking the west to fly a kite, when they were meddling during the crucial moments of the war. And why did the meddling increase during such critical junctures? Was it really to prevent civilian deaths? But the west self-righteously murdered over a million (unofficial toll) Iraqis in less than a decade, whereas the horrendous Sri Lankan governments didn’t kill half that many in three. So there’s some condescension here, or some “pressure” from interested parties right? What are the other explanations?
As a side effect, Rajapakse seems to have got into a nasty and unnecessary habit of mistrusting and demonizing the west (to his advantage perhaps?). Not sure how this continued jingoism and recalcitrance will help us.
The longus,
I am liking you very much. Having the humour is good for soul.
You are not liking me jumping between you and the MG? I will be jumping wherever I am wanting. I am not even waiting for president to say jump these days. He is just looking at me and I am jumping without asking how high to be jumping and hitting the head on the ceiling. President laughing and telling familiy this Mervyn crazy bastard always jumping for no reason. But I am not bothered. President happy I am happy.
And you are also not liking the president feeding own family and looking afer friends? You are thinking this is bad? Setting example to everybody how to be taking care of family and the friends?
Hmmmmm. Good that you are not showing that very much and not very often. If you are showing you are not liking president’s family planning as ofen as you are showing you are not liking Western governments world plannings you can expect to be hugging Siyambala tree forever and ever no question asked. I will not be waiting for you to be coming to the Kelaniya side. I will be coming to your own side, with tree if possible.
Observer, good one, exactly what I wanted to tell Mr.Sam.
Dear S.D.
As you say here:
“Longus, perhaps this is where western condescension towards us stems from? A lack of credibility? Not to imply that other factors should be ruled out, but merely to point out that this too was a significant factor in the continued success of LTTE propaganda?”
This was a result of inefficiency on the part of Sri Lanka’s diplomats in the West who had the personal interests before the country’s in their opulent existence.
“As a side effect, Rajapakse seems to have got into a nasty and unnecessary habit of mistrusting and demonizing the west (to his advantage perhaps?). Not sure how this continued jingoism and recalcitrance will help us.”
I think this will continue to be a vicious cycle until either party relaxes its view. It appears that Sri Lanka might end up as a conservative and intolerant country mainly based on its agricultural resources.
Dear The Mervyn Silva
I too am liking your comments as you are reminding me of another minister during Premadasa government time and that person was A.J. Ranasinghe. He was the minister of media and an equally jovial and full of humour person like you. Once he was telling the media that he were preparing to drink the soup made out of the slippers of that Premadasa were wearing! And also he was calling himself as the ‘balu kukka’ of Premadasa! I think that you too should be cultivating that good habbit of drinking Maha Raja’s slipper soup, unless of course you are already drinking it for your dinner!
How nice to be having the educated plus jolly-good plus humourous moronic ministers like Oba Thuma? That S.D. who were writing before were telling something about “recalcitrance”. I think what you have in your brain is simple calcification and not “recalcitrance”! And I think you having the calcification in your frontal cortex, which is controlling your behavoir and thinking I think.I think also that if you drink acid everyday this calcium will be dissolving away and passing with your urine ,but there is a amall chance that you will be passing your brain also with the urine like stones
I am waiting to see your next stunt like many other Lankets eargerly waiting and waiting….
Longus,
“And do you believe that the ‘natives’(as they used to call us) should not put their ex-colonial master in his place when he oversteps? It has nothing to do with “the cynical expression of a confirmed racial chauvinist”, as you say, but everything with the “right to assert” against high-handedness! You seem to have mixed up anti-colonialism with chauvinism, like many other Sri Lankan liberal thinkers.”
I have no problem with anti-colonialism except when anti-colonialism is the rhetoric used by racist rogue governments to whip up their people into a frenzy so that they can’t see the evil that their own government is doing. Seems like you all have fallen into the trap exactly as designed. It’s really convenient to totalize the West as one and to accuse the entire West of committing the war crimes for which UK and USA are mainly responsible. The UN declared the war illegal. France and Sweden did not support the multi-national force that attacked Iraq. So on what grounds does Sri Lanka accuse UN, France, Sweden of having insincere motives in calling for a ceasefire? Because they all belong to the same race, and thus are all the same?
How come you don’t talk about Sri Lankan hypocrisy in meddling with Israel-Palestine issue? On what grounds does Sri Lankan government get a moral right to talk about the oppression of Palestinians when it has even been known to have sponsored massacres against its own citizens, both Tamils and Sinhalese, when it deploys goon squads against its own people?
“There is no “one reason”. Heart attack is one of many causes of death in people! The West bought the story of the LTTE (I didn’t say without a question!) and acted in the way they did.”
I’m not interested in whether there was one reason or many reasons. The truth is that before 2009 the Western media have always only reported the Sri Lankan government’s perspective on the war. LTTE violence always got an airing in the Western media, but government violence against Tamils was never reported. Behind the scenes perhaps Western governments listened to what the Tamil diaspora had to say about what was happening on the ground in the North and North east and it led to Western attempts to negotiate for Tamils. And why should they not have listened? Don’t SL Tamils have a right to speak, to express their concerns, to reveal abuse and killings of their community? Only the Sinhalese have the right to speak and decide what is the truth and what is not? How do you know it was LTTE propaganda and not true? Were you there during those decades facing the violence coming from both the LTTE and the SLA?
Unless you can prove that it was indeed “LTTE propaganda”, that it was not true, you have no ground on which to make the claims you do.
SD,
“W.r.t to MG’s question: “Could you explain how the LTTE came to be declared internationally as a terrorist group?”When suicide bombs go off in the middle of civilian areas, does any western government really have a choice other than to declare them terrorists? I mean, isn’t that a plain as day fact? But they resisted quite a bit didn’t they?”
Yes, and rightly so. When suicide bombs go off, any responsible government must ask why people are prepared to kill themselves. They should ask what are the consequences of their declaring the LTTE a terrorist force. If they want to declare any organization a terrorist force, they must be prepared to take on the cause of the people for which the terrorists claim to be fighting. No doubt, the LTTE was vile and terrorist and it killed even its own community, but it was also, unfortunately, the only force that kept off total devastation of Tamils. We can see the truth of that now. Is it not clear that the death of the LTTE has removed the only reason why GOSL thinks it should give Tamils any rights? So, yes, the West needed to tread carefully in this issue. They needed to take into account that there is more than one side to a conflict, that it is not just the Sinhalese that are human beings but that the Tamils are also human beings.
“And why did the meddling increase during such critical junctures? Was it really to prevent civilian deaths? But the west self-righteously murdered over a million (unofficial toll) Iraqis in less than a decade, whereas the horrendous Sri Lankan governments didn’t kill half that many in three.”
How do you know the West killed over a million Iraqis? Isn’t that because the West doesn’t fight behind a curtain of silence and secrecy? The difference between the “West” and Sri Lanka is that we KNOW how evil the West is. We have yet to find out how evil Sri Lanka has been. How do you know how many people the Sri Lankan governments have killed? So here we are in a situation where we can throw stones at the West because at least they are decent enough to let the world see their murdering. But we can’t throw stones at Sri Lanka because they have covered up their truth. And so, we are supposed to give the moral high ground to Sri Lanka? You may. I won’t.
I know that the West hasn’t committed massacres against its own citizens, against the people who put their trust in them by voting them into power. I can’t say the same for Sri Lanka. That kind of betrayal of trust is the worst in the world.
“So there’s some condescension here, or some “pressure” from interested parties right? What are the other explanations?”
The “other” explanations could be that some Western governments may be facing pressure from their voters to do the right thing. Large swathes of their voters are actually interested in human rights issues. It seems you guys simply cannot entertain the possibility that some Western governments may actually be moved by ethical considerations. Why do you need so badly to believe that the West is against you as one large evil force when actually there are many, many Western countries with different motivations? Is it because if you didn’t see the West in that way, it would open the doors to a war crimes investigation and you don’t want that? Why would you not want to know the truth of what your government did? (You don’t need to answer these questions to me, but I hope you will answer them to yourself.)
Dear MG,
RE: “No doubt, the LTTE was vile and terrorist and it killed even its own community, but it was also, unfortunately, the only force that kept off total devastation of Tamils.”
Can you please explain how the LTTE kept this devastation off? Can you also explain the nature of this devastation? Are the Tamils being murdered on the streets as we speak? Recruited as child soldiers? Forcibly conscripted? Denied opportunities to study? We need to be clear on what you mean right? According to some, such as Dr. Muttukrishna Sarvanathan, the “devastation” itself was brought about by some others. He says that “A small fraction of the Tamil diaspora has been the scourge of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. I regard this small minority of Tamil diaspora as scum of the earth.”” and that they “mislead the Tamils in the North and East promising a mythical Tamil state; while these scoundrels lived happily in their adopted homelands, the people of the North East Sri Lanka had to pay enormously with their blood and sweat.”
(http://www.groundviews.org/2010/11/10/jaffna-and-the-north-of-sri-lanka-today-post-war-realities-challenges-and-opportunities/#comments)
Dear Professor
All over the world(including Southern Sri Lanka), ”doing drugs” is a crime but not in Northern Sri Lanka:
http://transcurrents.com/tc/2010/10/young_religious_visit_their_ow.html#more
Young religious visit their own suffering brothers and sisters in Northern Sri Lanka
by Rev.Fr.Lasantha de Abrew s.j., 25 October 2010:
”… The high military presence in these areas makes the resettled persons more tensed, uncomfortable and uneasy. The regular visits of the soldiers to their half built houses and temporary sheds, frequent arrests of the young males on various justified and unjustified charges, and inviting the children to the camps to watch films make them uneasy.
….Some teachers of the area noted, “They have lost interest in studies” … Easy availability of DVD shops, liquor, smoking even promoted by the soldiers could be the causes for such lack of interest.
….We had an opportunity to visit Sannar in the District Mannar where the people are living in temporary huts donated by the UNHCR. They were told that they would be resettled in their own land but it had been a wild dream as they are relocated in a jungle as their own land has been named a High Security Zone under the Sri Lankan Army. ….”
Dear Professor
Will you please use your influence on the President to save the war-ravaged Tamils from the drugs his Army is supplying them?
The longus,
It is appearing to me that while I am responding to you, you are responding to somebody else. What kind of calcification is causing that God is only knowing.
This kind of cock up is causing me to roling on the floor and laughing my backside off
M.G.
It’s true that we can’t lump together all the Western nations as trying to play the bully, and there is no question the tyrants in the third-world countries do play around with the anti-collonial sentiments, but on the other hand the fact remains that they see the abuses in our part of the world differently in a condescending light. The UN didn’t endorse the invasion of Iraq, but there is a US led coalition army fighting ‘a war on terror’ in Afganistan, and this has the blessings of the UN, where civilian casualties is a day to day event. These civilian casualties are ‘regretted’ by the perpetrators as unavoidable (as happens in any war!),but don’t give the same chance to other ‘not-so-favourites’ of theirs fighting their ‘wars on terror’.In that case even Sri Lanka can very well issue a ‘statement of regret’- if there are civilian deaths- and move forwards!
If the war in Iraq and Afganistan is as transparent as you say why should a whistle blower citizen’s organization have to take the risk of revealing the files that are termed ‘classified’? In the latest revelation of 400,000 such classified files it is shown that the US government has under-reportd the civilian deaths by about 15,000 and turned a blind eye to rampant human rights abuses. If this is the transparency that you are talking about, why should the US defence establishment decry it as a ‘threat to the national security’? Instead of addressing the issues the US has started an investigation as to who leaked the information. And the founder of wikileaks Julian Asange is having a mega-dose of democracy of late!
Where are the advisory panels to UN to conduct investigations into these civilian deaths? Whatever action was taken by the US so far was confined to internal trials by the military only.
What about the alleged killing of around 40,000 surrendering Iraqi troops during the first Gulf war? Where are the advisory panels to the UN to file action in this?
When the US dropped those two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki “IN THE FINAL STAGES OF” WWII, which killed about 200,000 civilians according to some estimates how did Harry Truman get away with that crime? Why isn’t it being investigated as a war crime in these Supreme Institutions that look after the human rights?
Injustice in one place or in one era is not justification for injustice in another place or in another era. We can end or reduce injustice in this world by taking steps in as many places as possible in this era.
luxmy
Holy preaching!
We don’t want to ‘parent’ the world!
We are not the guardians! To ‘reduce’ injustice, is not our business!
If it is justice, the same standard should be applied everywhere!
Oppressive regimes(how it has been happening in Sri Lanka is given in the article) around the world have not been allowing the same standard to be applied everywhere. So the next best thing is reducing injustice.
luxmi
Is it the oppressive third world regimes or the super-rich, self-righteous Western powers?
Who keeps suspects in Gitmo camp for more than 5 years without a trial?
http://transcurrents.com/tc/2010/08/outline_of_submission_made_to.html
Jayantha Dhanapala’s written submission to LLRC, 30 August 2010:
‘’Your mandate artificially sets a time frame from 21 February 2002 to 19 May 2009 . That and its restricted mandate is also a limitation in your good faith efforts to discharge your task. The lessons we have to learn go back to the past – certainly from the time that we had responsibility for our own governance on 4 February 1948. Each and every Government which held office from 1948 till the present bear culpability for the failure to achieve good governance, national unity and a framework of peace, stability and economic development in which all ethnic, religious and other groups could live in security and equality. ”
“The Iraq Intervention: What US Policy Makers Could Have Learned from Sri Lanka”, Prof John Richardson(American University, New York), Ethnic Studies Institute, Colombo, July 2006.
http://www.groundviews.org/2010/10/17/an-allergy-to-analysis-and-historical-amnesia-in-sri-lanka/#comments
Allergy to analysis and historical amnesia in Sri Lanka, Dayan Jayatilleka, 17 October 2010:
”… The Bandaranaike administration sowed the dragon’s teeth and it took Mahinda Rajapakse to slay the marauding dragon, with all the corollaries and consequences that entailed. … Dozens of Tamil youth were imprisoned under Emergency for years, for the crime of hoisting black flags against the promulgation of the ’72 Constitution. …”
Paradise Poisoned: Learning about Conflict, Terrorism and Development from Sri Lanka ‘s Civil Wars, Prof John Richardson, 2005:
”S.W.R.D.Bandaranaike’s term marked the beginning of a ‘poisonous’ cycle in Sri Lankan politics that has worked to polarise society along communal lines. When in power, leaders of both parties have seen the need for reasonable concessions to Sri Lanka Tamils in order to maintain national unity. But when in opposition, these same leaders have become uncompromising advocates of Sinhalese nationalism in order to gain political support. In the early 1950s the charismatic SWRD Bandaranaike altered Sri Lanka’s political landscape forever by beginning to vocally advocate an overly populist, pro-Sinhalese and pro-Buddhist political agenda. Campaigning on a political platform to make Sinhala the only official language ‘within 24 hours’ after becoming Prime Minister, and to give preferential treatment to Sinhalese in education and employment, he swept to power in the general election of April 1956. A new and turbulent era in Sri Lankan politics had begun. Having opened the Pandora’s Box of race-based politics, Sinhalese politicians could not close it.”
Ethnic Conflict and Economic Development- A POLICY ORIENTED ANALYSIS, John Richardson(1996) “Democracy alone cannot ensure ethnic harmony. Instead, it may allow freer expression of ethnic antagonisms and legalised persecution of minorities. In Sri Lanka, both S.W.R.D. and Sirimavo Bandaranaike won democratic elections by appealing to Buddhist-Sinhalese nationalist sentiments and denigrating the ethnic Tamils. Slobodan Milosevic, the former Communist Party Chief of Serbia and General Franjo Tudjman of Croatia won their presidencies by appealing to the most divisive aspects of Serbian and Croatian nationalism”.
Paradise Poisoned: Learning about Conflict, Terrorism and Development from Sri Lanka ‘s Civil Wars, John Richardson, 2005:
”In 1993, Arun Gandhi, the grandson of Mohandas K. Gandhi, invited me to contribute to a volume, entitled World Without Violence, memorialising the 125th anniversary of the Mahatma’s birth. Motivation for the project, he told contributors, was rooted in a life-changing sojourn at his grandfather’s ashram when he was a very young man. Through relatively simple words and examples, Gandhi tried to share some fundamental ideas with his young grandson.
The causes of violence in society are not complicated, Gandhi maintained, and could be traced to eight blunders:
1. Wealth without work, 2. Pleasure without conscience, 3. Knowledge without character, 4. Commerce without morality, 5. Science without humanity, 6. Worship without sacrifice, 7. Politics without principle and 8. Rights without responsibilities
The ‘eight blunders’ became the organising concept for Arun Gandhi’s commemorative volume. Each contributor was invited to use one ‘blunder’ as a theme around which to organise an essay on a World Without Violence.
I chose ‘politics without principle’ and drew two lessons from Sri Lanka ‘s experience. First was that practising politics without principle, even in pursuit of principled goals, is likely to push a society toward violent conflict. Ethnically diverse societies are particularly susceptible to this pathology. The second lesson was that processes of democratic political campaigning and elections pose nearly irresistible temptations to practice politics without principle. The more worthy the aspirant, the stronger the belief that his or her leadership is needed to deal with crises or achieve worthy goals, the more irresistible will be the temptation to compromise the principle of satya (truthful or moral conduct) and commit the seventh blunder. ”
SD,
So I guess you think the Tamil problem is all resolved? Then why are people entrusting their lives and that of their children to the high seas and hightailing it to faraway continents where they can at least hope for some humanitarian treatment? As for Muttukrishna Sarvanathan’s comments, while what he says is true and he believes it to be true, have you considered that there are some politically correct things someone in a position like his has to say in order to allow him to carry on doing the good work he is doing? I have no doubt that he considers other groups of people than this small fraction of the Tamil diaspora to be even worse scum of the earth but it would not benefit his cause to say who.
Thank goodness for the LTTE–without them, who else can one point fingers at? Also, thank goodness for GOSL’s determination not to present their war behaviour to scrutiny. So you folks can continue to avoid facing the truth. Let me ask you this: given the situation that existed and the overwhelming political power of the Sinhalese over the Tamils, was there really a chance that a terror organization like the LTTE would not come into existence? If innocent Tamil civilians had not been targeted in state-sponsored pogroms and massacres, what are the chances that the terror organization would also not target innocent Sinhalese civilians?
I think before one can argue about whether the LTTE stood in the way of the total devastation of SL Tamils or not, there has to be full disclosure of what happened in the war and what is happening now. Without that free access to information, our position in argument can never be equal–you have the unfair upper hand and can freely base your argument on lies and government propaganda.
Longus,
I think the condescension doesn’t come from SL and the others being third world countries but because they are killing their own citizens. And yes, civilian casualties are an unavoidable phenomenon in war, but the question about investigating Sri Lanka for war crimes is not about whether there were unavoidable deaths, but whether civilians had actually been targeted by SLA.
“If the war in Iraq and Afganistan is as transparent as you say why should a whistle blower citizen’s organization have to take the risk of revealing the files that are termed ‘classified’? In the latest revelation of 400,000 such classified files it is shown that the US government has under-reportd the civilian deaths by about 15,000 and turned a blind eye to rampant human rights abuses. If this is the transparency that you are talking about, why should the US defence establishment decry it as a ‘threat to the national security’?”
But these facts have been found out, despite US government attempts to hide them. That’s transparency. And guess what? Julian Assange is still alive. He doesn’t fear being hunted down by US, but rather tried for treason. What would have happened to him if he had been Sri Lankan? GOSL has killed far less dangerous journalists than that.
Of course the US defence establishment will decry it as a threat to national security–the war is still on. Not so with the SL civil war. What is SL’s excuse for still refusing even minimal knowledge of what happened?
“Where are the advisory panels to UN to conduct investigations into these civilian deaths? Whatever action was taken by the US so far was confined to internal trials by the military only.”
It is up to other countries to demand such investigations. Many of them don’t because they don’t want UN investigation into their own war crimes. That’s how SL got away with it at the UN. It’s not just a matter of the big bad West. It’s also a matter of the big bad East.
“What about the alleged killing of around 40,000 surrendering Iraqi troops during the first Gulf war? Where are the advisory panels to the UN to file action in this?”
Haven’t heard of this. Are you speaking of the retreating troops on the Highway of Death? Apparently, it is not against international law to fire against retreating troops. Seymour Hersh claimed 350 surrendering Iraqi soldiers were killed but I don’t know where you got the 40K figure from.
“When the US dropped those two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki “IN THE FINAL STAGES OF” WWII, which killed about 200,000 civilians according to some estimates how did Harry Truman get away with that crime? Why isn’t it being investigated as a war crime in these Supreme Institutions that look after the human rights?”
Those atomic bombs were required to make Japan surrender. Even after the first bomb had been dropped on Hiroshima, they still refused to yield, despite knowing that an atomic bomb had been devised and having seen the devastation caused. So then the second was dropped. Doesn’t Japan have to take any responsibility for it?
Dear MG,
RE: “So I guess you think the Tamil problem is all resolved?”
I never said this. What I said was that the LTTE exacerbated the situation. So most of the rest of your argument is a waste. Let’s stick to the points, so that neither of us have to waste time on the imagined position of the other?
You still haven’t explained, how “the LTTE kept this devastation off”?
RE: “Then why are people entrusting their lives and that of their children to the high seas and hightailing it to faraway continents where they can at least hope for some humanitarian treatment?”
Tamil Nadu is less than 100 km away and is clearly a safe refuge. If escape from horrendous persecution and death is the immediate need, wouldn’t anyone in their right minds travel to the closest safe haven? Why risk one’s life traveling so many miles more to these other “developed” countries?
RE: “have you considered that there are some politically correct things someone in a position like his has to say in order to allow him to carry on doing the good work he is doing?”
That’s a possibility. I did consider it. However, Sarvanathan has not hesitated to point out the negative aspects of the government also, and some of his comments are not “politically correct”. He does not appear to have a problem with calling a spade a spade.
RE: “Also, thank goodness for GOSL’s determination not to present their war behaviour to scrutiny. So you folks can continue to avoid facing the truth.”
I think you are ignoring a critical aspect of this problem. For 30 years, the people in the north lived to fulfill the dictats of a deranged individual. Meanwhile, this never-ending war was taking a tremendous toll on the country as a whole. People dying brutally left, right and center was the order of the day. That’s why most Sri Lankans are immensely glad that the LTTE issue is over, despite the massive cost it entailed. So when you act all surprised at the cost to lives in the final war, people have to wonder what planet you were living on prior to that. One cannot analyze the situation from an idealistic perspective, entirely divorced from ground realities.
RE: “given the situation that existed and the overwhelming political power of the Sinhalese over the Tamils, was there really a chance that a terror organization like the LTTE would not come into existence?”
Are you saying that everywhere there’s a majority which oppresses a minority, a terror organization comes into existence?
RE: “If innocent Tamil civilians had not been targeted in state-sponsored pogroms and massacres, what are the chances that the terror organization would also not target innocent Sinhalese civilians?”
I’ve never thought that the initial support by the Tamil people towards the LTTE was wrong. It was an understandable reaction in the face of barbaric persecution. What I criticize, is the continuous support of idiotic individuals to an organization that was *no longer fighting for equal rights for Tamils*, but *fighting to create a personal fiefdom for a megalomaniac”. An entire country full of hapless people cannot endlessly pay for such idiocy, and the demise of the LTTE was long overdue.
MG
I think Julian Asange wouldn’t be among the living if he were a Sri Lankan! Yet, this is not what you expect from a country which is said to set standards of democracy to the world!
You say:
“But these facts have been found out, despite US government attempts to hide them. That’s transparency…” That’s the most hilarious statement anybody can make ; waiting till sombody reveals what was covered up and then call it “transparancy!” This must be the definition of bigotry!
Then you say:
“Those atomic bombs were required to make Japan surrender. Even after the first bomb had been dropped on Hiroshima, they still refused to yield, despite knowing that an atomic bomb had been devised and having seen the devastation caused. So then the second was dropped. Doesn’t Japan have to take any responsibility for it?”
In the same way the LTTE should take the responsibility for using the civilians as a human shield when they jolly well knew the consequences. Doesn’t the LTTE responsible for the civilian deaths in that case? The same argument was put forward by the Israel ( that is that the Hamas were using the civilians in the Gaza strip as human shields and therefore they(the civilians) were legitimate targets..) the Western powers (naamely the USA and Canada) protected Israel! Infact the USA vetoed the resolution against Israel in the UNHRC.(when Israel had not only used white phosperos against the civilians but targeted the UN food convoys delibarately whlie keeping a blockade to starve the civilians in Gaza Strip) This is the forked tongued policy of the West!
One more point on killing one’s own citizens. The civilians in the West Bank who get shelled belong to Israel while those in the Gaza could either belong to Israel or Palestine. Anyway the establishment of Israel itself was not done legally and therefore it remans an illegal state!
SD,
“I never said this. What I said was that the LTTE exacerbated the situation.”
How do you know? What are you comparing it against? If there had been no LTTE, what would have happened? My point is that if it hadn’t been the LTTE, it would have been another force that would have also used violence. The LTTE was not the only militant group that arose at the time. The SL Tamils had no choice. I am not celebrating the LTTE. Far from it. But it was inevitable. You ask if all other marginalized groups in other countries resort to violence. Yes, they do, when no space is provided for genuine political and legislative negotiation and when they have a history with the land. And once there was a terrorist force, there were only certain ways it could have turned out. With an ineffective force, they would have crashed and burned early. With an effective one, they would have gone from strength to strength and perhaps attained their goals. LTTE missed their chance. It went from strength to hubris, until the next inevitable thing had to happen–the spawning of a Rajapaksa, one monstrosity giving birth to the next.
Why are you so surprised that the SL Tamils would continue to pin their faith on a megalomaniac? Did they have a lot of options? Why do the Sinhalese support their megalomaniac?
“That’s why most Sri Lankans are immensely glad that the LTTE issue is over, despite the massive cost it entailed. So when you act all surprised at the cost to lives in the final war, people have to wonder what planet you were living on prior to that. One cannot analyze the situation from an idealistic perspective, entirely divorced from ground realities.”
I know of one ground reality. I know if Rajapaksa had declared war to the death on the LTTE at a time when the LTTE had decided to base themselves in the South, you would not be singing this same song that war always costs lives. You would not be so cool about the collateral damage. What planet am I living on? A Tamil planet. But at least I am acutely aware of my racial biases.
As for why the SL Tamils had to go so far looking for a new home instead of going to Tamil Nadu, did you expect them to risk their lives to move from one refugee camp to another? They wanted a life. You seem to hold even that against them.
“An entire country full of hapless people cannot endlessly pay for such idiocy, and the demise of the LTTE was long overdue.”
Yes, but you see, the LTTE is dead now. But you folks are still paying for YOUR idiocies, are you not? Do you think the Tamils have a monopoly on idiocy?
Just a word about Sarvanathan–I concede your point that he has made much negative criticism of GOSL. I had not seen the latest interview and thought you were referring to an earlier one. But just an observation on the interview–he calls a small section of the diaspora scum, but actually views Prabhakaran as the victim of their mischief. I thought that was really interesting.