Federalism is a novel concept that has yet to be tested in SL. It is, of course, far more complex than the present unitary model. The average citizen would need quite some time to digest its ramifications. It is the job of intellectuals to make it more palatable and present it to the public for further viewing. Unfortunately, as the title of this thread indicates, such intellectuals have side-stepped the issue in favor of petty nationalist politics. In the absence of such enlightenment, the unassuming voter too succumbs to the sway of politicians, as these rather careless comments by Mahinda Rajapakse indicate:

“.. my theory is: there are no minorities in Sri Lanka, there are only those who love the country and those who don’t… No way for federalism in this country. For reconciliation to happen, there must be a mix [of ethnicities].

Simple statistics will contradict the above point:

(1) 20,000 Sinhala youth killed during JVP times

(2) 30,000 Tamil civilians killed during the last few months of the insurgency

(3) 10,000 ex-LTTE who surrendered and whose whereabouts have no paper trail. We can assume they will never see daylight again

(4) 600 Tamil youth who disappeared during the first few months of 1996, after “Operation Sunshine”

(5) Dozens of journalists murdered or incarcerated, and the thousands of Tamil civilians who died due to protracted aerial bombing and intended assault, or who simply disappeared, or who were raped… all under the patronage of the state-sponsored draconian legislation known as the PTA

If we add up the above figures, we can say with a fair amount of reassurance that close to 80,000 people died as a result of state-sponsored violence. What is interesting is that the total casualties of the war are thought to hover around 100,000, with some overlap in the figures I gave. But these are conservative estimates. The true figure will never be known.

“Far from being morally equivalent, the Sri Lankan state at its worst cannot be as bad as the LTTE at its best, in terms of human rights, for the simple reason that the former is in some degree accountable to electors as well as the international community”.

With all the white vans, murders of journalists, commando-style attacks (Rupavahini), bombing the civilians and hiding it from world, what more do you want to prove that this regime is as equally or even more worse than the LTTE? There can be and should be no denial on the recalcitrant attitude of the LTTE but it was a banned outfit, treated as a pariah by the civilised world but one would have expected a higher standard of the SL regime but sadly it behaved worse than the LTTE. I do not really understand what do you mean by that the SL regime is in some degree accountable to the international community? Doesn’t this sound odd?

“A fresh move beyond it which will be ably petitioned against by Sarath Silva before the SC, subject to the zero-sum game in parliament and thrown to the wolves at an islandwide referendum where people will almost certainly vote, not so much in accordance with their party loyalties but their ethno-religious and linguistic affiliations and prejudices?”

As if the Tamils are not aware of these prejudices? Then what? It is because of this and after trying peaceful means, the Tamils supported the LTTE because the Sinhala south will never address the Tamil’s greivances. Of course, the wholesale of the LTTE and with blood on its hands, it fast lost its credibility and the diaspora Tamils have to accept their part and contribution to this menace. If, as Dayan says, it is going to be a pipe-dream for the Tamils to get anywhere with the prejudices of the Sinhala majority, then there can be only one solution to this – a separate state and no matter what Dayan or the others think and say, this is the only way to resolve this issue and it will certainly happen one day. Call it a premonition.

“The structural framework for devolution as established by the Thirteenth Amendment and the Provincial Councils Act is problematic in so many respects that are too well known to rehearse here. They include the unworkable dual structure of the provincial executive as between the Governor and the Board of Ministers; the multifarious devices of central government incursion including the Governor’s (read President’s) powers, the weaknesses of the (improperly so called) concurrent list; the national policy clause in the reserved list empowering rampant interference; the weakness of the fiscal and financial framework; and generally (re)centralising nature of the Provincial Councils Act.”

I entirely agree with you, the 13th Amendment and Provincial Councils have proven to be an utter failure in the South and Dayan has yet to explain what it will magically accomplish in the North (watch Dayan point out the singular Wayamba experience under Gamini Jayawickrema Perera, while ignoring that of the other six PCs over the last 20 years). That is why the 13th Amendment should be revoked- devolution simply won’t work in SL.

“The Southern space at least produced a traidion of dissenting scholarship and journalism, while the North and more importantly, the freer Diaspora, did not.”

That’s right Dayan, the UTHR-J never dissented against the LTTE. It was part and parcel of the Movement and tricked gullible people into thinking that it was dissent. It is incredible how you exposed their utter lies.

Even more incredible is how you figured out that the Tamils never produced a tradition of dissent when you lack the language skills to read their vernacular literature (unless I’m wrong and you actually do read Tamil). Do you have some magical or psionic insight that allows you to transcend linguistic barriers? Did you have this ability before or after you received your Ph.D or met Castro (the Cuban, not the dead Tiger)?

Happy New Year and thanks for the thoughtful , literate intervention, as usual. If I may respond to the constructive criticisms made here by you:

1. Far from being morally equivalent, the Sri Lankan state at its worst cannot be as bad as the LTTE at its best, in terms of human rights, for the simple reason that the former is in some degree accountable to electors as well as the international community. This is a systemic given. The hermetically sealed totalitarianism of the LTTE permitted no Groundviews while the State did even while the war was on. In short, there can be no moral equivalence between a flawed democratic state, which even now, is about to hold an election which may bring ” regime change’ , and a totalitarian terrorist formation. Obama makes much the same point in his Nobel prize acceptance speech, about the viability of Gandhian methods against British democratic colinialism but not against Nazi totalitarianism.

2. The Southern space at least produced a traidion of dissenting scholarship and journalism, while the North and more importantly, the freer Diaspora, did not. No one- JR or JVP– was able to destroy the essentialy democratic ethos of the South. Never did anyone in the South roll bare bodied on hot tarred roads in the noonday sun behind a chariot carrying a portrait of a leader ( say, Wijeweera), as happened dutring the Pongu Thamil celebrations…and no one in the Tamil community wrote in horror about it ( not even from the safety of London). And let’s not put it down to oppression: I don’t recall any processions in Northern ireland of Republicans flagellating themselves as in a Philipino Passion play, while walking behind a portrait of Gerry Adams!

3. Devolution and the 13th amendment: the unitary state will always prevail over devolution. That is not the point. The issue is whether a centralised unitary state will always prevail over a devolved one. If the issue becomes unitary vs non-unitary, then the former will always prevail at a referendum. All it takes is one demagogue. Publius thinks that the 13th amendment isn’t ‘remotely viable’, but in comparison with what? What does he think is viable? A fresh move beyond it which will be ably petitioned against by Sarath Silva before the SC, subject to the zero-sum game in parliament and thrown to the wolves at an islandwide referendum where people will almost certainly vote, not so much in accordance with their party loyalties but their ethno-religious and linguistic affiliations and prejudices? Does anyone seriously expect either MR or SF to go beyond the 13th amendment and be able to see it through as CBK was not? We’ll be lucky if either agrees to fully implement 13.