Kadphises,

I’m sorry to resurrect this long dead thread. I have been away for a while and had made a mental note to respond to your post, which I think makes a lot of sense.

Exercising sensitivity and allaying the fears of the Tamil people is a matter which is different to your concerns, valid though I believe them to be. My argument, from the very beginning, has been that sensitivity and prudence needs to be exercised as part of the effort to building bridges between these two communities, and threatening people with the bogeyman of “colonization”, is hardly the way to go.

Also, what if certain sections of the Tamil community want lots more? Should the conversation be centered around their rather unsound ideas only? The issue in question isn’t whether we need to cave in to those demands, but whether we can allay the fears of the vast majority of the Sri Lankan Tamil people and make them feel a part of the Sri Lankan identity, which at present, many feel promotes a Sinhala-Buddhist identity at the exclusion of their own. It has more to do with whether we can live with our own conscience as citizens of this country, which at present we clearly cannot.

Bira,
You have stated the following.

“I don’t think that GOSL is this bad; but you insist on USA and the West to be our arbiter. I don’t know why.”

I have already answered this question. We are talking about two different cases here.

CASE1: There is a problem between the husband and wife and the case is at the courts (UN) now.

CASE2: The husband’s lawyers are questioning the prosecutor’s own record.

We cannot mix these cases up. Well, the husband and his lawywers would love to mix them up to make CASE1 a mistrial so he can continue the abuse and be in control of his wife’s property and destiny. But, if the jurros (UN nations) believe that the prosecutor are doing an excellent job in briging justice to CASE1 (like how they supported in UNHRC resolution), regardless of the prosecutor’s own record, thats all it matters. The husband and his lawywers can make any accusations against the prosecutors but there will be no effect on case1.

But the husband and his lawywers have an option to file a case against the prosecutor, who happens to be the world’s super power, and try their luck in making a dent on the prosecutor’s reputation, and that would be CASE2.

Good luck and I rest my case.

Dr. J, so I see there’s no Sympathy for the Devil?

Dear Sam,

Some more comments by Ex-President Carter:

“Despite an arbitrary rule that any man killed by drones is declared an enemy terrorist, the death of nearby innocent women and children is accepted as inevitable. After more than 30 airstrikes on civilian homes this year in Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai has demanded that such attacks end, but the practice continues in areas of Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen that are not in any war zone. We don’t know how many hundreds of innocent civilians have been killed in these attacks, each one approved by the highest authorities in Washington. This would have been unthinkable in previous times.”

” Meanwhile, the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, now houses 169 prisoners. About half have been cleared for release, yet have little prospect of ever obtaining their freedom. American authorities have revealed that, in order to obtain confessions, some of the few being tried (only in military courts) have been tortured by waterboarding more than 100 times or intimidated with semiautomatic weapons, power drills or threats to sexually assault their mothers. Astoundingly, these facts cannot be used as a defense by the accused, because the government claims they occurred under the cover of “national security.” Most of the other prisoners have no prospect of ever being charged or tried either.

At a time when popular revolutions are sweeping the globe, the United States should be strengthening, not weakening, basic rules of law and principles of justice enumerated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But instead of making the world safer, America’s violation of international human rights abets our enemies and alienates our friends.”

I don’t think that GOSL is this bad; but you insist on USA and the West to be our arbiter. I don’t know why.

Dear Sam,

Following is a comment by the Americans themselves about the bona-fides of your ‘Prosecuters” the USA Govt.

Powerful and courageous Op-Ed in the NY Times by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. Although he doesn’t mention Obama by name the implication is clear. I really think the only way anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together can still support our bankster Puppet in Chief and murderer of American citizens, Barack Obama, is due to an incapacity to mentally accept that he is as bad as if not worse than George W. Bush (at least he was a thug to your face).

Key quotes:
Recent legislation has made legal the president’s right to detain a person indefinitely on suspicion of affiliation with terrorist organizations or “associated forces,” a broad, vague power that can be abused without meaningful oversight from the courts or Congress (the law is currently being blocked by a federal judge). This law violates the right to freedom of expression and to be presumed innocent until proved guilty, two other rights enshrined in the declaration.

In addition to American citizens’ being targeted for assassination or indefinite detention, recent laws have canceled the restraints in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to allow unprecedented violations of our rights to privacy through warrantless wiretapping and government mining of our electronic communications. Popular state laws permit detaining individuals because of their appearance, where they worship or with whom they associate.

I would also like to add this excellent quote by Noam Chomsky, which I got from Glenn Greenwald’s latest:

My own concern is primarily the terror and violence carried out by my own state, for two reasons. For one thing, because it happens to be the larger component of international violence. But also for a much more important reason than that; namely, I can do something about it. So even if the U.S. was responsible for 2 percent of the violence in the world instead of the majority of it, it would be that 2 percent I would be primarily responsible for. And that is a simple ethical judgment. That is, the ethical value of one’s actions depends on their anticipated and predictable consequences. It is very easy to denounce the atrocities of someone else. That has about as much ethical value as denouncing atrocities that took place in the 18th century.

The whole article can be read here-it will give you the shivers- when you read how USA Govt. attacks their own citizens and others. The GOSL are angels by comparison you think?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/opinion/americas-shameful-human-rights-record.html?_r=2

Good one Dr. J.

Yeah George,

Except that the Tamil leadership has been protesting that they just cain’t get no Satisfaction, and whenever presented with a reform proposal, tend to Paint it Black.

Dear Dr. Rajasingham Narendran,

IMHO State Lands is a National resource and is not a communal or community or Provincial property.

“The inevitable question would be, whether state land should considered, a communal/ community/ provincial property or an national resource/ treasure in a small island?”

These should be used to uplift the masses starting from the poorest of the poor without any communal bias. Singapore is a good example of a small country where the pressure on land has not been allowed to escalate in to racial violence by ensuring an equitable distribution of this finite resource.

Gal Oya required 10% of the Export Tea earnings. Up to 1989 the Mahavelli used up over 200% of annual export earnings from Tea. By today, 23 years later, it would have used up over 300% of the gross National earnings of Lanka!

Compelling reasons for State Lands to be considered a National Resource, to be used for the benefit of all.

I understand that the ability for the minorities to govern themselves needs to be maintained but that should not be at the expense of the well being of the rest of the population that forms an overwhelming majority of about 85+% of the population (those who live outside the N & E Provinces).

I believe that the Minority concern can be protected by delimitation based on the National per-capita land holding. This will ensure that the current ethnic proportions within a given area is maintained enabling the current majority within a province to form a government without ever having to worry about dilution.

Off the cuff,

Thanks for your informative and thought provoking comment. What I can infer from the information you have provided is:

The units of land allocated to farmers – 2.5 acres- is totally insufficient to sustain a meaningful livelihood.

However, would landless individuals have the financial capacity and technical know how to develop larger tracts – economically viable- of land?

This would raise the question whether larger acreages of land should be allocated to groups of individuals who can present themselves as corporate entities , with clear plans and the required finances for profitable development. They would be required to provide employment, training and extension services to farmers of the area and also organize buy-back schemes.

Would this lead to crony capitalism, instead of optimal utilization of land aimed at optimum productivity, to meet national needs?

Would co-operative principle-based groupings be the answer?

If either corporate (principled) and/ or co-operative approach is adopted, it will transcend communal considerations. However, would it fulfill the hitherto recognized social need to provide land to the landless?

The inevitable question would be, whether state land should considered, a communal/ community/ provincial property or an national resource/ treasure in a small island?

Further, should the central governments consider the provinces or regions on a community/ communal basis, or as made-up also of citizens of Sri Lanka, who have to be given the opportunity and help to develop the resources in the areas they reside?

Finally, are Sri lankans- people and the government- capable of rising above communal and parochial considerations, at this point in time?

Dr.Rajasingham Narendran

Dear Dr. Rajasingham Narendran,

Bringing the Mahaveli waters to the Northern Province, as originally conceived by the Sirimavo Bandaranaike government, would be a good idea and will help win the hearts and minds of the northern Tamils”

The Mahaveli development includes the NCP canal which is 160 Km long and brings the Mahaveli waters to Iranamadu.

Ceylon’s first major dam, the Gal Oya (800 000 acre feet), commissioned in 1952, was a relatively modest investment. At Rs 750 lakhs, the cost of the dam (exclusive of downstream costs), it was about 10% of the annual export earnings from tea at that time. The accelerated Mahaveli Development Project (ADMP) commissioned in 1978 by J.R.Jayewardene’s new UNP government was huge in comparison with the size of the economy and, characteristically, financial prudence was thrown to the winds. The project in addition to a hydro-power generating capacity of 650 MW, proposed to utilise most of the 7 billion acre feet of water, that annually flowed down the Mahaveli, Ceylon’s largest river, to irrigate much of the dry-zone. Its cumulative cost by 1989 was Rs 55 billion, more than twice the annual export earnings from tea and more than the earned contribution to the annual budget (about Rs 80 billion, half of which came foreign loans). 60% of the cost of the ADMP came from foreign aid of which 55% was spent abroad. 44% of foreign aid component (26% of the cost of the project) came as grants. This contributed to massive inflation, of around 30%, and labour unrest in the early 80s, when investment was highest.

The preceding paragraph is an extract from a UTHR(J) report. It underlines the massive investment required for development and the consequences of such massive investment on the whole population of the country. The main benificiaries of this investment is the local people who live around the area developed.

If the population living outside the immediate area or province ,where the development takes place is excluded, by any means, then the question arises as to why those who are excluded should pay for this development instead of investing in local area development of their own such as in Education, Health care and social services etc.

This underlines the gross injustice of any ethnic based homeland concept.

The UTHR(J), in analysing the economic status of the colonists, has this to say

“ A high rate of inflation, the drop in value of the rupee, a consequent rise in the price of inputs, a growing in capacity of the state to help them and their inability to offer collateral and borrow from banks, led to a progressive deterioration of the position of colonists. Studies done on farmers in the Mahaveli areas [See 1,3 & 4] speak of an astonishing level of poverty. Rupasena [3] estimates the average monthly income of a family in System H (Anuradhapura) at Rs 1000/= per month (at 90 bushels per acre on 21/2 acres) and adds that those in the Polonnaruwa area (LB of System B and part of System C ) fare even worse despite good harvests. Indebtedness could only further undermine their income. Ariyasinghe [1, pp29-35] lists several trends in the Mahaveli regions leading to impoverishment and marginalisation. They are: “…with increased pauperisation and dependency, tenancy changes are taking place, with hidden tenancy to owners of inputs or officials, whereby they(the colonists) become tenants, labourers or share-croppers on their own land. The high increase of population had led to fragmentation of land with sizes becoming small and uneconomic. The introduction of cash crops by large investment companies, especially in Systems B & C (Polonnaruwa District) has pushed the farmers to work in commercial farms neglecting their block of land. This also leads to hidden tenancy… Dependence on channel irrigation has led to risky agriculture based on water availability … due to improper water for irrigation… They (the settlers) now want village tanks in the Mahaveli areas rehabilitated especially in Systems H,B,L and C.”
A pessimistic note is also struck in the official Mahaveli Authority publication [4, p10]: “Only those farmers who are able to achieve 100 bushels of paddy per acre on 2 1/2 acres for two seasons a year can be expected to earn a minimum subsistence level income…”

The foregoing is a minimalistic look at what the Traditional Homeland means to an overwhelming majority of the Lankan polity (irrespective of ethnicity), who live outside the areas claimed by the Northern Tamils, a population of less then HALF the Tamil population of Lanka.

It seems to me that justice can be served only by a per-capita based system. 13A recognises this in an offhanded way but has left a loophole to subvert it.

Isn’t the first two categories in your proposal people of the same province? If that is so your division becomes 66.66% for the province and 33.33% for the rest of Lanka. “…..lands in such projects should be open to all Sri Lankans through mechanisms that ensure that the landless people of a given area get 33.33 %, the people of the province outside the area 33.33 % and landless people from other provinces get 33.33 %, of the land available for development”