Dear Wijayapala,

“….how the British could have created two states in Sri Lanka….”

How?…It is exactly how they (Brits) concurred this island. Brits were too good not only to this Island people but also to Indians.

Then again, I already told that it is a hypothetical event which didn’t happen. How could I explain an event which didn’t happen? Thank you.

Dear SomeOne

“C’Mon, you need to fix this kind of mentality, in my view.”

How can I “fix” my mentality when you refuse to clarify your position?

“Do you think that Nehru’s disagreement would have prevented the separation of Pakistan and India?. I don’t want to comment on this.”

If you do not want to comment on this, then why should I? You have yet to show how the British could have created two states in Sri Lanka that would have been sustainable.

“Is it because you believe that the Sinhalese are racially inferior to the Tamils..”. C’Mon, you need to fix this kind of mentality, in my view.

“..Nehru agreed to Partition and the creation of Pakistan..” Do you think that Nehru’s disagreement would have prevented the separation of Pakistan and India?. I don’t want to comment on this. Because, this is highly hypothetical. One “IF” one too many.

One day, I was watching Dalialama’s press club presentation on TV. He (Dalailama) said that Mahatma Gandhi had gone to an extent to offer the position of prime minister ship to Jinna in order to prevent the separation of Pakistan. I believe what Dalailama said was true. Every one would have worked had to keep the two nations together, I guess.

In my view, Indians and Pakistanees are brothers. The same thing goes with Tamils and Sinhalese. Thank you.

Dear SomeOne

“Well, this is my prediction and it is not worth discussing the reasons why I arrived at this conclusion.”

Is it because you believe that the Sinhalese are racially inferior to the Tamils, and are too embarrassed to say so?

“We had a significant chance of getting two or more separate independent governing systems to this country. It was just after India and Pakistan (East and west) became independent states and our politicians at the time of (so called) independence were aware of this situation.”

There is one important detail you are missing regarding India and Pakistan- the Indian National Congress under Nehru agreed to Partition and the creation of Pakistan. Pakistan was not artificially created by the British.

“We are not going anywhere with what?.. “. I don’t want to answer this question.

Why not?

Sorry for belated response.

“Why not??…”. Well, this is my prediction and it is not worth discussing the reasons why I arrived at this conclusion.

We had a significant chance of getting two or more separate independent governing systems to this country. It was just after India and Pakistan (East and west) became independent states and our politicians at the time of (so called) independence were aware of this situation. The “Sovereignty” which (some)people enjoy to day were on shaky ground at the time of independence. Whether the “Sovereignty” was on shaky ground or not, certainly this country was politically unstable. We need to understand our recent past history in order to move out of the maze/mess which we are in.

“We are not going anywhere with what?.. “. I don’t want to answer this question. This is what we are talking about. Then again, this became part and partial of our life.

“but they weren’t very divided politically around the time of independence…”. trust and betrayal dominate our political history, I guess. Thank you.

Dear SomeOne

“The point is, if British had established two independent Sovereign state in this island, sinhaleese has no chance of over powering the other state. Let it be Jaffna (peninsula), Wanni, eastern province, Uda rata,or pahatha rata.”

Why not?

“You said “Tamil leadership never presented a superior alternative to the Soulbury Constitution.”. Fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion. The reality is that we are NOT going any where.”

We are not going anywhere with what?

“Don’t say Tamil leadership. Tamils themselves are divided.”

They have been divided for about the past 20 years, but they weren’t very divided politically around the time of independence. At that time, the Tamil vote was split between the UNP and the Tamil Congress.

I asked a friend in the Gunaratnam faction if the Dambulla incident was not a good opportunity to put out the message that the PSF stood for equality between the communities and condemn the actions by the Dambulla priest. However there was no condemnation. They instead released a statement asking the people “not to be deceived by the Government’s attempt to cause divsions between the communties.”

It merely confirmed my suspicions. They may have split from the JVP, but the old JVP habits have not died.

They, like the JVP are unable or unwilling to take Sinhala nationalism head on and deal with it.

Instead of voicing outrage against the priest and the mob led by him they skirted the whole issue and released a cop out statement that avoided mentioning either the Priest or Sinhala Nationalism.

This is so much like the JVP’s treatment of every other issue..

They will not address the Tamil’s desire for self determination. But they will talk endlessly about the Tamil elite controlling the Tamil underclass, Indian conspiracies, Western conspiracies and Imperialist conspiracies. They see conspiracies everywhere. Every problem that besets the country has no solution, only an explanation i.e. its a conspiracy by the usual suspects. A paranoid state of mind shared by Stalinists, Maoists and also the Khmer Rouge!

When these types then come to power the first thing they do is try to eliminate the “conspirators” i.e. all their critics. This generally takes precedence over addressing more pressing issues like feeding the population. What follows then are the Gulags, cultural revolutions and Cambodian style genocides while the people are reduced to mere slaves in the collective farms.

If they want to be seen differently to the PA or UNP as a “principled” political movement they should publicise their specific solutions to the country’s problems.

How will they look after the poor? How will they find the money for it?
What is their solution to the ethnic issue? What is their environmental policy? These are the tough questions and we need to know their answers before voting for them.

Dear Wijayapala,

Now, let me put my question differently.

“Do you think that the “rejection” of Sinhalese matter if British had decided to have two separate governing systems to this island?”

The point is, if British had established two independent Sovereign state in this island, sinhaleese has no chance of over powering the other state. Let it be Jaffna (peninsula), Wanni, eastern province, Uda rata,or pahatha rata.

You said “Tamil leadership never presented a superior alternative to the Soulbury Constitution.”. Fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion. The reality is that we are NOT going any where.

Don’t say Tamil leadership. Tamils themselves are divided. In other words, unity between Sinhalese and Tamils are stronger than the unity between Tamils themselves.

Rajadurai showed middle finger gesture to Amirthalingam and Karuna did the same to Pirapakaran. This is history.

Talk to you later. Thank you

Dear SomeOne

“Do you think that this “acceptance” matter if British had decided to have two separate governing systems to this island?”

Of course it would’ve mattered, the Sinhalese would not have accepted a bifurcated island.

“Some one else is deciding our destiny. That is what exactly majority people wanted and they grabbed it with both hands.”

I don’t understand your point. If someone else comes up with an idea that the majority agrees with, then what is the problem?

The only issue is if the minority has a better idea that is ignored. As far as I can tell, the Tamil leadership never presented a superior alternative to the Soulbury Constitution.

“…Would the Sinhalese have accepted this alternative you have in mind?…”

Although it is a hypothetical situation, it is worth considering this case.

Do you think that this “acceptance” matter if British had decided to have two separate governing systems to this island?

“..What exactly should the British have implemented instead of the Soulbury Constitution..”

Therein lays the problem. Some one else is deciding our destiny. That is what exactly majority people wanted and they grabbed it with both hands.

Sad reality is that we don’t know how to take advantage of the unitary system and move on with our lives. Thank you