Dear Keynes!;

One is a counterfeit.

Thanks!

Dear Acharya, first, apologies for the late response. You have raised some very pertinent points in response to my article, many of which I have much sympathy with.

I realize that the language of my article would have led you to some of the points you make and in turn apologize to all readers for my lack of clarity. I refer here in particular to the points about ” mirror image”, ‘extremists” and any suggestion that Mahinda Rajapaksa is a liberal. On the latter score, I agree with you entirely that he is not and that he uses the the JHU/NFF elements in his coalition to cover up what are essentially his own views and ideological predisposition. I have said and written this before. Re mirror image I have been remiss in not qualifying this. I should have included the word “considered” before “the mirror image”, since I do believe that in general political terms perceptions are very important. As for “demonizing” those who do not agree with my views as “extremists”, this is not a past time I indulge in, however strong the temptation at times! Furthermore, I do not consider the nationalisms in Sri Lanka to be “extreme” per se, although of course there are elements within each of these nationalisms that I do consider to be such. I am also willing to consider the argument that those elements distort the very idea of nationalism.

Re the 3) the question of as to what the TNA constitutes or should is something that has to be sorted out within the Tamil polity. No doubt if Sampanthan and ITAK cling to what you term is a ” disastrous” understanding of this, alternatives to them will arise and challenge them politically and electorally. In my opinion this is both necessary and healthy.

Re 4) here are my long time federalist responses. Certainly, there are some elements in the south who will insist that advocating a federal solution is “extremist”. Sampanthan not even using the term may have been conditioned by this in the sense of being tactical in political terms. He may also have calculated that the flak he would receive for not using the terms would be less problematic to him in the wider scheme of things than the flak he would have attracted if he did. Frankly, I do not know what exactly conditioned his choice of words. In any event what may or may not have influenced Sampanthan, should not in any way stop those like me who think federalism is not extreme and moreover, that it still is the best solution. I am entirely in agreement with your points about plurinationalism and my understanding of what has been placed on the table by the TNA in direct talks with the Rajapaksha regime is of documents that do not contradict this – the 95 and 97 proposals, the August 2000 Draft constitution bill, the Majority Report of the APRC Experts Committee. It is not my understanding either that Sampanthan and the TNA will accept a settlement within a unitary state.

The Jaffna Challenge as opposed to the Challengers rugby team is to fashion a political platform that unites the Tamil polity on a settlement that will move us from post-war to post conflict. Absolutely, arriving at that settlement and a post-conflict Sri Lanka is not the sole responsibility of the TNA And the regime or indeed of political parties. The pluri- national case needs articulation and as cogently, coherently and widely as possible.

I was not here referring to any specific individuals – hence the title Jaffna Challenge(r)s.

And please note the article was not intended to be a defense of Sampanthan’s speech. Rather it was a statement of my understanding of it in the context of the critiques it has attracted in the current political context.

Fair enough. Must be my age. 🙂

There is a difference between calling someone a dog, and referring to the famous Pavlovian experiment with dogs. One refers to a species, the other refers to a behavioural pattern.

“Why don’t you two stop barking like Pavlov’s dogs”

And I was under the impression that GV censored abusive comments. Has the policy been revised?

How come you can’t even get your name right?

”But that truth cannot excuse human rights violations that currently afflict the nation as a whole; or for that matter obscure the looming threat of the cultural and political colonisation of the north by the Sinhala Buddhist majority” – Biased and Prejudiced Collection on Sri Lanka, *Gananath Obeyesekere, Economic & Political Weekly, VOL 47 No. 04, 28 January-03 February (*a Sinhalese Emeritus Professor of Anthropology, Princeton University)

wijayapala
History tells us that those who are oppressed for a long time split up and damage each other and are driven in many directions and end up in ruins.

Lol, wasn’t me who suggested he was a moderate. Why don’t you two stop barking like Pavlov’s dogs and actually read the comments 😀