Tamil politics: Too much thinking might be going on
by Rajan Philips
It is not that there is no thinking in Tamil politics; there might be too much thinking going on. There is no institutional apparatus to screen out bad thinking and try out better options. And the free license of the internet has provided the medium for unsupervised circulation of idiotic thinking.
Namal Rajapaksa, the son of President Mahinda Rajapaksa visited Hatton on Dec 23, together with Minister Arumugam Thondaman and met the plantation community. He is seen here greeting the people after arriving in the area. Pic: Minister Arumugam Thondaman’s media unit
Transnational government is a prime example – the kind of political idiocy only expatriate electronic expertise can create and sustain. There is also too much idiocy in the political thinking about the forthcoming presidential election, and it is particularly evident in the unsolicited advice that is being dished out to the Tamil voters. To wit, the idiotic advice that the Tamils should be smart and vote for Mahinda Rajapakse and leave it to His Excellency and his handful of Tamil hangers-on to decide how much of the 13th Amendment is good for them.
A perennial commentator offering this advice has charitably conceded that even after the extermination of the LTTE the Tamils need not role over and play dead. Rather, they should steer clear of the old ways that have brought them to the current crossroads and look for new modes and models. A brave new model is apparently that of the late S. Thondaman, the “proud and upright leader” of the upcountry Tamils who took “his people out of the depths of disenfranchisement without losing a single life”. What is more, “he knew how to get the better of and the best out of the Sinhalese, not bring out the worst!”
It is not only the thinking behind this patronizing advice that is muddled, but its premise also falsifies a good part of Tamil and Sri Lankan political histories. For starters, Thondaman got his political leverage after 1977 from one and only one source: the rise of Tamil separatism in the North and East and the political violence associated with it. He was a party to the now defunct Vaddukoddai Resolution and he was the first person to publicly reveal in Parliament, in the wake of the 1983 riots, the secret understanding that the TULF and JR had reached between Vaddukoddai (1976) and the 1977 elections. He did not turn his back on the TLUF after 1977, unlike the more native Tamil turncoats, and he did not flinch from raising his voice on behalf of the TULF whenever and wherever there was need for him to do so. He always maintained that up till 1983 the TULF kept to its bargain but not JR or the government. After 1983 and the Sixth Amendment, there was no TULF.
JR, Premadasa and Kumaratunga did not grant Thondaman anything out of charity or altruism. They needed peace in the ‘thottam’ (a simple Tamil word that the circumspect and consistent Mervyn de Silva turned into a potent political term) and needed to avoid it being infected by the Tiger virus from the North and East. They were also constrained to be on their best behaviour by the global spotlight that had been turned on Sri Lanka after JR opened the economy to the world’s robber barons. In addition to tea, the plantations became the nursery for the first wave of local and foreign NGOs who were appalled by the plight of the plantation communities. After 1983, the spotlight became glaring and New Delhi found the excuse to flash its own torch light on Sri Lanka.
The original sin
Thondaman played his cards superbly. He harnessed the global attention, India ’s oversight, and the threat of militancy within the thottam inspired by the exploits of Tamil Tiger nationalism outside the thottam, to extract from JR and others the maximum he could for his people. He did get the better of and may have got the best out of the Sinhalese, but he had no illusion that he succeeded in not bringing out the political worst in them. The Sirima-Shastri Pact may have been a worse deal for him and his people than disenfranchisement, and as he publicly lambasted he was not spared the political rudeness and disrespect of some of the Sinhalese ministers at cabinet meetings.
More important, the maximum that Thondaman achieved was by no means the full reparation for the injustice of disenfranchisement that was inflicted on the upcountry Tamils on the morrow of our independence. By the time the long simmering citizenship question of the upcountry Tamils was settled forty years later, their population was halved, the inter-ethnic electoral balance designed by the Soulbury Commission was destroyed, and the most cohesive social base for class politics in Sri Lanka was ethnicized.
Anyone who lays claim to being a leftist in thinking or in action has to agree with my paraphrasing of Hector Abhayavardhana’s characterization of disenfranchisement as the origin sin that triggered Sri Lanka ’s postcolonial disintegration. The crushing defeat of the LTTE has not arrested or reversed that process of disintegration. It has merely changed its direction. Rather than installing stability and normalcy, the victorious Sri Lankan government has imploded in internal fights over the political spoils of victory. The squaring off of the Commander in Chief and his erstwhile Chief of Defence Staff as the principal presidential candidates for the January election captures in one fell swoop the farce and tragedy of our country. Let me leave the farce of it for another time, and focus on the tragedy for now, especially Tamil tragedy.
The Tamils cannot overcome their tragedy, goes the second part of the advice, unless they turn away from the old ways of Tamil intransigence. An unbroken string of so called intransigencies – from fifty-fifty, federalism, the 13th Amendment and the northeast mearger, to LTTE’s maniacal obduracy – is flaunted as what the Tamils should avoid today, after their dream of Eelam has been blown out of the lagoon waters of Mullaitivu. What is conveniently forgotten in this simplistic summary of history is that compromise and intransigence have alternated in Tamil politics, and until the horrific hijacking of Tamil politics by the LTTE, Tamil compromise always preceded its intransigence, with the latter almost always begotten by Sinhalese intransigence in spite of Tamil compromise.
G.G. Ponnambalam’s Fifty-Fifty demand was the sequel to D.S. Senanayake’s manipulation of the Committee system of the State Council to create the infamous pan-Sinhala Board of Ministers under the Donoughmore Constitution. But the practical lawyer he was, Ponnambalam backed down from Fifty-Fifty and took the case to the Tamil people to support “responsive co-operation” with the Sinhalese government under the Soulbury Constitutional compromise (the “communal compact” according to A.J. Wilson). But the compact was broken by the Citizenship Act, the disenfranchisement of the upcountry Tamils and the state directed colonization of the Eastern Province and parts of the Northern Province . Ponnambalam stood his ground despite these reversals and was thoroughly vindicated by the Tamil voters in the 1952 election. At the same election the Tamils totally rejected the Federal Party that called for Tamil intransigence accusing Ponnambalam of sellout and demonizing him a traitor.
Someone has to be really creative to suggest that the Tamils precipitated the Sinhala Only movement in order for them to vote for the Federal Party in 1956. To its credit, the Federal Party too strove for compromise in reaching agreement with S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike. But to the utter discredit of his widow-successor, the SLFP turned its back on its founder’s principled policy on the Tamil question. And these reversals were constitutionally entrenched in 1972 and 1978, both milestones on the path of Sinhalese political intransigence that became millstones weighing down Sri Lanka ’s political development.
Not the end of Tamil history
The 13th Amendment of 1988, whether too little or too late, addresses many of the old issues but most of it has so far remained only on paper. The warning now is that the Tamils have no realistic option but to rally behind Mahinda Rajapakse and hope that he will implement a portion of the the 13th Amendment in return for their votes. What is implied is ‘the end of history’ for Tamil politics in Sri Lanka and that there is nothing for it beyond Rajapakse’s generosity and the framework of the 13th Amendment. The warning is also premised on mendicant triumphalism that western compassion for Tamil human rights has gone dry, that the US (based on Senator John Kerry’s ill informed Foreign Relations Committee Report) has finally acknowledged the Sri Lankan government’s military victory over terrorism (although these greetings were passed on immediately after the war), and that the US perforce has to recognize the importance of the Rajapakse government for US interests in South Asia. This is not very different from the Tiger thinking and mendicant triumphalism that sent the LTTE to its grave.
The assumptions of ‘end of history’, final solution to the Tamil question, and Western accommodation of the Rajapakse government fly in the face of historical experiences and current realities. The disenfranchisement of the upcountry Tamils, the passage of Sinhala Only, and the enactment of the two constitutions were all thought to be acts of finality. No one – not even the Tamils – thought they would become sites of permanent contestation. They have and they will continue to be. The LTTE arrogated to itself the task of imposing a final solution on the matter and had defeat imposed on it by the government. But the defeat of the LTTE has not eliminated the issues that gave rise to it.
The meaning of politics in our time is not the resolution of contradictions and inequalities from one time period to another, but their resolution throughout societies at the same time. The demands on politics are more spatial and cross-sectional than temporal and longitudinal. The rights and lives of individuals and groups and nationalities matter and no government can ignore them. Nor can they be ignored by the so called liberation movements as justification for some future good. The Tigers got it wrong when they forced the Tamils to shut up and put up with them purportedly for the sake of future generations. The government is getting it wrong in subjecting the rights of the Tamil people and their life requirements to some form of rationing on the pretext that they may or not have supported the Tigers in the past. The spotlight on Sri Lanka is not going anywhere and it will be difficult, even impossible in the long run, for any government or its leaders to violate people’s rights and shortchange them on their material needs without paying a global price for it - either through trade penalties and sanctions or individual accountability. The Tamil Diaspora may not be equipped to force a political solution in Sri Lanka , but it has the wherewithal to create hell overseas for an intransigent government in Colombo .
For the Tamils in the north and east of Sri Lanka , it is the worst of times. They are war ravaged and traumatized and their world has been turned upside down ten times over. Nonetheless, these conditions will create a new mode of politics to continue the contest and the struggle for their rights and equality within Sri Lanka . Tamil politics cannot function or perform in isolation from others in Sri Lanka and outside of the Sri Lankan political framework. That was the misplaced beginning and the tragic end of the LTTE.
The LTTE did poke its hand into Sri Lankan politics but always in the most abominable way. What was also its remarkably stupid intervention was to order the Tamils to boycott the 2005 presidential election. In January 2010, the Tamil voters have 22 different ways of avoiding a boycott. Of the 22 candidates vying for the highest office, Vickramabahu Karunaratne and Siritunga Jyasuriya present the most rational and progressive positions in regard to the Tamil question. They may not win the election, but their positions are neither unwinnable nor are they unsupportable by the Sinhalese. It was practically with a similar position on the Tamil question that Chandrika Kumaratunga won the presidency twice in 1994 and 1999. If it could happen then, it can happen again.
The Tamil voters may want to think ahead of future elections even as they vote in the present election – and to vote in a manner that will recreate the political possibilities of 1994 and 1999, sooner than later. That means they have to vote for change, if not in this election, but soon after. That will rule out voting for the incumbent, Mahinda Rajapakse. His chief contender, Sarath Fonseka, is no knight in shining armour. But he represents change although he is not the best change, and any change is better than no change. In throwing himself into a political battle with characteristic courage, he has done all Sri Lankans a great service. For even if he were to lose the election, he has effectively lame ducked the Mahinda Rajapakse presidency and has ensured that there will be no Rajapakse family dynasty after the second term is done. Sri Lankans who think clearly will acknowledge this.
20 Comments
The Tamils need to forge alliances with mainline parties in order to achieve their political goals. They cannot succeed if they remain isolated on the sidelines or boycott the elections altogether.
However this must not be confused with making deals with families such as the Rajapakse Dynasty. This Dynasty lead by Mahinda and represented by Basil, Gota, Chamal, Namal and about 300 odd relatives and catchers in Public Service do not represent the aspirations of the Sri Lankan Nation. They have merely hijacked the Exceutive and Government by selling the war. Further they are the mouthpiece for the JHU, NPF and other racist elements. So making deals with such people is not in the interest of the Tamil people.
Rajapakse had a mandate for two more years but has been forced to ask for a fresh mandate due to the political instabilty within his own regime. Having made promises and deals to a wide section of the political spectrum and selling the war to its utmost he ran short of political options. So much for his claim to have 40 yrs experience. So hanging onto this Bankrupt Politico for short term political gain is not an option for the Minorities. The much talked of Extension Chintana which wass to be unveiled on the 18th has not materialised. So it seems that accusing General Fonseka of betrayal is the only card in the Rajapakse Pack of lies.
Tamils dont need federalism, dont need separation, dont need provincial counciles or any other political rubbish from a failed state!!.
The need of the hour for tamils is to rebuild their society and urgent needs. All the tamils living abroad should wake up from their dreams of 1980's and take a flight to North & East. Look, open your eyes and look at reality!!.
We need to first build our basic needs, then our economic might, after that political rights (if the SL state had not failed into factions) and that will give them the final security.
1. BUILD alliances NOT exclusiveness as the LTTE did.
2. NO VIOLENCE but use your HEAD & BRAINS like the jews. Get someone else to fight and die for you!!.
3. FOCUS on the basics education, discipline, hardwork and work with the Singhalese.
STOP all this rubbish talk as to who they should vote for etc and build the basics for our people. Who cares who gets elected. The tamils need a common enemy to unite and so do the singhalese. Now the singhalese dont have one so they are fighting among themselves. Allow them to do it.
Regards
Aj
There is no point in trying to defend a country that lacks democracy and justice. Sinhala government has committed Tamil genocide. Therefore, it is very appropriate that Tamil diversify their thinking. That is what is happening and the stupid cannot understand it.
It is becoming more evident that the UN chief Ban-Ki Moon is probably also in this whole game of the genocide of Tamils in Tamil Eelam.
This. I think, is the reason for inaction by the UN body upto now.
We must understand that Ban Ki Moon is from Asia and calls himself a "Buddhist" following the utter abstractness of unattainable "Nirvana" preached in Buddhism. Genuinity and truth is not in that culture.
He, probably sided Sri Lanka, kept quiet against genocide and even advised the government of Sri Lanka to go ahead with a view to establish a totalitarian "Bhuudist state" for the entire island of former Ceylon.
It is foolish to expect any member of a gang of criminals to bring justice on the whole gang. It is a waste of time and human effort. And Sri Lanka is cunningly deceptive in its ways.
I suggest something legal the world body to do against Ban Ki Moon for failing to carry out his responsibility and to protect humanity?
Does Namal Rajapakse really need to dress like Mad Parrot to get votes?
Thank you Rajan for the interesting article.
I agree with Sri Lankan that the Tamils need to forge alliances with mainline parties in order to achieve their political goals. But, it should be just only one part of their strategy as the Southern polity cannot be trusted in providing Tamils equal status, if history has taught the Tamils any lesson.
The SL Tamils should first clearly define and spell out their political objectives for equality in SL and then begin to build their lives with the Diaspora help, and become financially strong, and should be in a position (like the Jews of USA) to influence and work with the main SL political parties.
Since SL Tamils have limited freedom to speak their minds in SL under the current constituition and GOSL terror aparatus (white vans etc) they should build and keep strong ties with Diaspora and international community to voice any wrong doings of GOSL against their interests.
At the same time, the Tamil Diaspora should continue with their political activities in exposing the injustice practices of the GOSL in the world capitals, possibly through their trans national govt or else.
This twin strategy could be painfully slow, but definitely result in success in the long-term once the Sinhalese majority comes to terms that any wrong doing or injustices of the GOSL against Tamils is not going to fly without paying a price internationally, as the author stated. If that never happens, then there will be times, the right geo-political climate changes may hit the region, and the Tamils might be allowed to go separate by the regional/international powers keeping their own interests in mind and not because to bring peace /justice to Tamils.
This sort of non-violent twin strategy will eually stunn the world as it did with the brilliance of LTTE's military capabilities (not its political capabilities) and help to build a lasting reputation for SL Tamils in the world for their defiance and determination to win their rights.
Entire sri lanka needs a change of government,not only the tamils.Tamils should vote for Fonseka and see what happens.
What may happen cannot be worse than what is happening now, as far as the tamils are concerned.
Evidently Sinhala leaders do know that the issue is not over.There's a huge majority among ordinary Sinhala intelligentsia who don't believe there won't be another rise up from the ashes.As for Tamils,yes they are traumatized, stranded and exhausted.But for how long?
Srilankan issue is already internationalised.UN,US,UK France Germany and many more are dragged into the scene for relief to the affected.India and China all keen to participate in their respective interest.
So,the issue has captured invited and uninvited guests by both the parties,in order to help ease tensions by providing armaments,intelligence and yes, medicines and foods for affected.Yes,it's an outside world business now
Slowly slowly country is sliding towards a regional battle field.We always had been silent partners without much ha hoo,but MR made it quite noicy for his own survival Tamil issue has cost this country enormously.
Still there's no end in sight and instead of searching for one,another battle field has been chosen to claim credit for an unfinished job.So,a change should come from Colombo.
The authoir is a leftist intellectual who has absorbed many of the myths introduced by the Ilankai Thamil Arasu kadchi over the years. The accusation of colonization of the east and disenfranchisement of the estate workers are both, when examined in the light of accurate data, found to be false.
The demand by the Donoughmore commission to franchise the estate workers was stopped by a combined effort of the Caste conscious Tamil leaders and the Up-country Radala. and governor Stanley brought in an order in Council in the mid 1930s.
Already, by 1939, enfranchisement had stopped. But the first election was fought without this correctly taken into account. The citizenship act was drawn up mainly by Kandiah Vayithiyanathan, with inputs from G. G. P, and Ivor Jennings. The main reason for the disenfranchisement was the climate of fear created by Marxist trade union activity (Brace-Girdle affair etc), where-in both the British and the Local leaders feared the promised "revolution that was supposed to be around the corner".
At that time, Tea was the principal source of revenue and the government was willing to do anything to safeguard it. So it is the Marxists, the Hector Abhayawardana types of that era, who should be indicted for the estate workers loosing their franchise. Remember that Senator Natesan asked in the senate speech (1949) why D. S. Senanayake who had SUPPORTED the enfranchisement of Indian workers even as late as the late 1930s, should change his mind. The answer was the specter of chaos in the tea estates threatened by Marxist activists - the homologues of the Rajan Philips of today.
Remember that Chelva took the citizenship act to the supreme court, and to the Privy council and they all found the act to be democratic and even forward-looking. Even today, in the West, Switzerland, EU etc., they have much harsher citizenship requirements than what was demanded by the Amended Indian citizenship act of the 1940s - continuous residence for 7 years in the country.
As for the second accusation about colonization of the East - surely this is a racist remark based on the belief that certain parts of the contry should be reserved for certain races - it sounds like the Afrikaner Apartheid (lving apart).
The Tamil population in Colombo began to increase exponentially since 1905, when the Jaffna-Colombo train line was opened. That is somehow not regarded as "colonization". In fact, Tamil population in the "traditional Sinhalese areas" continued to increase since the second world war as well, while the population in the North and the East did not increase with the same rhythm.
Any Tamil who made it good and got rich moved to the south, while holding property in the North as absentee land lords. Meanwhile, given that about 75% of the population is Sinhalese, it has the largest number of would be new settlers who are needed to man the new irrigation schemes, which are funded mainly by the Taxes raised by this population.
D. S. Senanayake appointed his son Dudley Senanayake (certainly NOT a racist) as the minister of Agriculture. He appointed the Galoya Board and other "colonization boards", which were headed by far sighted, broad-minded Tamils like Mr. Kanagasundaram.
The board was full of other eminent Tamils, Tamil engineers etc. Mr. B. H. Farmer, as well as Prof. Michael Roberts have reviewed the colonization program and have stated that there was NO "racial motivation" in the colonization programs during the periods under the Senanayakes.
It was the Federal Party (Arasu Kadchi), and the later writings of A. J. Wilson (which differ from the earlier writings), that began this canard against the Senanayakes, while ignoring the on-going colonization of the south by the Tamils. When the US west was settled by WASP immigrants from the East coast, adding to the old Hispanic population, that was entirely the correct thing to do.
The same thing goes, several fold, for Sri Lanka where the North and the East were sparsely populated and ideally suited to absorb the population bulge which was mainly from the densely populated south. That the natural demographic consequence of growth.
Rajan Philips thinks that the LTTE hijacked the Tamil nationalist movement. Let me quote just a para from the "Broken Palmyrah".
In 1972 I was at a meeting where S.J.V. Chelvanayakam, the leader of the F.P.
was present on the platform.
Mr. Kasi Ananthan, a popular platform speaker, who
is now a member of the L.T.T.E., told the audience:
Mr. Duraiappa, Mr. Subramaniam, Mr. Arulampalam and Mr. Anandasangeri are enemies of the Tamil nation. They do not deserve a natural death. Nor do they deserve to die in an accident. The Tamil people, especially the youth, must decide how they should die....
This speech was editorially quoted in the Suthanthiran, a paper owned by Mr. Chelvanayakam. Such a speech which apparently had the blessings of the Tamil leadership was a foretaste of things to come. In the succeeding years we were taught unquestioning compliance with political authority.
If the F.P. or its successor, the T.U.L.F., announced a three day hartal, we had to comply and stay at home; there was no question of discussion. Anyone who did not comply could have expected some young men to come and beat him up. The seeds were sown for the growth of totalitarian militant groups and for the methods of violence
they employed."
The leftist mindset, where people like Kumar David and Virkamabahu supported the LTTE as fellow travelers, involves the acceptance of any methods to achieve the end. That is why Sirirtunga and Bahu disqualify themselves from democratic politics.
That is where the problem lies. Choosing a military man to solve a problem is like hitting the patient with a hammer to cure a headache. Our Tamil intellectuals, ever used to controlling people because of the natural mindset of a caste dominated society, have a long way to go before the mindset is changed. Dayan Jayatilleke, a Sinhalese, does not know the importance of the caste structure in Tamil society and how it establishes this dictatorial mindset quite unconsciously.
** Does Namal Rajapakse really need to dress like Mad Parrot to get votes?**
Devinda, This is better than the barbarism of killing 20,000 people in cold blood and then fighting on the pavement platform to take credit as to who killed the most.
Devinda, How about hugging trees in Anuradhapura, having bundles of white and multi colored threads on their hand…only Ranil seem to be not doing all these to get votes :-)
My basic point is, one can go on with this narrative, and one may even be right, but it isn’t realistic, in that it doesn't reflect the prevailing balance of forces and the limits of the historically possible at this given stage. ( Brest litovsk and the NEP are excellent examples of Lenin's cold realism).
Given the correlation of forces, things can only go one of two ways: 13th amendment and Northern Ireland at best/Chechnya at worst, or… the fate and status of NATO member Turkey’s Kurds and the illegalisation of Herri Batasuna in EU Spain.
The Tamil politicians and ideologues can take their pick. I suppose that’s “self determination”!
There is nothing wrong in the writer being a former Leftist intellectual.
In fact, our left leaders - across the racial and religious spectrum from the 1930s until NM/Colvin betrayed the cause for Cabinet plums in 1964 - provided a
groundswell of intellectuals of social justice and thinking. It was racial-religious majoritarianism that consumed them since. Rajan Phillips's appreciation of the political events of the 60s to 80s is impressive.
As someone who knew the late Thondaman at close quarters, I sede Phillips has understood Thonda well. What the Sinhala political side must know is Thonda helped the Sinhalese while he was helping the Tamils and his own people. He kept LTTE infiltration from the Thottam.
Even the LTTE had so much respect for the man they did not want to precipitate matters while he was around - because they knew he had the interest of the North East Tamils too at heart. Which is probably why they did not blow him off at a time when this was childs play to them. In addition, Thonda kept the anti-Indian extremists at bay in the heated Cabinet meetings in the post-1983 period.
Which is why Premadasa - who was a front-liner in the anti-Indian wing of the Cabinet - became very close to Thonda during the Premadasa presidency. CBK readily took him into her Cabinet due to an arrangement between Mangala and Arumugam T - because Thonda was an asset to the country.
She admitted this openly when she opened Thonda's statue in Parliament in the presence of an Indian Union Minister. India considered Thonda to be an indispensable asset in Indo-Lankan diplomacy.
Peace and Unity between Sinhalese and Tamils is possible. The learning of men
like Rajan Phillips should be obtained to move in the right path.
ISS
BastianD's response is more illuminating.
The proposed cure of supporting a power hungry military man (the key issue of dispute between MR regime and SF was the extent of military power that the regime was willing leave in the hands of SF) will most likely drive Tamils further in to despair.
Now we have it from the horses mouth. Minister Champike Ranawaka speaking at a press conference held by the JHU at Mahaweli Centre said that 29 policy matters the JHU had proposed to include in the second stage of ‘Mahinda Chinthana’ were to be issued as the election manifesto of Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse.
This explains the delay in issuing the extended Chintana. So the Tamils can now decide if the will forge alliances with MR and the JHU and if it is in the interest of their community to do so.
It is my belief that the TNA should meet MR and SF and find out from them what they are prepared to offer the Tamils. It is a fact that the Tamils will decide who the next President is going to be. The TNA should tell the Tamils what they are asking from the two main contestants. This should be given the widest publicty so that Tamils will know what the Tamil leader are requesting MR and SF. The response to the demands from MR and SF should be again be given the widest publicity.The TNA should arrange a poll to find out the views of the Tamils and then request the Tamils to vote for either MR or SF depending on which of them is prepared to offer the best terms. Everything must be done openly and transparently with wide publicity.This is an opportunity the Tamils of SL should not miss.
"Peace and Unity between Sinhalese and Tamils is possible. The learning of men
like Rajan Phillips should be obtained to move in the right path" by ISS is unreal he has not learned from the history unles Tamils want to be ascimilated by Sinhalees like what has happened to Negombo ,Chilow Tamils, Malays ,Burgers.etc.
BastianD,
The movement of Tamils to the South happened without any state sponsorship in the normal course of people moving to others parts of the country. If enterprising people want go anywhere, they are and were free to do it. And that was how there were bakers, carpenters, tailors and others in Jaffna. And they were perfectly fine until hostilities between the communities increased in both the North and the South. Under conditions of conflict, they naturally felt unsafe and returned to the South. What the Federal Party was opposed to was the state-aided colonization, which caused justified fears among Tamils. There were people like N.Q. Dias, Panditharatne, et .al., who were said to be hell-bent on ethnic reshaping of the North-East. I was not born at Dudley's time, but I was aware of the colonization under the Mahaweli scheme under JRJ/Gamini Dissanayake.
Although Suthanthiran was the Federal Party organ, I don't think it was correct on the part of UTHR to say SJV owned it and condoned everything its firebrand editor Kovai Mahesan published. UTHR can sometimes make mistakes.
Dayan Jayatilleka's writings expose his basic undemocratic nature. Leave aside his outrageous advocacy of Chechen solution and his flippant dismissal of many atrocious crimes the current regime has perpetrated. A basic theme underlying his writings is that if Tamils do not vote for Rajapaksa, he has no obligation to address the problems of the Tamil people. In whose definition of democracy is that a valid view? Imagine President Obama ignoring the problems of Republican voters, or voters in Texas--a state where secessionists are in abundance, simply because they didn't vote for him?
Jayatilleka and others asking Tamils to be 'realistic' think that there is no such thing as morality and principle. It is not about maximalist demands or separatism. It is clearly a choice between right and wrong; between morality vs. expediency. If anything the Tamils have learnt from the LTTE fiasco, it is that, maybe if they had confronted the LTTE early and often, rather than assume it would transform itself somehow, they would be in a better position. The Rajapaksa regime is as evil as the LTTE. Even the UTHR has affirmed it, but BastianD and DJ, while quoting portions of the UTHR to justify their views, conveniently ignore that fudamental point. Isn't it racism on their part?
When it comes to dealing with evil, whether with the LTTE or the Rajapaksa regime, confrontation is important and necessary. To appease evil in the name of 'realism' is the sure way to extinction. That is precisely what the Tamils, especially the expatriate ones, have learnt the hard way, and they should apply that learning in real life.
Re. Bastian D's studied comments, please allow me to state that movement of people from one part of the Island to another in large numbers has to be understood in context. The opening of the railway at the beginning of the 20th century coincided with the growing importance of the export/cash crop economy by the British. These needed skilled, educated hands which the South could not provide in the quantum required. The North Eastern Tamils came here to work in the offices(both Mercantile and Govt) Banks etc., leaving their young families behind. The population also was small, housing and education available in quality and quantity the was movement was for economic reasons. It was because we did not have the required numbers in the South, in addition to the N-East, we had emigrants from undivided India to support the growing economy - many of whom came for trading and support services. The population around the 40s was around 5-8 million compared to the 20 million today. Even today none opposes anyone moving from one place to another in the island for any legitimate cause. Take the similar case of South Africa. They have managed their recent history
very well and are on the way up. Of course, like Singapore's LKY they had the great Mandela - both of whom united what would have collpased as divided nations. What is opposed here is the movement of people provided with
State resources with pre-planned schemes of altering the demographic realities of particular areas - for eventual political aims. It is such a conspiracy in the Trincomalle District that has reduced the largest community there for over a hundred years ago - the Tamils - to almost the 3rd today. The same game plan is now applied to the Batticoloa District - which the Tamils rightly oppose. A Tamil-dominated North East Province (population below 2 million) poses no danger to the Sinhalese in the country (pop - 17 million). It is an illusion created by scheming politicians to keep the people divided so they can enjoy the sppils. They have won so far and have drained the country to ruin. It is now upto the people on both sides to take over and build the country and regain our earlier unity and prosperity. That is the challenge before all of us.
ISS
Let us hope sanity and peace prevails on all sides .