The Sri Lanka Democracy Forum insists that the only way out of the destruction and tragedy faced by the people of Sri Lanka over the last two-and-a-half decades is through a political process that addresses the genuine grievances and democratic aspirations of all minority communities. Such a political process needs to discard the legacy of the unitary state and move towards constitutional reform through devolution of power to the regions and power-sharing at the centre, with greater representation for minorities in a bicameral legislature.Committed to the belief that there is no military solution to the conflict in Sri Lanka, SLDF recognizes that the ongoing APRC process remains the only political initiative that is making an attempt towards addressing issues at the heart of the longstanding conflict. However, recent statements by the leadership of the two major political parties, the SLFP and UNP, seriously undermine the APRC process, just as every past attempt in Sri Lanka to bring about state reform has been undermined by the partisan and electoral politics of these parties. The APRC process should remain above such electoral politics and be seen as a way forward out of a political crisis that is affecting all the people of Sri Lanka.
Thanks to some of the smaller political parties in Parliament and the perseverance of the APRC Chairman Prof. Tissa Vitarana, the APRC process has continued despite the attempts of the Sinhala chauvinists of the JHU and JVP to subvert the entire exercise. The proposals coming from the APRC, as articulated by Prof. Vitarana, have been seen as a democratic and pragmatic response to the predicament of the minority communities - particularly the Tamil community that has been devastated by war - yet looking for a solution within a united Sri Lanka. Hence the engagement of various political parties with these proposals becomes an acid test of their commitment to a political solution of the conflict.
LTTE, JHU and JVP
The politics of the LTTE on the one hand and the JVP/JHU on the other represent two sides of the same coin and they feed on each other. The separatist nationalism and suicidal politics of the LTTE have entailed immense suffering not only for the entire country, but especially for the Tamil community of which it arbitrarily claims to be the “sole representative”. On the other side, the JHU, JVP and other Sinhala nationalist elements mirror the extremism of Tamil nationalism as represented by the LTTE. Denying that there is an ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka and seeing the problem as one of mere “terrorism”, these forces stridently advocate war as the only option. Although seemingly on opposite sides, the LTTE and JHU/JVP - representing only a minority of both communities - present an unholy alliance that jointly supports the continuation of military operations that are devastating for all the people of Sri Lanka and stand opposed to an indigenous and inclusive process to find a political solution.
The President and the SLFP
The President and the SLFP initially played a positive role in setting up the APRC, which initiated a discussion on the shape that a political solution might take, and produced credible proposals that won broad-based support. Yet just when a national consensus appeared to be emerging, the SLFP sabotaged the entire process by putting forward proposals that went against the grain of what the moderate majority – Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims – had suggested. Later, the entire process was put on hold, strengthening suspicions that it had been initiated merely in order to deceive the people of Sri Lanka and the international community. In a recent interview with IANS on 2 September 2007, President Rajapakse justified his party’s conduct as follows:
“I cannot change history or my own political circumstances overnight... You must remember my political legacy and constraints. During my election I received few Tamil votes because of the LTTE-enforced boycott. I was elected primarily by a Sinhala constituency on an election manifesto which made it clear that an ultimate solution to the ethnic crisis could be evolved only on the basis of a unitary state. In any peace settlement I have to carry the Sinhala voters with me. I cannot unilaterally impose a settlement – it has to be the outcome of a political process – an outcome that must be long-lasting and acceptable to the people.”
This appalling statement goes against the grain of winning the consent and support of the Tamils and can be criticised on many counts. First, the President should recognize that he is the President of the entire country and not of any single ethnic community. Rather than seek to satisfy the electorate that voted for him, he should endeavour to promote the interests and welfare of all Sri Lankans. Secondly, there is no credible evidence that the majority of Sinhala voters insist on a unitary state. The unitary concept in the SLFP proposals was adopted at the behest of the JVP and JHU; indeed, it was not even recognised by the Sinhala nationalists in his own party as evidenced by the fact that the original SLFP proposals, retrogressive though they were, made no mention of a ‘unitary’ state. Thirdly, in commencing the APRC process, he publicly and repeatedly declared that he was envisaging a solution based on “maximum devolution of powers”, which is irreconcilable with the concept of the unitary state. Fourth, he has repeatedly declared that he was willing to abide by the consensus within the APRC even if it was different from his own position. In this context, President Rajapakse needs to show the necessary leadership to ensure that the APRC process goes forward and delivers a credible set of proposals. It is imperative that he does not use delaying tactics – as he did with the retrogressive SLFP proposals - to further thwart the only initiative making any progress towards a political solution. The President should have the vision to change his position on a unitary state and become part of the political mainstream, finding a solution within a united Sri Lanka that is not limited by labels adopted in his election manifesto. Insistence on a unitary constitution will cost him not only the electoral support of the minority communities and Sinhalese moderates, but also the broader support of the people of Sri Lanka and that of the international community.
The UNP
In this scenario the UNP, the main opposition party, could have played a positive role, boosting its own political credibility, by supporting the proposals put forward by the Chairman of the APRC and advancing the debate on the political solution. Instead, it has retreated into partisan politics, withdrawing from the APRC and claiming that the APRC process is dead. The UNP bears much of the blame for undermining the constitutional reform process in the late nineties, which culminated in the draft constitution tabled in August 2000. Indeed, the legacy of their seventeen-year rule was the dramatic militarization of society and politics, of the ethnic conflict, and the weakening of democratic institutions and of the democratic process. Given this legacy, it is imperative that the UNP engage with the APRC process in a pro-active, positive and constructive manner.
Support for the Political Process
Just as the LTTE's fascist politics has taken the Tamil people on a suicidal path, Sinhala ‘Buddhist’ exclusivist thinking has taken the whole country down the path of destruction for the last 50 years. This has to be halted. The Sinhala nationalists of the JHU and JVP are now attempting to push the entire country towards ethnic polarization, violence and instability with their majoritarian agenda. The moderate forces in the country need to avert such a disaster by ensuring that a reasonable political solution that guarantees the legitimate rights of all the communities is urgently delivered through the APRC process.
SLDF commends the courage and perseverance of APRC Chairman Prof. Tissa Vitarana in his attempts to find political consensus among the political parties while addressing the substantive issues necessary to put forward a credible proposal that would be acceptable to minority communities. Prof. Vitarana has come under a barrage of attacks from the JHU and JVP in their attempt to scuttle the APRC process and undermine his efforts. However, there has also been a stream of sensible and rational support by sections of the media and a less vocal majority of moderates in the country who are committed to democracy and human rights. SLDF calls on civil society, particularly academics, university students and staff, religious clergy and community-based organizations, to recognize the urgency of the situation and express their support for the APRC process to find a democratic political solution within a united Sri Lanka with maximum devolution to the regions and power sharing at the centre.
About SLDF : Sri Lanka Democracy Forum is a community that shares a commitment to a democratic and pluralistic vision of Sri Lanka. We recognize that in addition to the loss of lives, the costs of war also entailed the erosion of democracy, the demobilization of pluralistic and independent social movements, and the further victimization of marginalized communities. In that context, we believe that movement towards a just and sustainable peace must be accompanied by the reconstruction of a democratic community that protects and promotes social justice, and the individual and collective rights and freedoms of all communities in Sri Lanka. We are in solidarity with, and have a commitment to support the efforts of marginalized communities to address past injustices, whether such injustice was based on the suppression of dissent, economic disempowerment, and/or on ethnic, gender or caste discrimination at the national or regional level. Among other efforts, we seek to proactively support grass roots movements that seek to expand and revitalize conditions for a vibrant, pluralistic and independent civil society that nurtures freedom of conscience, diverse political affiliations and an independent media. Thus, we believe that the terrain for engagement is not merely macro-political policy, but also economic decision-making, cultural production, and diverse local struggles furthering democratization in all spheres of life. The Sri Lanka Democracy Forum had its inaugural meeting in Toronto, Canada in 2002.
Post a Comment