“Do they seek a solution to the tragic humanitarian crisis now affecting our people? Then why do they instead put as agenda number one the demand for foreign governments to act immediately to lift the proscription of the LTTE instead of demanding foreign aid for the humanitarian crisis as the most pressing?”
by S. Raveendran from Melbourne to Sri Lanka Guardian
(September 28, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) What does the Tamil Diaspora want to do in its current predicament? Incidentally, are those who appear to domineer as the spokesman the true representatives of the Diaspora?
Very many academics and intellectuals, in addition to a large number of professionals who were forced to flee by the events of 1977 and 1983, have closely followed and solidly supported the separation movement for years. They believed that was the solution, and it is not possible for them to continue in a marriage festering with violence used as a tool of control and subjugation.
This Diaspora interacted well with their governments, NGO’s and other agencies, bringing the desired lobbying, which the Sri Lankan Government and its own agents within its Diaspora found hard to combat. Political pundits know that the late President Jayawardene did not deal with India out of a desire to settle the Tamil question. A globe-trotting mission to Europe and America seeking support to vanquish the Tamil liberation groups failed. He was clearly told by all those nations justice needed to be done to the Tamils and for that he needs to deal with nobody but India.
It is not necessary to narrate the debacle which followed the Indian Accord, or to be judgmental about who manipulated events from then onwards to their agenda, but there can be no doubt all that has led to the humanitarian crisis currently plaguing Tamils in that country.
A collateral development to those tragedies also saw young men not fighting in any of the military groups in Sri Lanka seeking asylum in other countries - correctly - because of persecution. Their behaviour amongst the Diaspora then often became not of their own design but by others who sought to qualify their decision as self-styled ‘community leaders’.
The actions of such gurus have marginalised the intellectuals who guided the separatist movement from its infancy, and such people in the Diaspora who contributed so much in the aftermath of 1977 and 1983 are now nowhere to be seen, disheartened at their inability to contribute anything of real value to their community, when it is held to ransom by the egos of a few.
The recent meeting with Lord Malloch Brown, the British Deputy Foreign Secretary on 15 September 2008, which promised so much – to engage closely with an authority who had the power to achieve a great deal for the cause, ultimately achieved absolutely nothing, like many meetings before, and concreted the intransigence
It was a meeting that promised much. Lord Malloch Brown had gone to Sri Lanka and came away criticising the Sri Lankan government, going so far as to table a report in the British parliament questioning the conduct of the Rajapakse regime and acutely pointing to its human rights abuses. This meeting was a chance for constituents of Harrow to make their concerns heard within the halls of power.
Instead, it was hijacked by certain elements within the community, most likely not residents of Harrow, who swamped the meeting with their own supporters and who wanted nothing voiced but their own agenda.
These men continued their clear disrespect for decorum, the democratic system or the common courtesy of respect for another’s opinion. Many of the people who the meeting was targeted at – Harrow Tamils – were forced to wait outside while these elements proceeded to turn this meeting with a senior Government minister into a farce. Tamils who came to table questions to the MP’s present, most of them academics and intellectuals who have followed - and supported - the separation movement for years, were heckled by rowdy parts of the crowd.
The logic displayed in drowning out and mocking people who had come to discuss the humanitarian crisis currently plaguing the North – surely the most imperative situation of the moment – is plain confusing.
What have they actually achieved through their actions in Harrow, or indeed in taking similar action wherever the Tamil Diaspora have spread? They destroyed a wonderful opportunity to engage a sympathetic parliamentarian, demonstrated the worst behaviour of our community, lost the respect of elected officials and the respect of the decent Tamils who, despite some people’s thinking and propaganda, fully support Tamil’s defence of their lives and property.
Lord Brown pointed out that the position of his government that there is no military solution to the problem in Sri Lanka and that people of the Tamil areas were entitled to have a political self-government within a united Sri Lanka. If separation is inevitable he said that is a matter for the government of Sri Lanka and the Tamils, and all what international governments could do is to force a negotiated settlement. He also said that while they would endeavour this with the Sri Lankan government which has taken a hard line and has elected to prosecute militarily against the separatist group, it is a democratically elected government popular amongst the majority of the community, and they have to recognize and deal with that.
He confirmed that Britain fully supports the proscription of the LTTE, which is done by America as well as the European Union. However that may have angered the British Tamils and the Diaspora elsewhere, it is a stark fact. There are opportunities to make challenges to such proscription legitimately, and disturbingly clapping hands and standing up and chanting to remove proscription is not the legitimate way of achieving a result. He also acknowledged Mr. Pillayan as one involved in acts of terrorism but currently a leader elected, even through a flawed process, and therefore there was nothing wrong in his meeting with him. This does not mean endorsement of his stand or policies and the reason that he cannot or could not meet the LTTE leader is the fact he represents a proscribed movement, which is supported by his own government, and he has to follow that protocol.
There were hallmarks of direction and guidance but when Lord Brown finished his speech and was leaving, a young Tamil in front of the crowd stood and chanted ‘Prabakharan is our leader” and “Tiger Thirst is a Separate State”, which slogans the crowd repeated.
The essential reality is that western governments, and their representatives, are not going to deal with shouting, chanting young louts, who themselves probably have little conception of what they are doing or the reverberations to the Tamil communities in their adopted countries and the peace process as a whole.
Seeking foreign intervention, either militarily or through political convention is pointless when a handful of people within the community utilise intimidation for their own agenda as masters with the correct answers. Even the agenda of this handful is skewered. Do they seek peace for all Sri Lankans? Then why the constant clamouring for statehood when nearly all foreign powers have indicated they would fully support self-government for the Tamil areas?
Do they seek a solution to the tragic humanitarian crisis now affecting our people? Then why do they instead put as agenda number one the demand for foreign governments to act immediately to lift the proscription of the LTTE instead of demanding foreign aid for the humanitarian crisis as the most pressing?
Do they seek a separate homeland? Then why demand foreign intervention for a political solution when they refuse the support of those who are best capable of campaigning for a political framework? Do they honestly believe that any foreign government is inclined to listen to them, as a repressed people, when they menacingly swamp community programs and meetings with elected officials and repress most of their own community?
And ending what was supposed to be a ‘serious’ meeting with fist-pumping slogan-chanting only lends our community an image of euphoric deranged detachment more synonymous to the wider public with Islamic fundamentalism. As we well know with the wars currently playing out in the middle east, no foreign government has shown any inclination to reason with fundamentalists who show no capacity for logic or compromise. - Sri Lanka Guardian
by S. Raveendran from Melbourne to Sri Lanka Guardian
(September 28, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) What does the Tamil Diaspora want to do in its current predicament? Incidentally, are those who appear to domineer as the spokesman the true representatives of the Diaspora?
Very many academics and intellectuals, in addition to a large number of professionals who were forced to flee by the events of 1977 and 1983, have closely followed and solidly supported the separation movement for years. They believed that was the solution, and it is not possible for them to continue in a marriage festering with violence used as a tool of control and subjugation.
This Diaspora interacted well with their governments, NGO’s and other agencies, bringing the desired lobbying, which the Sri Lankan Government and its own agents within its Diaspora found hard to combat. Political pundits know that the late President Jayawardene did not deal with India out of a desire to settle the Tamil question. A globe-trotting mission to Europe and America seeking support to vanquish the Tamil liberation groups failed. He was clearly told by all those nations justice needed to be done to the Tamils and for that he needs to deal with nobody but India.
It is not necessary to narrate the debacle which followed the Indian Accord, or to be judgmental about who manipulated events from then onwards to their agenda, but there can be no doubt all that has led to the humanitarian crisis currently plaguing Tamils in that country.
A collateral development to those tragedies also saw young men not fighting in any of the military groups in Sri Lanka seeking asylum in other countries - correctly - because of persecution. Their behaviour amongst the Diaspora then often became not of their own design but by others who sought to qualify their decision as self-styled ‘community leaders’.
The actions of such gurus have marginalised the intellectuals who guided the separatist movement from its infancy, and such people in the Diaspora who contributed so much in the aftermath of 1977 and 1983 are now nowhere to be seen, disheartened at their inability to contribute anything of real value to their community, when it is held to ransom by the egos of a few.
The recent meeting with Lord Malloch Brown, the British Deputy Foreign Secretary on 15 September 2008, which promised so much – to engage closely with an authority who had the power to achieve a great deal for the cause, ultimately achieved absolutely nothing, like many meetings before, and concreted the intransigence
It was a meeting that promised much. Lord Malloch Brown had gone to Sri Lanka and came away criticising the Sri Lankan government, going so far as to table a report in the British parliament questioning the conduct of the Rajapakse regime and acutely pointing to its human rights abuses. This meeting was a chance for constituents of Harrow to make their concerns heard within the halls of power.
Instead, it was hijacked by certain elements within the community, most likely not residents of Harrow, who swamped the meeting with their own supporters and who wanted nothing voiced but their own agenda.
These men continued their clear disrespect for decorum, the democratic system or the common courtesy of respect for another’s opinion. Many of the people who the meeting was targeted at – Harrow Tamils – were forced to wait outside while these elements proceeded to turn this meeting with a senior Government minister into a farce. Tamils who came to table questions to the MP’s present, most of them academics and intellectuals who have followed - and supported - the separation movement for years, were heckled by rowdy parts of the crowd.
The logic displayed in drowning out and mocking people who had come to discuss the humanitarian crisis currently plaguing the North – surely the most imperative situation of the moment – is plain confusing.
What have they actually achieved through their actions in Harrow, or indeed in taking similar action wherever the Tamil Diaspora have spread? They destroyed a wonderful opportunity to engage a sympathetic parliamentarian, demonstrated the worst behaviour of our community, lost the respect of elected officials and the respect of the decent Tamils who, despite some people’s thinking and propaganda, fully support Tamil’s defence of their lives and property.
Lord Brown pointed out that the position of his government that there is no military solution to the problem in Sri Lanka and that people of the Tamil areas were entitled to have a political self-government within a united Sri Lanka. If separation is inevitable he said that is a matter for the government of Sri Lanka and the Tamils, and all what international governments could do is to force a negotiated settlement. He also said that while they would endeavour this with the Sri Lankan government which has taken a hard line and has elected to prosecute militarily against the separatist group, it is a democratically elected government popular amongst the majority of the community, and they have to recognize and deal with that.
He confirmed that Britain fully supports the proscription of the LTTE, which is done by America as well as the European Union. However that may have angered the British Tamils and the Diaspora elsewhere, it is a stark fact. There are opportunities to make challenges to such proscription legitimately, and disturbingly clapping hands and standing up and chanting to remove proscription is not the legitimate way of achieving a result. He also acknowledged Mr. Pillayan as one involved in acts of terrorism but currently a leader elected, even through a flawed process, and therefore there was nothing wrong in his meeting with him. This does not mean endorsement of his stand or policies and the reason that he cannot or could not meet the LTTE leader is the fact he represents a proscribed movement, which is supported by his own government, and he has to follow that protocol.
There were hallmarks of direction and guidance but when Lord Brown finished his speech and was leaving, a young Tamil in front of the crowd stood and chanted ‘Prabakharan is our leader” and “Tiger Thirst is a Separate State”, which slogans the crowd repeated.
The essential reality is that western governments, and their representatives, are not going to deal with shouting, chanting young louts, who themselves probably have little conception of what they are doing or the reverberations to the Tamil communities in their adopted countries and the peace process as a whole.
Seeking foreign intervention, either militarily or through political convention is pointless when a handful of people within the community utilise intimidation for their own agenda as masters with the correct answers. Even the agenda of this handful is skewered. Do they seek peace for all Sri Lankans? Then why the constant clamouring for statehood when nearly all foreign powers have indicated they would fully support self-government for the Tamil areas?
Do they seek a solution to the tragic humanitarian crisis now affecting our people? Then why do they instead put as agenda number one the demand for foreign governments to act immediately to lift the proscription of the LTTE instead of demanding foreign aid for the humanitarian crisis as the most pressing?
Do they seek a separate homeland? Then why demand foreign intervention for a political solution when they refuse the support of those who are best capable of campaigning for a political framework? Do they honestly believe that any foreign government is inclined to listen to them, as a repressed people, when they menacingly swamp community programs and meetings with elected officials and repress most of their own community?
And ending what was supposed to be a ‘serious’ meeting with fist-pumping slogan-chanting only lends our community an image of euphoric deranged detachment more synonymous to the wider public with Islamic fundamentalism. As we well know with the wars currently playing out in the middle east, no foreign government has shown any inclination to reason with fundamentalists who show no capacity for logic or compromise. - Sri Lanka Guardian
Post a Comment