LTTE Clings to Disruption and Political Introversion even after Military Debacle

"Prabhakaran’s rejection of the electoral and peaceful means to gaining freedom and his resorting to terrorism only, call into question the legitimacy of its quest for independence."
_________

By Philip Fernando in Los Angeles for Sri Lanka Guardian

(January 31, Los Angeles, Sri Lanka Guardian) LTTE believed that when state and ethnic group boundaries do not coincide, politics must remain ugly. That policy was prescriptive and agenda-driven and not based on winning rights or ventilating grievances. They demonized democratically elected governments for decades with a just one slogan “ethnic domination by southern chauvinists.” LTTE ignored the fact that Fifty five percent of the minorities live amidst the majority community-in Colombo, Kandy, Galle Matara etc. Yet they actively pursued separation of peoples through expulsions, the redrawing of ethnic boundaries and the outright destruction of life and property to claim territories of their own. It had no chance of success.


Having lost most of their territorial domain, the LTTE still relied on partition as the only remedy. The DMK recently faulted the LTTE for not responding to the Sri Lanka government's request to protect civilians, thereby proving that he is not the liberator he claims to be. He is sacrificing the lives of those whom he was trying to liberate by making a human shield out of them. LTTE is hiding behind hapless men, women and children. Even the well-known LTTE backers in Chennai cannot dislodge LTTE from their exploitation of innocent people.

LTTE’s basic assumption that ethnicity must breed conflict is an example of a classical error sometimes called "the base-rate fallacy. It is particularly seductive when events are much more visible than nonevents. How diversity thrived within eighty five percent of the country was ignored and they pursued violence in homogenizing the LTTE led terrorists enclave in the North. By being oblivious to the conflicts that did not happen, Prabhakaran deliberately denied the dynamics of those that did.

Time is ripe to understand how ethnic diversity is so blatantly obvious in Sri Lanka. There has not been a single instance of chaotic ethnic violence in Sri Lanka for decades even when numerous suicide bombers decimated families including infants, the Buddhist clergy and ministers of repute. The propensity to understand and make sense of when ethnic differences generate conflict -- and knowing how best to attempt to prevent or respond to them when they do has been a trade mark of Sri Lanka for several decades now: a manifestation of a deeper understanding of how ethnicity works.

People tend to prefer members of their own group and, in some cases, have active antipathy toward out-group members, making conflict the inevitable result. That is the exception and not the rule. LTTE used the negative aspects of ethnicity towards achieving their own sinister ends. It was used as an appealing narrative. It resonated when violence was pursued for an ulterior end. But it was doomed from the start.

It is obvious that the notion that ethnic diversity generates antipathies so deep that they cannot be realistically resolved, so separation becomes the obvious end, perhaps, the only feasible antidote has been proved to be wrong. In reality, political coalitions are formed along ethnic lines not because people care more for their own but simply because it is easier to collaborate with their ethnic peers to achieve collective ends.

Such reciprocity is most likely to develop in environments that are devoid of the institutions and practices. Time has come to foster institutions that would protect ethnic groups from being taken advantage of by ruthless seekers of power. In such cases, reciprocity is a protection against being cheated by a ruthless terrorist. People have rejected the so called tribal antipathies brought to the surface by the LTTE. The time to install initiatives that break down barriers to cooperation has arrived. The best response may be greater investment in formal institutions so that individuals are assured that discrimination will be punished and that cooperation across ethnic lines will be reciprocated.

Tragically, the Tamil Diaspora was forced to sacrifice millions of well earned money ($ 300 million or so every year) for a cause they had no faith in. It can be said with a great deal of certainty that the generosity of the Diaspora for building bridges towards peace will emerge soon even without any attempt at extortion. Remarkably, given the opportunity to donate to a worthy cause they would be generous. There are no inherent impediments to foster unity that the Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims would fail to capitalize. There are more bulldozers, tractors, trailers amidst all the paraphernalia of development in the Eastern Province today than anywhere else in Sri Lanka. LTTE’s hold there vanished only a year ago.

It is opportune to invest in creating impartial and credible state institutions that facilitate cooperation across ethnic lines. With such institutions in place, citizens would no longer need to rely disproportionately on ethnic networks in the marketplace and in politics. In this respect, modernization may be the antidote to ethnic nationalism because we always rejected the destabilizing idea that every separately defined cultural unit should have its own state.

The LTTE may still cling to the notion that disruption and political introversion would automatically bring ethnic liberation. History has proved otherwise. Prabhakaran helped the doctrine of ethnic self-determination reached its reductio ad absurdum at this point. The hopelessly impractical Eelam struggle remains beyond reach and illusive. In the world today, there are 6,800 different dialects or languages that might gain political recognition as independent linguistic groups. Does anyone seriously suggest that the 200 or so existing states should each, on average, be cut into 34 pieces?

Sri Lanka has been more responsive to their ethnic minority communities than ever before. Compared to the imperial agglomerations of yesteryear, we are behaving receptively well to the aspirations of all citizens. We also have more resources at our disposal than before and have annual budgets equivalent to nearly 50 percent of their GDPs, much of which is spent on social services that benefit everyone. They can -- and do -- accommodate the economic needs of all communities quite well. They have responded to the basic requirements of language, freedoms of worship, assembly and right to education with greater fervor. If Bretons, Punjabis, Quebecois, and Scots live quite well inside the bonds of multinational sovereignty and in some cases better than residents of other provinces with no claims of being a distinct nation, so can the Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims and Burghers.

Prabhakaran’s rejection of the electoral and peaceful means to gaining freedom and his resorting to terrorism only, call into question the legitimacy of its quest for independence. His systematic destruction of dissent in the North doomed him for good. He had scant respect for Kadiragamas, Alfred Duraiappahs and Thiruchelvams, just to name a few of his victims who were far superior in intellect to him.

Let me end on a positive note. India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand contain different ethnic groups that have largely profited from the intense economic resurgence of their states. Northern and southern Vietnam is culturally different, but both have benefited from the country's economic growth. We are certain that Sri Lanka would respond to economic needs of all groups, and whatever its concerns, no single group need not seek separation to alleviate their needs. There is a sure fire alternative to partition: buckle down to work. - Sri Lanka Guardian