Reconcile with Tamils or Risk terrorism – a reply

"Sri Lanka seems to be ready for the eventuality of war anyway with increases in defence spending, manpower, weapons for the Navy and the Air Force. This means the threat or risk of terrorism cannot take us anywhere. People as the biggest losers of the war do not endorse war again. It is foolhardy to expect a different outcome after four Elam Wars ended with the same result."
_______________

By Thomas Johnpulle

(August 16, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) “Reconcile with Tamils or Risk Terrorism”. This is a threat; nothing else. But why drag Tamils into this threat? Tamils never made this threat. Robert Blake should rather be dreaming of a multiethnic society for everyone to live in as in his country. But he seems to be suggesting otherwise. If the government and the armed forces have this type of attitude, Tamils run the grave risk of being unfairly subjugated for alleged ‘terrorist’ links even after the end of the war, the way poor Afghan children are made to pay for American suspicions. This type of threats can ruin reconciliation and force the parties to continue with military might. It injects suspicion and suspicion poisons trust. Over 50% Tamils live outside the North-East and what benefit do they get in regional, race-based power sharing apart from splitting their community right from the middle?

It is not the government of 225 MPs and the President that should reconcile; it is the 20 million people. People cannot be forced into reconciliation by threatening terrorism. It failed in Vietnam, Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan and Pakistan. It will fail in Sri Lanka as well.

Instead a democratic and peaceful approach is required to encourage people to reconcile. Politicians reconciling with each other does not make anything better for the people. Give them a ministry or power and they will reconcile with the ruling coalition while people are left to suffer divisions.

How can 20 million people reconcile?

How can 20 million people reconcile with each other? How have the Americans reconciled with each other? How did the Germans reconcile after pursuing completely different ways of life for decades? There’s only one way – ethnic integration. The City of Colombo is a fantastic example of how ethnic integration has expelled racism, divisions and mistrust. That’s not all. People of all the districts except the Northern districts have already reconciled. Unfortunately the Northerners have no opportunity to reconcile as they cannot see any neighbours of another race for Christ’s sake! Have to agree with Blake that 280,000 people in IDP camps are not allowed an opportunity to reconcile. Government must speed up their resettlement and release those who are not suspected of terrorism with alternative places of abode.

Therefore the way to reconciliation is about ethnic integration in the North while allowing its continuation elsewhere. There is a limit an army of gun pointing soldiers and Northern civilians can reconcile. It must be civilians with civilians as it has happened in Colombo and elsewhere; more interestingly in the United States of America too.

Decades of reconciliation through ethnic integration has done wonders in the Eastern province which was the first to give up violence and racism. Today former Tamil Tigers are appropriately integrated with Tamils, Muslims and Sinhalas in the East in one team working for the betterment of all. There is no power sharing with Tamils, Muslims and Sinhalas here. Power is shared with teams comprising Tamils, Muslims and Sinhalas like cricket teams. Even the national parliament and ruling parties throughout history have been this way. The Cabinet is another fantastic example of power sharing without dragging race into it.

Race-based power sharing destroys reconciliation

As explained above, power is already shared between Tamil, Sinhala and Muslim people and their elected representatives. But certainly not on the basis of race. This has worked well here as in all other countries. Sharing power along racial lines leads to open racism and divisions. Thereafter there is no need to reconcile and the reconciliation process collapses flat on the ground.

Pro-LTTE groups are now demanding that the government share power with them. Their track record of dealing with Sinhalas and Muslims has been disastrous. Their record of anti-Sri Lankan activities and pro-LTTE activities speak for itself. Sharing power with these elements is out of the question, if the reconciliation process is to be meaningful. For national reconciliation, power must be shared between multiethnic teams and each team should have accommodating individuals. Unfortunately, those who demand power sharing lack both these qualifications.

According to the Constitution not only Tamils but also Muslims and Sinhalas have the right to live in any part of the island. Muslims and Sinhalas ethnically cleansed from the North must be resettled as the first step of reconciliation in the North. They must be allowed to vote for the northern elections. Multiethnic communities based on agriculture and fisheries must be created in the North which is the only place in the island that lacks coexistence for no fault of its population. Natural resources in the North amply justify this move. This creates multiethnic teams with whom power can be shared. Competition between two or more multiethnic teams would ensure people get the best deal.

Why reconciliation has opposite meanings in US English depending on the place?

The word reconciliation has contradictory meanings in US English. In the US, NATO Germany, Kosovo and NATO aspirant Georgia reconciliation means reconciliation. But in the case of Palestine, Serbia, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, North-South Vietnam, etc., reconciliation means conflict. This paradox has some link to the word game of terrorists and rebels. While rebels fighting an invader army in Afghanistan are termed terrorists, terrorists fighting their own people in Sri Lanka are called rebels!

The purpose of citing these two indisputable examples is to drive home the fact that words can be twisted to mean quite the opposite of their natural meaning. Out of the two conflicting definitions of “reconciliation”, Sri Lanka must choose the one that suits. The choice must rest with Sri Lankans not with outsiders. In making that choice, spiritual considerations such as ethnic harmony, ethnic integration and coexistence must be considered while national considerations like territorial integrity, sovereignty and national interest must also be considered. On the economic front, access to economic resources everywhere to every ethnic group member must be given due concern. Multi-social and multicultural aspects also need to be considered.

Reconciled people is a one united people in one nation with one pointed self determination, under one flag and national anthem. If not, reconciliation has failed.

Terrorism or rebellion

Terrorism is not dead in Sri Lanka. It is still very active according to news reports. There is absolutely no direct connection between terrorism and reconciliation as suggested by Blake. Lack of reconciliation coupled with a weak military gives rise to terrorism no doubt. But terrorism is not a bargaining tool for power grabbing or forced “reconciliation”. Terrorism has to be handled by the military, militarily and reconciliation got to be handled democratically with the assistance of the law enforcing agents. If the nation enters into a bargaining process with terrorists based on violence, there cannot be any reconciliation. Then it will be war again and war is winnable by the stronger party. Thirty four (34) years of war has made reconciliation very difficult in areas the war ravaged most savagely – the North. If war is to resume, it will further push reconciliation into more difficult terrain.

However, Sri Lanka seems to be ready for the eventuality of war anyway with increases in defence spending, manpower, weapons for the Navy and the Air Force. This means the threat or risk of terrorism cannot take us anywhere. People as the biggest losers of the war do not endorse war again. It is foolhardy to expect a different outcome after four Elam Wars ended with the same result.

Regional politics

The region is attracting unwanted attention from all superpowers and budding superpowers. This means the region may be turned into a battlefield or a playground of a major power struggle. It is indisputable that the majority Sinhala community is aligned to China historically, economically, politically, militarily and culturally. They have a history of over 2,000 years with diplomatic relations with China. Although an ardent Buddhist country, Sri Lanka cancelled the visit of Dalai Lama in the 1960s over obvious reasons. Muslims have deep affiliations to Arab countries and Pakistan. Pakistan and Bangladesh take a special place in regional Muslim unity. All in all China - the Asian superpower - and Pakistan are in the same Asian power axis. On the other hand, Tamils are culturally and politically connected to Tamil Nadu, India, and to the Tamil Diaspora in the West.

Coupled with some recent developments in the region that can potentially have defence implications, the other camp is also eying Sri Lanka. The only way they can also get a foothold in the island is by dividing the island nation along ethnic lines and allegiances.

This is the driving force behind the compulsion to share power along racial-geographic lines knowing very well that most Tamils live outside the North-East. And knowing very well that ethnic integration is the only logical, tried and tested solution. Is it a mere coincidence that this pressure comes from the anti-Asian-superpower camp? Will the fate of Tamils in the North and East be the same miserable fate of the East Timorese? Will North-East Tamils have anything left after being used as pawns in regional power games?

The only solution is true reconciliation based on ethnic harmony and integration, as it has already happened in Sri Lanka.

-Sri Lanka Guardian