A Black May might have been avoided, but 2019 has seven more months left to go. Sri Lanka’s fate lies in balance. Ten years after the end of the last war, will we be plunged into a new –religious – war?
***
by Tisaranee Gunasekara
“And
even here
Lies
the other shore
Waiting
to be reached.”
Tagore
(My Reminiscences)
The blue, red,
yellow, orange and white lights are on, as are the makeshift stalls selling
lanterns. Yet few pause to see, haggle, buy. Vesak, so near chronologically,
had never seemed so far away spiritually.
After the Easter Sunday Massacre, fears were raised about Vesak too
being turned into a bloody spectacle by the IS, working through its local
adherents. As it turned out, neither the IS nor its local adherents were
necessary to turn Vesak into a season of violence. The Sinhalese managed the
task on their own.
The outburst of anti-Muslims violence began on 12th Sunday
in Chilaw (the inciting incident seemingly was a Facebook post by a Muslim
trader with deficient English and a cavalier attitude towards punctuation; it
was translated into Sinhala by a Sinhalese whose knowledge of English was even
poorer). Within hours, the violence spread to other parts of the North Western
Province and to Gampaha district. Undeterred by the curfew or the presence of
the security forces, the mobs attacked and burnt, as they did in Digana in
2018, Aluthgama in 2014 and nationally during Black July.
As of now, the worse of the violence seems over. Even so, this is only
a reprieve. If the perpetrators of this week’s riots are not brought before the
law, fast, a new outburst is bound to follow.
The main suspects of the Digana anti-Muslim violence (including Amth
Weerasinghe of the Mahason Balakaya) were arrested, and remanded. But they were
never charged, despite the presence of ample evidence in the public domain. Three
days after the anti-constitutional coup of October 26th, they were enlarged
on bail. Afterwards, Amith Weerasinghe tried to ignite other religious flares.
For instance, earlier this year, he attempted to fire up Buddhists by shouting
about a Hindu takeover of the Sri Pada
The Mahason Balakaya and other Sinhala-Buddhist fanatics happily
returned to the anti-Muslim groove after the Easter Sunday Massacre. A demonstration
against ‘Islamic terrorism’ planned for 11th Saturday in Digana was
banned by the courts. Responding to the ban, the Mahason Balakaya leader made
no secret about his future plans. “I’m asking the leaders of this country, if
in future a ten thousand Amith Weerasinghes are created can you issue ten
thousand banning orders? If fifty thousand, sixty thousand monks of this
country get on to the road, what will you do?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZE6RmimOSk).
His threat turned into an actuality in less than 48 hours.
Had this man, and his cohorts, been charged, tried and convicted,
perhaps this week’s violence might not have happened. When perpetrators of
mob-violence go unpunished, it opens the door to Ochlocracy.
Speaker Karu Jayasuriya stated, “There is no difference whatsoever
between those extremist traitors and suicide bombers killing children.” He was
right. This week’s rioters are terrorists too and the government must treat
them as such. If the government fails to act with speed and firmness, if it
allows the incendiaries to walk, again, another outburst of violence would be
unavoidable.
A Black May might have been avoided, but 2019 has seven more months
left to go. Sri Lanka’s fate lies in balance. Ten years after the end of the
last war, will we be plunged into a new –religious – war?
The not-so-new
Spectre
Ethnic-overdetermination was the term used by Dr. Newton Gunasinghe
to describe the new divide in Sri Lanka in the aftermath of Black July. Using
an Althusserian concept, he argued that in both Sinhala and Tamil societies,
the ethnic factor had come to the fore, submerging class contradictions. The
subsequent years were to prove him right.
Today, Sri Lanka is facing an even greater danger, that of
religious-overdetermination. If the government fails to rein in forces of
religious extremism on all sides, the dream of a Lankan nation will be replaced
by the nightmarish reality of a country plagued by violent religious fissures.
Religious identity will trump every other alignment, starting with our common
humanity.
Interestingly, the first signs of a nascent religious
overdetermination appeared during the long interregnum created by the third and
final peace process. During the 2002-2005 period, Catholics, including Sinhala
Catholics, were turned into the new enemy. The conversion of Buddhists into
Christianity was depicted as an even greater danger than Eelam. The old crimes
of Portuguese colonists gained a new immediacy in the extremist
Sinhala-Buddhist discourse. The demand for an anti-conversion bill began to
dominate the political debate.
The anti-Catholic hysteria reached its moral nadir when Soma Thero
died suddenly during a visit to Russia. Catholics were accused of murdering the
monk, as a part of a Western conspiracy to take over Sri Lanka. Churches were
attacked by the dozen. The hysteria was such that the government was forced to
appoint a commission to investigate the monk’s demise. The anti-Catholic fires were stoked by the
newly formed Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) to gain a considerable chunk of the
electoral pie at the 2004 parliamentary polls.
The anti-Catholic hysteria vanished as suddenly as it began when the
de facto Fourth Eelam War commenced. Tamils replaced Christians once again as
the main enemy.
During the initial post-war years, Sinhala-Buddhist extremists targeted
not Muslims but Christians. The newly minted BBS put forward five demands at
its inaugural convention at the BMICH in July 2012. None of them made specific
mention of Muslims. The resolutions demanded an end to family planning among
Sinhalese, amending the current (Roman, Dutch and British inspired) laws to
protect Buddhists, opposition to a political solution to the ethnic problem,
implementing the recommendation of the Buddhasasana Commission Report of 1959
and appointing a regulatory authority to supervise Buddhist books (The Island – 29.7.2012). There was no
halal demand or burqa hysteria.
Just six months later, it all changed. In January 2013, the BBS
launched its anti-halal campaign. Suddenly the Muslims were the new enemy,
their way of life an existential threat to everyone else.
After the Easter
Sunday Massacre, many Muslim leaders came forward to denounce the carnage and
the suicide bombers in unequivocal terms. And in a gesture that spoke louder
than multiples tomes full of words, Lankan Islamic leaders refused to accept
the bodies of the suicide bombers, thereby denying the killers a religious
burial. Their purpose was to demonstrate their abhorrence towards suicide bombing
and to send a clear warning to the entire Muslims community that such violence
in the name of faith was unacceptable.
The leading
Buddhist monks are yet to take a similar stand. They didn’t do it during Black
July or the previous attacks on Tamils. They didn’t do so during Aluthgama and
Digana anti-Muslim outbursts. They are still not doing it.
How hard is it to say
that violence has no place in Buddhism? How hard is it to point out that no
monk can advocate violence and remain a true disciple of the Buddha? How hard
it is to denounce the rioting as anti-Buddhist, a disgrace to one of the
greatest proponents of non-violence the world has ever known? How hard is it to
tell the rioters not to desecrate Vesak with their violent orgy? How hard is it
to say, Not in our name, never in our name?
Post-East Sunday Massacre, many have accused Muslims of insularity.
Yet when Muslim progressives tried to lessen that insularity by abolishing such
egregious practices as child marriage, they found themselves alone and
defenceless. The other communities ignored their struggle, while the craven government
abandoned them to the fury of their own fundamentalists. (Rajan Hoole’s Sri Lanka’s Easter Tragedy through the Eyes
of Dissent in The Colombo Telegraph
deals with this aspect at length).
In another inane and deadly repetition of the past, democratic
Muslim leaders are being equated with the IS terrorists. This was exactly what happened
with the Tamils; we found democratic Tamil leaders ‘too much’ and got
Vellupillai Pirapaharan in their stead.
The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration had a rare window of
opportunity to work with moderates and progressives of all communities to
isolate and weaken the hardliners, the radicals, the fundamentalists. The
government missed that opportunity. The tragedy and the danger of today stem
from that unforgivable failure.
A different path?
Sri Lanka had a secular constitution up to 1972. It was changed by a
supposedly left government for no reason other than political expediency.
There was no popular demand in the 1970’s to change the secular
nature of the constitution, to give a special place to Buddhism. For the
majority of people, economic considerations were paramount. Yet the United
Front government, and specifically Dr. Colvin R de Silva, took that fateful
step, thereby creating a new minefield for Sri Lanka.
After Easter Sunday Massacre, there are demands for reforms in
Muslim society. But for these reforms to be implemented successfully, without
further alienating a large swathe of ordinary Muslims, they must come as a part
of a general political and societal transformation. Sri Lanka as a whole needs
to move away from religious politics to non-religious politics. Political
leaders and religious leaders must begin to focus on their separate spheres,
ending the deadly practice of fusing the two for personal and parochial gains.
Secularism is often misconceived as being anti-religious. It is not.
Secularism stands for the separation of religious institutions and state
institutions, for freedom of religion and for equality for all faiths and none.
Secularism is also denigrated as a Western fashion. But two of history’s
greatest secular rulers came from the Orient, from India: Akbar the Great, and
Maharaja Ranjith Singh, known to posterity as the Lion of Punjab. They both
successfully led multi-religious empires by adopting policies of religious
neutrality.
Extremism is
fuelled by ignorance. In Sri Lanka, every religious community has ghettoised
itself. We interact less with each other and know less about each other than we
did fifty years ago. This separation starts at school and continues right to
the grave. We boast that Sri Lanka is home to four great religions, but our
children are not taught even the basics of other religions. We know next to
nothing of each other’s history. This ignorance provides a fertile ground for
extremists of all varieties. It makes the task of demonising and dehumanising
the religious Other easier.
How much would a non-Muslim child know about the contributions made
by Islamic scholars, philosophers and scientists to our common civilisation?
How much would even a Muslim child, exposed only to Salafi influences, know
about those contributions? Hasn’t that ignorance enabled the creation of a
dangerously false stereotype, Islam and Muslims as joyless religious fanatics?
Eric Hobsbawm uses a phrase from Karl Kraus to define religious
fundamentalists, calling them the symptoms of ‘the disease of which they
purport to be the cure’ (The Age of
Extremes). The solution to religious fantaticism is not to enhance the
marriage between politics and religion but to lessen those bonds.
The 17th Century French Philosopher Pierre Bayle in his Historical and Critical Dictionary pointed
out that given the bloody history of religious conflict and persecution, it is
impossible to conclude that there is a correlation between religious faith and
moral conduct. If the gory events of the last month proved anything, it did the
correctness of Bayle’s argument. Absolute, uncritical, unquestioning faith in
any creed, religious or political, paves the way to inhumanity and barbarity. Suicide
killers or rioters are not born; they are made by a belief that killing the
religious other is either no sin or opens a quick root to heaven.
When Andre Malraux asked Nehru to name his greatest challenge
Nehru’s reply was “creating a just state by just means; perhaps too creating a
secular state in a religious country” (Anti-Memoirs).
As we stand on the brink of a new – and a worse – abyss, our challenge is no
different – we need to create a Lankan nation in a country plagued by
conflicting and contending tribal consciousnesses. That task can be undertaken
only by a state that tries to stay above those divisions, and not immerse
itself in them.
Post a Comment