Internationalising the Internal Crisis

By N. Sathiya Moorthy

(February 16, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) ‘Today, there are more nations and governments that are ready to acknowledge the oft-repeated Sri Lankan Government charge that the LTTE has been using Tamil civilians as ‘human shields’ than they had done ever before. There are also more institutions the world over that are ready to wait out an LTTE version – or that of the Government – before passing a verdict . For every charge of the Sencholai kind, there is one like the Vishwamadu suicide-strike. Human lives have become human shields and ‘HR brands’.

Yet, global governments need to be concerned about the replicable nature of the human shields that their constant calls for the Sri Lankan State to end the hostilities could facilitate elsewhere. Global nations have their reasons to revive their interest. Terrorism is one. Equity and equality are another. They go together in the Sri Lankan context. The international community’s support for the Sri Lankan State in the past three years is as much for the initiation of the political process as it has been for the eradication of insincere approach of the LTTE kind for problem-solving. They adopted the latter to facilitate the former. There are no stand-alones, and it is this message that they are sending out to the Sri Lankan Government. If Russia extended a diplomatic safe hand for the Sri Lankan Government, China, another P-5 member was providing weapons for the Sri Lankan State. Both share the clear-cut ‘global’ doctrine on fighting terrorism. Like others, they too have clear or not-so-clear strategies for the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Sri Lanka’s strategic locale matters to some, and could become a matter of concern to some others.

On the one hand, you had the international community asking the LTTE to free the civilians and lay down weapons, or urging the Sri Lankan Government to order ceasefire and initiate peace talks – or, both. On the other, you also had Russia and the UK reportedly stalling a Mexican move to bring the ethnic issue to the high table of the UN Security Council, however informal it was to be.

Overnight, Sri Lanka is global news all over again, for delicately delineated reasons – all of them flowing from the ethnic war that is seen to be in its last leg. The UK has named a special envoy (since vetoed by Colombo), and the Indian Government referred to the situation in President Pratibha Patil’s annual State address.

Demonstrators are back on Colombo streets, protesting the emerging perceptions of foreign governments. Across Europe and the Americas, Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora is crying foul – against the international community, for exactly opposite reasons. Nearer to the shores, south Indian State of Tamil Nadu has been witness to emotion-charged accusations, targeting the rulers in Delhi and Chennai. It has since consolidated ‘majority political opinion’ in the State and the nation against the LTTE – and in favour of the larger Tamil cause and concerns in Sri Lanka.

The world did not know Sri Lanka existed, or the Sri Lankan Tamil problem was shaping up in the pre-Independence era. It was a British colony, yes, but known better for Trincomallee, an Allied naval base in the Second World War. Indian freedom leaders like Gandhiji and Jawaharlal Nehru cared. They had followers among the Sinhalas and were deified by the island Tamils.

Independence from the common British ruler changed all that. The Palk Strait divided the two nations, and their peoples. For New Delhi, Sri Lanka, then Ceylon, was a sovereign nation as India. The emerging Dravidian polity in Tamil Nadu had its hands full, in shaping their own policies and programmes, political survival and growth.

The disenfranchisement of the upcountry Indian Tamils was almost a non-event in Tamil Nadu. Living in a utopian world, India extended a motherly arm to all those forced out of Sri Lanka and Burma, now Myanmar. The ‘Sinhala Only’ law, and the attendant inequities and violence against the Tamils went mostly unnoticed even in India. Pogrom-83 changed the Indian perception. To the rest of the world, Sri Lanka was a pawn in the Cold War, still.

Come the internet era and the Diaspora Tamils, purposeful as they are resourceful, left nothing to chance. The Sri Lankan State was slow in catching up. Once it did so, the State has had the leverage that the non-State players could not enjoy, particularly in the post-9/11 global environment. The results are there to be seen on the ground.

Today, there are more nations and governments that are ready to acknowledge the oft-repeated Sri Lankan Government charge that the LTTE has been using Tamil civilians as ‘human shields’ than they had done ever before. There are also more institutions the world over that are ready to wait out an LTTE version – or that of the Government – before passing a verdict

For every charge of the Sencholai kind, there is one like the Vishwamadu suicide-strike. Human lives have become human shields and ‘HR brands’. Yet, global governments need to be concerned about the replicable nature of the human shields that their constant calls for the Sri Lankan State to end the hostilities could facilitate elsewhere.

Global nations have their reasons to revive their interest. Terrorism is one. Equity and equality are another. They go together in the Sri Lankan context. The international community’s support for the Sri Lankan State in the past three years is as much for the initiation of the political process as it has been for the eradication of insincere approach of the LTTE kind for problem-solving. They adopted the latter to facilitate the former. There are no stand-alones, and it is this message that they are sending out to the Sri Lankan Government.

If Russia extended a diplomatic safe hand for the Sri Lankan Government, China, another P-5 member was providing weapons for the Sri Lankan State. Both share the clear-cut ‘global’ doctrine on fighting terrorism. Like others, they too have clear or not-so-clear strategies for the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Sri Lanka’s strategic locale matters to some, and could become a matter of concern to some others.

For much of the rest of the world engaged in the Sri Lankan issue, the Diaspora constituency is a knife that can cut either way. Their polities are confused, and their governments are concerned about the way they can use the Diaspora and/or the Diaspora can use them. Permanent peace in Sri Lanka means a lot for them all.

Sri Lanka’s was an internal problem that an insensitive State internationalised. Such internationalisation of the issue gave greater confidence to the LTTE, thus paving the way for its politico-military undoing. Today, there are few governments that are ready to stand by the LTTE, or stand guarantee for the outfit. The Sri Lankan State did not have much to do in this conversion.

Having internationalised the issue, the Sri Lankan State cannot escape the peace-price that it has to pay – and is committed to paying. There are no free lunches in global diplomacy, including aid diplomacy. The world is not seeking much for itself, either. Colombo knows the best, and knows what is best for Sri Lanka.

-------
The writer is Director, Chennai Chapter of the Observer Research Foundation, the Indian policy think-tank, headquartered in New Delhi.The article an originally carried by the Daily Mirror, Colombo based daily news paper.

-Sri Lanka Guardian