New vibes for Tamil politics

“Prabhakaran is dead and a vacuum exists for a refill of the leadership role or roles. The old leaders of the Tamils are still around (those of whom the LTTE could not eliminate and those whom he brought under his heavy boot); those among the would be liberators who challenged the Lankan State are also around (that is, the few who have survived the LTTE attacks); so are some of the solo players who played out the illusion of being representatives of the Tamils. Who amongst them will take the lead?”
……………………………

By Gnana Moonesinghe

"If men could learn from history, what lessons it might teach us! But passion and party blind our eyes, and the light which experience gives is a lantern in the stern which shines only on the waves behind." - Samuel Taylor Coleridge

(December 20, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Too long just a few have done the thinking for the Tamils. Too long have the Tamils followed a few at the top. Too long have they been led by emotion and rhetoric. Too long have they stayed in a time warp where fresh thinking was shut out and the collective mind kept dormant. In their lives there was no spring or summer and nothing new could grow. The stillness of autumn and the cold of the winter was their lot. Following this recurring pattern led them into the pitiful pitfalls- the fate that befalls all who follow without question, without dialogue and who rest all arguments in blind faith on the anointed leadership. Too bad the Tamils had to wake up to the events following the post ’56 era, each decade since then adding to the cumulative trauma of the community.

New vibes for Tamil politics is the need of the moment. It is time that post Prabhakaran period throw up new leadership with fresh assessment of the aspirations and realities of the Tamil community - the vision of Tamils as an equal partner in the nation state of Sri Lanka. The Tamil community has faced too much suffering, too many deaths, too many disappearances, too many lives languishing without homes, without livelihoods, without a serene environment, without a place to rest. From the fifty -fifty high tide of the pre independence period to the wakening to a minority status and the disappointments they faced from the non viable utopias painted by the many leaders who took on the leadership from time to time have been their experience. The Tigers who put up an effective challenge to the nation state took them to a new high in the vision of Eelam. This seemed, until early 2009, to be a likely proposition.

However the shattered dreams began long before the collapse of the LTTE. Too soon it became evident that Prabhakaran’s dreams did not synchronize with the democratic accommodation available to the people in the North and the East. The Tamil people have once again failed themselves by nurturing a demi- god from whose clutches none could escape. Prabhakaran’s dreams were no different to all men who get catapulted to the top, all too willingly, by an enthused people. He dreamed of a ‘Prabhakaran land’ where his diktat was supreme and where dissent resulted in annihilation. Silence was the only option and unquestioned acquiescence the only path to survival. The Thiranagamas and the Mahattayas learnt that any attempt to voice anything different to that of the supreme leader ended in certain death and they did die because Prabhakaran so willed it.

The people who hoped to enjoy the breeze of freedom from the burden of an overbearing majority found much to their dismay that they were mentally manacled and were falling slowly but surely into the depths of despair. Children born in the 70’s and after knew nothing but war. Their regular feed has been Eelam. The LTTE promised the Tamils a utopian life in an independent Eelam where both personal and psychological needs will be secured; where cultural and linguistic aspirations will be fulfilled and where the quality of life will be enhanced. In doing so the LTTE raised the hopes of their community. But with the passage of time disillusionment set in when the war became a never ending reality. The voluntary support was soon overtaken by compulsion and the fear syndrome became a part of the lives of the hapless people. This brought about the slow strangulation of the Tamil spirit.

As of now the war is over. Will the end of the war bring the much sought after recognition of a due share and a sanguine life to the Tamils? Will recognition of their individual worth come to those who have gone through the travails of living in the battle zone under coercion and involuntary sacrifice? Will inclusivity come to those who lived outside the war zone but who nevertheless encountered constant fears of recriminations by the security checks, societal suspicions and who lead for the most part an insecure life without dignity.

Sandwiched as the Tamils were between the LTTE and the armed forces, people lost their peace of mind; bombarded as they were with not only constant shelling but also the gruesome reality of being trapped in the corridors of attack and counter attack. Those who had the means fled the place, those who could not had to stay holding on to the hope that the army will be defeated by the superior power of the liberating forces of Prabhakaran. The emergence of Prabhakaran was considered a phenomenon, a successful countervailing force to stop the attacks by the Sri Lankan army and prevent the recurrence of the ’83 pogrom. This remained a great solace to the Tamils and even today if there is a lingering sadness among some Tamils about Prabhakaran’s demise, it is the fear that the leader and the movement they considered their sheet anchor and their protective cover of security and pride is no more. The Tamils felt that at last they have created a bulwark between the majority and the Tamils through the military strength of the LTTE and the strategies followed by their leader who could challenge the many inept ways of exclusion of the Tamils from a role in governance.

Prabhakaran is dead and a vacuum exists for a refill of the leadership role or roles. The old leaders of the Tamils are still around (those of whom the LTTE could not eliminate and those whom he brought under his heavy boot); those among the would be liberators who challenged the Lankan State are also around (that is, the few who have survived the LTTE attacks); so are some of the solo players who played out the illusion of being representatives of the Tamils. Who amongst them will take the lead?

There is considered opinion that the Tamil leadership over these many years failed to deliver on the variety of concerns of the Tamil community. A union of forces with a common agenda for the welfare of the Tamils would have carried greater impact to help resolve some at least of the grievances of the community. Instead, concentration of effort was always to fight for political space particularly after militancy came to the forefront. . The ‘I’ of the leader and the group mattered more than the ‘we’ of the collective, the Tamilians.

Should the Tamils not search for leaders who will be more flexible and search for accommodation at a national level? In the globalized world, boundaries and distances do not matter. Differences are given factors and flexibility is the tool through which the system functions. This is perhaps the model to adopt and be systematized into the political process. There are men and women amongst the Tamils who have gone through fire and water, the symbol of death and resurrection, and remain sharpened in wit by their experiences. Can they lead or make an input to their leaders?

In hindsight it would seem as if the leadership had used the whole of the Tamil community as martyrs to serve their ends. Evidence of this is seen in the way the leadership handled problems they were confronted with. The three major areas of discontent since 1956 have been one, regarding language following the declaration of Sinahla Only; two, the complaint of reduced access to higher education and three, the drop in employment opportunities in the public sector. Over the years the language issue was resolved and finally, with the 13th amendment, Sinhala and Tamil declared the official languages. But the Tamil politicians never gave prominence to these changes to the people. Many were not aware that such changes have taken place for the simple reason that it did not serve the political ambitions of their leaders to share this information. People kept agitating for what was already their constitutional right and the Tamil politicians were happy to keep this chorus alive. What a mature leadership keen on removing the obstacles should have done was to examine the shortcomings and flaws in policy, particularly in its tardy implementation. Tamils face serious problems in their dealings with officialdom owing to the language barrier but the leadership failed to attend to specifics to remove the difficulties.

Similarly, standardization and the quota system that reduced access to Tamil students, underwent changes in the 1970’s and early 1980’s. These did not enter the political dialogue either. The Tamil community continued to nurse the perception of discrimination and the politicians did not make the effort to clarify convincingly the rationale behind the policies. It is a tragedy that today many are realizing that this did help the disadvantaged students in the remote areas in the north, east and the south

The downturn in the employment potential for the Tamils continued sharply from the late 60’s and onwards. The disproportionate statistics for the Tamils in the public sector employment prior to this legislation have been a bone of contention with the majority community. The Tamils used the access they had to schools, with a singular concentration as the only resource for greater mobility. There is today a demand for strict application of meritocracy in recruitment abandoning the wide usage of patronage. If this had been followed and the merits of the system explained, it would have led to greater harmony not only between the Sinhalese and the Tamils but also quite emphatically within the Sinhalese majority community as well. Much of the discontent that boiled over in the 1971 uprising and later in 1989 had as a root cause, political patronage in selections made to employment.

When numbers worked against the Tamil minority in education as well as in recruitment to jobs, wiser counsel should have prevailed. The leadership should have encouraged their followers to gain mastery over the Sinhala and English languages while learning in Tamil and given them the opportunity to compete with the majority on an equal basis, proving their capacity to learn and excel. Mastery of another language adds value to one and will in no way diminish the esteem and the linguistic or cultural identity of any group. Tamil leaders denied to the Tamils this option while many of their children living in Colombo and other major towns gained versatility in all three languages. Tamils who had the resources and the opportunity, left the country especially after 1956 and later after 1983, while some others migrated for economic reasons either before or after 1983. The Tamil community lost the greater part of their intelligentsia and so did the country. Sections of the migrants later formed the Diaspora that invested in divisive and aggressive military option to the detriment of the Tamils and the others in the country, resources which could have been used for constructive purposes to strengthen the community’s competitiveness.

The shortsightedness of the politicians at the time was responsible for the rise of the militant movement and the untold suffering the Tamils have gone through and are still going through. Many of the mainstream Tamil politicians were ruthlessly eliminated by the LTTE. The ruthless element in the ethnic war was thus born out of this non committal attitude of the seniors who were actually masters of accommodation but who failed to teach this essential quality necessary for negotiation to their followers. The failure of the leadership to be transparent in their dealings with the members in their respective parties caused them and the country immense problems. The culpability of the political leadership in the south is in no way diminished by pointing out to the shortcomings in Tamil leadership.

Following the end of the war, in an attempt to indicate a return to normalcy the government held elections in the North. Elections were held even before the IDP’s were resettled and the wheels of society had begun to roll on. There was some degree of voter apathy, an indication that the government had pre-empted a process which turned out to be ahead of the immediate concerns of the war weary people struggling to settle down after years of leading a ‘nomadic’ life style. Many Tamils from this district have left the country or moved to other parts of the island; many of the residents are trapped in the IDP camps. Having lived without the trappings of democracy for many years, the people were perhaps unable to be enthused by the prospect of elections. Moreover the elections were held with a strong presence of security forces, with some candidates and their supporters carrying arms. No media interaction was available for the people to give expression to their needs and interests. Consequently the local elections turned out to be less than impressive.

There is a large non committed residue of voters. This is a good sign particularly in the light of the poll released by a think tank from Colombo which states that 65% of respondents in Jaffna either said that they identified with no party or refused to divulge which one it was. This means that people have matured and are going to take their time and not make quick decisions as to who or what they want. Also, the fact that they were not airing their choice of party, if they had made one, indicate that they would like to keep their choice private; a very significant response indeed.

Much needs to be done in the task of reconciliation and integration. This is only possible if the people of the North are taken into confidence and their opinions solicited. The TNA is reported to have said that a vote "for the ruling coalition would be to subject the peninsula to rule by Sri Lanka’s mainly Buddhist Sinhala majority". (The Economist, August 15th -21st, 2009.) If this is so, it would be a sad reflection on the longest serving political party which has opted to turn its attention away from lessons to be learnt from history. The need of the hour is to promote ‘inclusive’ politics and advocate pluralism in a manner that promotes nation building. This does not mean turning a blind eye to the causes of the conflict. This is the time to acquaint the Tamils in the war torn areas of the plans the government has for development, for reconciliation and for teaching of English and IT to get the young men and women linked to the global economy. This might help to offer peace to the traumatized people who will naturally tend to be wary of the Sinhala ‘enemy’. A generation of youth has lived since the 70’s in the north, without any interaction with the rest of the country except the army and to many this relationship had not been pleasant.

Once the Tamil people have settled down, it is the hope a ‘home grown’ Tamil leadership will emerge. They will have a greater awareness of their local needs while being conscious of the shortcomings in their past strategies. The reins of leadership should be taken by them so that they become stakeholders of the mechanisms and processes necessary for their progress. Civic space so long denied to them can be created that will foster skills in peace building strategies for national integration, individual and collective development in their areas of habitation, for justice and dignity as equal copartners within the nation. This time around the Tamil leadership should not fail.

-Sri Lanka Guardian