What the Sinhala people gained through war, is a feeling of seeking for the Middle Path in any future confrontation. Many Sinhala feel that majority rule should be balanced with interests and sensitivities of minorities. Saying there are no majorities and minorities is a reflection of the need to guarantee greater participation in the democratic process.
l by Victor Cherubim
(14 July, 2012, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) “See no evil, hear no evil nor speak no evil,” we all know is an admired admonition, hardly adhered. But what about the three other evils of our time: Terrorism, Separatism and Extremism. Many if not, most commentators are reluctant, repugnant and/or repulsed to offer an opinion, until their silence is construed as either being complacent, conciliatory or cretinism. Think outside the box, we could well consider these three evil forces actually as the cause of most of our contentious issues among peoples and nations?
Though each of these evils could have appeared in various manifestations, theories and practices and may have been given a voice, a hearing over the 30 odd years of war in Sri Lanka, we still cling on to them as if they have become second nature. This is a phenomenon common to many other nations too.
In regard to terrorism, we are aware that President George Bush declared Global War on Terror (GWOT) in response to attacks of 9/11. Others have questioned whether it is possible to declare war on an intangible situation and fathom how it will be known, if the war has been won or lost.
We in Sri Lanka had to win the war or so it seems, to see for ourselves, as well as to contain barbaric and political violence. But this war has made us backward by 30 years or more. When a war is classed as terrorist instead of a war of liberation, the real yardstick of assessment is seen in its after effects. When innocence is denigrated, free will is crushed; fear is installed by the dictates of one or more individuals or even by the State, it is political violence with ethnic and economic overtones. It makes an already difficult problem today of reconciliation among people, counterproductive.
With regard to separatism, I found I would learn a lesson or two by heading to the Scottish Highlands recently. I wanted to listen to the legends, experience a taste of good old Robbie Burns’ traditions. I wish to relate what I saw and heard in the Highlands.
Scottish independence is not separatism. It is not one and the same thing. Independence debate is a debate about Scotland’s rightful constitutional status within the British Isles, not a debate whether Scotland should go it alone, economically and politically. The campaign for Scottish independence is simply whether the referendum should include a second question, rather than a single straightforward yes or no vote.
First Minister Alex Salmon favours a second question – full devolution of the powers with reservations for defence and foreign affairs with Westminster. Opinion polls show a “staggering” 35 % of Scots wants separation, compared with 55% prefer staying within the U.K. Whilst back in England, I am told the surest way to persuade Scotland to leave the Union, is to imply it is bound to perpetual dependence on England. All this has come about by the change in economic climate.
What has come out loud and clear, people both sides of the border are passionately in favour of the Union.
Similarly, in Sri Lanka, what the Tamils have lost is the illusion that the war can be won with limited resources and manpower, money and strategic intelligence. Tamil lost out big way, as the Sinhala army larger by far, kept on driving them from Jaffna to Elephant Pass, to Kilinochchi, to Mullaitivu and to their demise in Mullivaikal. There was never a Plan B when Jaffna was not lost, nor did the LTTE communicate by winning friends among the Sinhalese. They relied solely on the military option at the expense of everything else, hardly learning the lessons of earlier defeats elsewhere.
A Sinhala writer sums up the continuing predicament of the Tamils as follows:
“The Tamils consistently looked to the outside world to retain their power within Sri Lanka. They resented and resisted any intrusions or interventions in their conservative way of life.”
On the question of separatism, economics has overshadowed by many other factors, as predominantly seen in Scotland. The question of separatism in Sri Lanka too is overtaken by other considerations, though unclear but still prevalent.
In Sri Lanka, we have to frame the question in the light of past experience. People tried to appeal for human rights and ran to the West for help. People tried, so they say, holding white flags and surrendered to be gunned down mercilessly. People tried but failed to communicate in Sinhala with the ordinary man on the street, to find common cause in their plight. Now they demand police and land powers, when they could not even get their prisoners free.
The Sinhala answer to separatism is precise, in fact clinical: “Can you prove you can handle Police and Land powers without going back to your fascist and so called terrorist past?”
No answer has been given as yet. Until this is resolved there can be no progress.
With regard to Extremism, in different realms, at different times, there have been many different definitions. Besides, there are varied and various features of extremism. Fear is the driving force that propels extremism. There is political extremism, religious extremism, and racial hatred leading to uncompromising policies.
Extremism is part and parcel of divide and rule. It is a mind tool to generate division.
The more there is division the more there is instability, The more there is instability the more there is unrest. The more there is unrest, the more some gain and many lose out. What is hardly appreciated is that the very people who have gained as a result have also suffered a loss of some kind, whilst the people who have lost too have gained in some way.
What the Tamils lost, they have gained by having to be more ingenious in ways of survival. What caused the displacement among Tamils; they have learned how to cope with tragedy.
What the Sinhala people gained through war, is a feeling of seeking for the Middle Path in any future confrontation. Many Sinhala feel that majority rule should be balanced with interests and sensitivities of minorities. Saying there are no majorities and minorities is a reflection of the need to guarantee greater participation in the democratic process.
Information Technology offers both Sinhala and Tamil and Muslim a new opportunity for bringing greater accountability and transparency into the democratic process, with oversight of the Executive and legislature by the judiciary. The rule of law cannot be enforced by outside, but has to be weaned and worked according to the customs, traditions and practices in Sri Lanka. The more there is independence of the judiciary, rather than independence for any minorities, the more there is a separation of powers, rather than the separation of the country, the more there is a Middle Path to progress, the more Sri Lanka will be recognised within and without. This realisation cannot come overnight.
The Writer can be reached at victorcherubim@aol.com
Post a Comment