| by Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

( March 17, 2014, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) There has been much debate regarding UN’s power over the Sri Lankan ethnic issue. I also wrote to the UN many times when I concluded that the pain I experienced at the University of New South Wales had its roots in racial discrimination. To date – I have not had any direct response back from the UN. But I was able to see the connection between the reason I gave and the outcomes that happened to those specifically mentioned in my complaints – starting with the Vice Chancellor of the University of New South Wales and ending with the Prime Minister. I had the courage of my conviction to raise the issue to UN level through my own experience. Beyond that I left it to Natural forces. These Natural forces have never failed me. Until that bitter experience – I just did not look for the connection through my experience only but included the thoughts and judgments of others. To the extent I identified naturally with others – they were part of my experience. Others were outsiders – however high up they were in social status. I sought and I found.

My experience at the University may not have been identified with by other migrants at the same University at the same time. Likewise, the experiences of Tamils of Sri Lanka may not be at the same depth with the UN - as it is with the direct victims. Ms Pillai with all her personal experiences due to race and gender, is not likely to feel at that depth with the victims who were let down by UN Administration. One has to step out of Administration or travel beyond, to identify with the Truth. One who has had the deepest experience would lead the real solution.

In terms of the UN – unless someone in the UN feels with the victims of war in Sri Lanka – they do not have the natural powers to lead the solution. Unless someone in the UN feels with the people of Sri Lanka – due to similar experience, UN is limited to its knowledge of rights and wrongs. This knowledge would help Administration through related laws and conventions. It would not lead to development of a solution that would represent the victims and work to protect their future generations.

Those of us driven by experience are already part of the solution. Others driven by knowledge – such as the UN – may help provide form to this solution – but they are not the root of the solution. The rest are driven by hearsay and/or negligence of duty of care. The root of the problem is root of the solution. This may be done top down through knowledge and allocating rights and wrongs or bottom up through the real experience as the base.

It took me a long time to appreciate that as a minority in Australia – it would be easier for me to use the bottom up path. I relied on my knowledge of right and wrong to express myself. Until I was defeated repeatedly along the way up the Administrative path and later in Courts – I was not ready to discard my knowledge. Until I discarded knowledge – I could not identify with my experience and experience alone. Once I got there – I was free of external forces. To the extent therefore we look within for solutions – we will get there. UN has to be an internal power for us to find this solution at UN level.

At the point where the victim thinks there is no other way – the victim needs to look at what happened to her/him / them – through that issue – only as per her/his/group’s experience. Once we remove hearsay and knowledge – we identify with the solution that would work for us anywhere anytime. If we had really lost – we would know that the compensation would happen – that it is not over yet. But if we become active and start administering – as is happening with the Sri Lankan issue – we would not identify with this true situation as per the system of God which never fails the believer.

Administratively speaking, unless other governments that rank higher than Sri Lanka at the UN level include the Tamil cause as theirs – the UN has the responsibility to uphold the status of Sri Lanka as it stands until administrative action is taken through Sri Lanka’s failure to act as per its stated commitments to UN’s policies. To the extent Tamils themselves practice UN policies – the very policies through which they expect the Sri Lankan government to be punished, they would have the natural powers to develop solutions of UN standards. Similarly the Sri Lankan government that drew on UN’s power to list the LTTE as terrorists. Once we practice, we have the experience. Once we have the experience – and are driven by that experience – we are already developing the solution.

Administration is like science. We go through the process of right and wrongs to promote or demote. To the extent Administrators contribute beyond their duties as per their positions – they have the experience. Once we have the experience we don’t need to go through the Administrative process but would know the connection between cause and effect – commonly known as karma. That is the path of faith. The deeper our experience, the deeper our belief.

Through Administration we may promote obedience. Once practice of that Administration becomes habitual, we become natural users of that path. Gradually when we do what we do for ourselves rather than to impress others – we become self-governing. It is to travel along this path of self-discovery without external interruptions that devolution is needed by smaller groups.

The test for Tamils is whether as a group – they practice the UN policies more than the Sri Lankan government? If yes, they would lead Sri Lanka in substance and to that extent they have the moral authority to use the UN as a facility. Without this higher level practice – the moves to punish amount to reverse Administration which diminishes the whole structure of Governance in Sri Lanka. Ultimately – if we, as individuals or as groups – identify with the experience that we had – without attributing blame to others – we are already part of the whole. When Tamils do this we then lead the whole of Sri Lanka. To the extent we continue to attribute blame and call for punishment – an eye for an eye – we are practicing reverse administration and are therefore diluting our own investment in self-governance.


ARCHIVES FROM AUGUST 2007 TO JANUARY 2015