|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Saturday, 20 March 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Features | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
Towards interim power-sharing and problem - solving: Arrangements in the South and the North-East Extracted from the publication titled 'The Sri Lankan Peace Process at Crossroads'; by Tyrol Ferdinands, Kumar Rupasinghe, Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, Jayadeva Uyangoda and Norbert Ropers
There are two essential pre-conditions for enhancing the next phase of the negotiations: interim power-sharing and problem-solving arrangements in the South and the North-East. If there is one principle of peace-making in Sri Lanka on which most actors in the international community, civil society, corporate sector and media agree, it is the need for inclusivity and partnership. Since the inception of the recent peace process, all sectors have impressed upon the President and the Prime Minister and their constituent parties, the need to arrive at a common understanding for taking the peace process forward. This has included the need for joint credit-sharing as well as blame-sharing on the achievements and setbacks in the process, and acknowledgement of the contributions of both sides with respect to this endeavour. This principle runs against the legacy of confrontation, exclusion and win-lose calculations in the Sri Lankan polity as well as against the power-political interests of many key influentials. It is therefore crucial that a strategic alliance of internal and external actors is assembled to transcend this legacy and move towards a paradigm shift towards bi-and multi-lateral power-sharing. In both main parties, the UNP and the SLFP, groupings can be differentiated according to their openness with respect to the nature and degree of an interim power sharing arrangement in the South. This offers an entry point for engaging them and establishing networks of like-minded politicians and advisors. It is also important to mobilise as many influentials from civil society, religious institutions and the business world to participate in this campaign. On the international level, the co-chairs of the Tokyo donor forum (with the exclusion of Norway) and India should be encouraged to do their utmost in supporting the ongoing endeavours and offering any assistance needed to create and sustain back channels as well as to explore ways of sustaining any agreements reached. Strategic and institutional framework The key elements for creating and sustaining an interim power-sharing arrangement could be: * A Memorandum-of-Understanding (MoU) for a limited period between the President/PA and the Prime Minister/UNF, elaborating in detail the principles, rules and procedures of a moratorium on unilateral political action affecting the peace process and an interim power-sharing arrangement of 'constructive cohabitation,' particularly with respect to issues of constitutional reform and the peace process. * A dispute resolution mechanism, established as part of the MoU to resolve any disputes about its interpretation. * A 'Joint Committee for Constitutional Reform,' and co-chaired by the President and the Prime Minister, to elaborate on a common policy with respect to the restructuring of the Sri Lankan State that accommodates the need for an inclusive settlement of the ethnic conflict. * A 'Joint Committee for National Security and the Management of the Peace Process,' co-chaired by the President and the Prime Minister, to oversee the activities in these two areas. It is to be composed of two 'Sub-Committees,' one for 'National Security,' chaired by the President and the other for the 'Management of the Peace Process,' chaired by the Prime Minister. This structure should guarantee that the peace process is an explicitly shared activity, for which the members of the Joint Committees takeover shared responsibility. * The negotiation team to be guided in its overall directives from the Joint Committee for the Management of the Peace Process and supported by a fundamentally re-organised and strengthened Peace Secretariat. The North-East Muslims One of the fundamental flaws in the current peace process is the absence of explicit and effective protection of the full set of the fundamental, civil, political, economic and social rights of the Muslims living particularly in the North-East province. The unfortunate Tamil-Muslim clashes in the East have brought to the forefront Muslim apprehensions and anxieties of being dominated by the Tamils and thus becoming second-class citizens, deprived of their individual and collective rights. There are divergent and conflicting viewpoints existing as to who should be responsible for the eruption of this violence. Both parties claim to possess the moral-high ground and accuse one another of betraying the common cause. The resentment of Tamils towards Muslims arises from the belief that Muslims benefitted from the war by trading not only with both sides but also collaborating with the Sinhala State machinery to crush their struggle. There is also a strongly expressed concern regarding Muslim dominance over the economy. Muslim concerns are about the recognition of the Muslims as a separate and distinct community, their security and protection, the future power-sharing arrangement, and grievances related to the forcible takeover of land in the Northern and Eastern regions, taxation and harassment. Periodic violence against Muslims in some areas has served to exacerbate these fears. The dominant political demand of the Muslims is for equal representation at the negotiating table. The failure of the official negotiations to resolve these issues during Phase-1 has led to a failure to resolve outstanding issues between Muslims and Tamils on the ground. The newly established North-East Muslims Peace Assembly (NEMPA), consisting of members of Muslim civil society and mosque federations, can be seen as such an effort to solve problems at the local level with the LTTE. The agreements reached between the LTTE and NEMPA with regard to Ampara and Batticaloa are quite innovative and have resulted in the handover of lands belonging to Muslims. Frequent meetings between the two parties to resolve issues at the village level have led to creating an atmosphere of relative tranquility in the two districts. Similar agreements could be reached in Trincomalee and the North. Such civil society initiatives do not preclude and negate the need for political cooperation between the LTTE and the Muslim political entity. The Muslim political entity has been deeply divided with different political agendas and has sent mixed signals with regard to their political demands. However, recently there has been an attempt to reach consensus and a willingness to address the ISGA proposals collectively. The Muslim political representatives must exercise an even-handed approach in their negotiation strategy with the GoSL and the LTTE. The Muslim demand to make bilateral negotiations between the GoSL and the LTTE into tripartite negotiations requires that consent and agreement is reached with both parties in such a way that Muslim participation enhances and strengthens the negotiations process. Whilst maintaining excellent relations with the South they should endeavour to develop a similar relationship with the LTTE in the North and East. This can only be done if a continuous dialogue is maintained with the LTTE both at the top and at district levels. Encouraging steps towards negotiations and mutually agreeable framework for interim power-sharing can also be observed in the ISGA proposal of the LTTE. The LTTE explicitly accepts and acknowledges the right of the Muslim community to participate in the formulation of their role in the ISGA. It is expected that the Muslim community will soon submit their proposals and on that basis it should be possible to find a mutually beneficial interim arrangment for the North East. Our recommendation is that an MoU should come into effect between the local/national leadership of the LTTE and an umbrella organisation of the Muslims, consisting of the represenatives of the SLMC, NUA and the local mosque federations. Contours of an MoU between the LTTE and the Muslim community in the East could be as follows: * Recognition of the historical right of the Muslims to live in the North East along with Sinhalese and Tamils, * Establishment of joint committees at the village level to resolve problems on the ground, * Working out of regulations to resolve land questions, * Negotiating of provisions to assure human security, to monitor human rights violations and to stop the Militarisation of Muslim and Tamil youths, * Emphasise the inter-dependency in the local economy and find inclusive interim solutions for trade and commerce, * International monitoring of human rights violations in the whole of the North East. * Formulation of clear regulations and rsponsibilities for implementation of the MoU. * Incorporation of dispute resolution mechanism into the MoU. The Sinhalese The Sinhalese are a significant minority in the East, particularly in Trincomalee and Ampara. They too have concerns regarding their status within a North East Administration if it is dominated by the LTTE. The Sinhalese in the North East, as a regionl minority there, fear that their concerns have not been properly addressed by the Sri Lankan State. The Sinhalese who currently feel marginalised should be given proper attention by the GoSL and the LTTE, their concerns and fears addressed, and a framemwork created for continuous dialogue. The role of civil society organisations in creating such a framework is important and needs to be encouraged. The Tamils The Tamils are a clear majority in the North, yet their majority status in the East is contested, particularly due to the significant presence of Sinhalese and Muslim communities in this province. However in any power-sharing arrangment in the North East, it is necessary to consider the Tamil community as diverse and pluralistic as is the Sinhalese community in the South. These diversities are linked to political, caste, religious and regional as well as gender identities. Power-sharing arrangments that ignore such diversity will lack the qualities of pluralism. Reflecting the diversity of the Tamil community in the North East is essential to facilitate the democratic transition of the Tamil polity. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
