Archives

Dr. Kumar Rupesinghe is the Chairman of the Foundation for Co-existence (FCE), an organisation aiming to consolidate the peace process and enhance the capacity of civil society organisations in promoting peace. He has also been an advisor to the Triple 'R' program and a founding member of the National Anti-War Front. In a recent interview with Rajmi Manatunga of the Daily News, Rupesinghe outlined his views on the peace process and possible solutions to the ethnic conflict.

Q: From your point of view, when should the Government restart peace negotiations with the LTTE and what should be the priorities at such negotiations?

A: It is vital that peace talks resume as soon as possible. It is only through such a step that the present negative aspects in the civil society regarding the process could be changed. The more peace talks are delayed the more those who oppose it will make use of it and pursue their own agendas.

Therefore, it is in the national interest and the aspiration of all communities of the country, especially those in the North-East who undergo tremendous suffering, that negotiations resume without delay. It is the wish of the majority of the people of Sri Lanka.

Q: How should the resumption take place?

A: I think the President should make use of her executive power for this purpose. The Gaullist model of Executive Presidency is framed precisely to take initiatives of this nature although our leaders have used it only to serve their petty political goals.

Q: Does that mean there should be no consensus between the political parties in Parliament before the Government goes to the negotiating table?

A: As far as I am aware there is a consensus between the parties on the issue. The United National Party (UNP) has indicated its support for the peace process when negotiations commence. The majority are of the same view. The Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC), the Ceylon Workers' Congress (CWC) and even the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) have pledged their support for the resumption of peace talks. So there is no problem about consensus.

Q: Do you think future peace talks between the two parties should be based on the Interim Self Governing Authority (ISGA) proposals forwarded by the LTTE last year?

A: Here we have to remember that the LTTE after 25 years of civil war has for the first time articulated a clear and unambiguous set of proposals for a political settlement. As is typical with any guerrilla movement they are very maximalist.

I myself have serious reservations regarding the ISGA proposals on issues like the grievances of the Muslim community and its extent of devolution. But that does not mean that they are not negotiable. The Government also has its own set of proposals and that is what negotiations are all about i.e reaching a middle ground. Therefore, I think talks should start based on the ISGA proposals.

Q: What are your views on the National Advisory Council on Peace and Reconciliation (NACPR) appointed by the President recently?

A: I think the Council is a welcome move. But you have to notice that both the bridegroom and the bestman were absent at the inaugural meeting of this Council. So this Council also draws attention to the acrimonious political culture in this country which is based on a win-lose scenario. One weakness of the NACPR is the non-representation of the UNP, TNA and the SLMC whose support is vital for any solution. Secondly, the absence of trade union representatives and representatives from the people of regions affected by the war is also a shortcoming.

Q: But does not the NACPR enable the South to reach a common understanding on their position on the ethnic conflict and a possible solution to it?

A: From what I see, most political parties in the South have already reached a consensus which is that they would agree to a federal solution to the problem. In countries like South Africa what you had was an independent social forum which reflected a vibrant civil society where every citizen was a stakeholder.

Q: But in South Africa the leaders of the two parties were the sole representatives of their people which authorised them to talk freely. Does the Sri Lankan peace process have that feature given the diverse opinions held by political parties in Parliament and the factional fighting in the East?

A: As for the South, I think the President should definitely be the leader to carry out the peace process forward. She is a national figure and the leader of all communities in the country, not only the SLFP.

The flaw lies not in the post of Executive Presidency but in the person who holds it. In 1994, President Kumaratunga received overwhelming support from the whole country as the first leader to come up with the federal idea as the solution for the ethnic problem. I think it is possible for her to transcend all political differences and reach the status of a national leader.

Q: In your opinion, what type of a federal structure would suit Sri Lanka?

A: It should be a system with maximum devolution which enables resources to flow freely to the peripheries, especially the North East so that people will be able to decide the economic and political future of that part of the country. After independence the Sri Lankan government has failed to develop the Northern and Eastern parts of the country.

They were treated as second class citizens who had no right to their own language which is a fundamental right. In the existing structure, the centre absorbs all resources at the cost of the peripheries. This is true even of the Uva province, not only of the North East where the problem is acute due to war.

Q: What are your comments on the political killings and the various human rights violations committed by the LTTE disregarding their commitment to the Ceasefire Agreement (CFA)?

A: All these activities should be condemned, especially the present fratricidal war within the Tamil community. But that should not make us overlook the collective rights of the Tamil community.

The LTTE is still going through a major transition in its history from a monolithic guerrilla group to a political organisation. The CFA should be fully complied by the LTTE but the provisions of the ceasefire do not give the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) the power to stop such violence.

Therefore, it is important that more powers are vested in the SLMM through informal meetings between the two parties. One should not look at the high table alone to initiate the peace process. Peace making and confidence building should start at the grassroots level before we reach the high table.

Q: Who should take the responsibility of awakening the common people to issues of the peace process?

A: Civil society groups and most importantly religious leaders have to play a significant role on this phase of the peace process.

I personally think that the statement issued by the Ven. Mahanayaka Thera of the Malwatte chapter very inspiring.

Q: Out of all the solutions so far proposed for the ethnic conflict what in your view would come close to the ideal solution?

A: A mixture of the 1995 and the 1997 proposals forwarded by President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga.

These proposals set out important guidelines about a system of Government within a united Sri Lanka with significant devolution.

But in the actual political negotiations these proposals were diluted. However, it indicates that we already have a substantial body of concepts and proposals to reach a final solution through negotiations.

www.ceylincoproperties.com

www.Pathmaconstruction.com

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries

Produced by Lake House
Copyright © 2003 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager