A durable political solution the only way
PRESIDENT Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga's address to the Asia
Society at its Park Avenue, New York Headquarters on Wednesday.
President Kumaratunga spoke on the theme " For Larger Freedom: Pursuit
of Peace in Sri Lanka."
I take great personal pleasure in getting an opportunity to brief the
distinguished members and guests here about the situation in Sri Lanka,
and to reflect on the challenges Sri Lanka faces in achieving peace and
development, and consolidating democracy.
Speaking before a distinguished and learned audience such as you is
also a challenge. As someone who left a doctoral academic program in
politics because I could not resist the lure of politics in the real
world, I continue to suffer from envy of those who engage on a daily
basis in intellectual activity, and hold in awe those who have something
to say that is not just novel, but intellectually so.
So Mr. Chairman my opportunity to address you has also become for me
an intellectually fulfilling challenge to describe our policies with
regard to the key issues we face, and also how our thinking about it has
evolved.
I hope this could give you some elements to reflect upon similar
political challenges in other parts of Asia, if not the world. This is
also the last address I will make to the Asia Society as President of
Sri Lanka.
Hurricane Katrina
It is a sad and tragic moment in the United States today because of
the destruction wrought by hurricane Katrina. We have been humbled
before the power of nature, just as we were on December 26th last year
by the Tsunami.
I wish to express the sympathy and solidarity of myself, my
government and the people of Sri Lanka with you at this moment of
incredible challenge.
In an address to the nation two days after the Tsunami struck in Sri
Lanka, I said: "This is a moment of great humility for us all. We have
been incredibly humbled by Nature's great forces. An ineluctable truth
has been laid bare before us all.
The mighty forces of Nature have compelled us to learn a lesson that
some of us refused for long to learn......This disaster has not been
selective in the destruction it has wrought. ...Nature does not
differentiate in the treatment of peoples.
Loss of life, loss and destruction of property take place
irrespective of whether it is in the North or South. It knows no
difference between religions or castes: the high and low in society or
the rich and the poor. It is necessary that we reflect carefully upon
this lesson nature has taught us."
I dare say that these thoughts are no less relevant to you as
Americans, even though, or especially because, you live in what many
call the sole superpower in the globe today.
And so my heart goes out to the people of Louisiana, Mississippi and
Alabama, and the wonderful city of New Orleans, especially the poor and
the helpless who have suffered from the hurricane, and my government and
I are ready to assist in any small way we can.
You may recall that my Foreign Minister, Lakshman Kadirgamar was with
me, here, last year when I visited you at the Asia Society. He was
assassinated just over a month ago. His killing is a dastardly act
committed by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
Kadirgamar was an opponent of Tamil and Sinhala extremism. He opposed
the terrorism of the LTTE and he supported a federal solution to the
conflict within a democratic and plural Sri Lanka that addressed the
aspirations of all communities - a longtime demand of many Tamil
political leaders.
He was killed for his courage in acting on his views. And he was
killed because he happened to be born a Tamil, who worked for a united
and democratic Sri Lanka. Something the LTTE, which claims to be the
sole representative of the Tamil people, does not yet agree with.
His assassination not only challenged my personal commitment, but
also that of a vast majority of the people of the country to pursuing a
negotiated settlement with the LTTE.
Although, my Government had the option of a military response, we
rejected it. And instead chose a different approach - to re-iterate our
commitment to a ceasefire and to a political solution, whilst reviewing
the approach towards negotiating with the LTTE we had hitherto taken.
Pressure on the LTTE
Such a review has just begun at a practical level with a call to the
international community to help exert real pressure on the LTTE, in
order that we can engage them in a process that will lead to a lasting
peace, bringing about democracy and human rights. This is also a good
time for such a review because of Sri Lanka's political calendar.
A new President will be elected in the next few months and he will
get an opportunity to begin fresh efforts to move the peace process. And
so I can be a bit more self-reflective about what such a peace process
may look like.
As I reflect upon the different elements of the peace process at the
national level in Sri Lanka - bringing an end to violent hostilities,
rebuilding the conflict-affected areas, strengthening human rights, and
working out a political solution - and the need to link these elements
in a way that leads to what we hope maybe a positive cycle of peace - I
see a resonance with the Secretary General's Report to the 2005 Summit -
"In Larger Freedom". There he observes that security, human rights and
development go hand in hand.
One step at a time
Some say that in Sri Lanka, or in other peace processes, it may be
desirable in theory to tackle each element of the peace process one step
at a time - first to end hostilities, then rebuild conflict-affected
areas, then strengthen human rights, and finally to workout a political
solution. However, reality is more complicated.
For example, a breakthrough in the political solution can promote
opportunities for development. Or efforts at improving human rights can
contribute to working out a political solution. Or for that matter,
socio-economic opportunities gained from development can provide an
incentive for avoiding war.
In other words, we need to be open to the possibility that the world
(particularly the world of war and peace) works in a non-linear and
sometimes chaotic fashion, even as we, as rational human beings, may try
to bring order to our understanding of it.
Conceptual Underpinnings of "Larger Freedom" Before I get into the
details of the Sri Lankan peace process, I would like to begin with
basic principles, and ask: what are the fundamental sources of conflict
in a political community where many different people live together?
I see three such sources of conflict: moral conflict over competing,
if not contradictory ideals; inequality even in the presence of a moral
consensus; and competition over goods and services. Let me elaborate,
briefly.
As human beings, blessed with reason and imagination, we think about
the world we live in. We ask questions of ourselves. Why are we here?
What are we meant to do? How should we treat others? What happens when
we die? These questions are so common, that they may appear trite?
But they underlie an important universality about us, and reflect our
yearning for something more than the houses we live in, the food we eat
and the pleasures we enjoy. While these questions are common, the
answers we supply to them are diverse.
They differ if you are a Hindu, a Jew, a Christian, a Muslim, a
Buddhist or a Jain, or if you are a liberal, a Marxist, a rationalist, a
utilitarian or a libertarian. Clearly, each of us thinks that some
answers are better than others. And so we differ in where the answers to
these fundamental questions will lead us.
But, if there is one thing we have learned from these thousands of
years of human civilization, it is that we will always differ in the
answers to these questions. They have differed, in the past, and they
will continue to, in the future.
No amount of rational and reasonable debate will lead to a
convergence on these ideals. You in the west have a greater experience
with the kind of violence this conflict can cause with the religious
wars that were a tragic part of European history.
But they led to important lessons, and so political institutions
evolved that gave expression to human freedom - freedoms of conscience,
expression and association.
These freedoms have now become an integral part of all democratic
societies, and we have learned to avoid the dark lessons that you were
forced to learn through experience.
Democratic tradition
The second source of conflict is inequality. This is particularly
true of societies that have a democratic tradition, where there is both
a belief that human beings deserve to be treated with equal dignity, and
that this ought to be enshrined in practical arrangements. It is of
course hard to find a political community today where such sentiments do
not exist.
So when people, even if they share the same moral values, feel that
they are not treated equally they can resist and fight.
While it has become fashionable today to disregard inequality as a
source of conflict, particularly globally, I believe that it will always
be an important source of conflict, because of the deep belief we all
have that unfair advantage over another is, unjust.
And it is hard to find a political constitution today where the equal
worth of a human being is disregarded or seen as irrelevant to setting
up the rules that will govern a society.
Sources of conflict
The third source of conflict is competition for scarce goods and
services, because we still do not live in an egalitarian world of
abundance. We want more, so we get together in groups to ask for more
and fight for more.
These groups may be ethnic groups, political groups, neighbourhood
groups, religious groups or language groups. The source of conflict here
is not necessarily the group identity itself, but the claims made by a
group for a greater share of the resources.
When a province says that its development has been neglected or when
an ethnic group asks for more admissions to university or when a city
asks for more resources, they are making claims for greater resources to
be shared with them. Whether or not these claims are justified, they can
lead to conflict.
These three sources of conflict are clearly intertwined and can also
be sources of conflict, globally, when we fail to recognize and act on
the equal dignity of all humans who live in the world today.
The United Nations Secretary General, Mr. Kofi Annan, understands
this when he says in his report: "I have named the present report "In
larger freedom" to stress the enduring relevance of the United Nations
and to emphasise that its purposes must be advanced in the lives of
individual men and women."
The Secretary General's report is a search for a practical way of
recognizing and acting upon this equal dignity globally, in a world of
great inequality of wealth and power. He seeks to do this politically by
integrating human rights, with development and security.
The deeper conceptual point in the Secretary General's report then is
not just that people must have equal access to say health, and equal
civil and political rights. But that equal access to health care is
needed for equal civil and political rights.
And equal civil and political rights are required for people to have
equal access to healthcare. The political philosopher John Rawls
captures this point by talking not just about equal basic liberties but
about the equal worth of basic liberties.
Similarly, Professor Amartya Sen refers to "Development as Freedom"
in order to emphasize that development is not simply to increase growth
rates in order to increase per capita income and purchase more goods,
but to improve health, education, housing, so that people will have
improved quality of life.
But it is not just political philosophers who are concerned about the
practical implications of treating people as equals. We have interesting
developments in what is called "game theory" among economists that
develops mathematical models for dealing with the technical challenges
of equal division of goods among "n" persons in day to day situations.
In a friendly critique of the talk I gave last year at the Asia
Society, a web blog - pointed out some of these important technical
advances in conflict resolution, curiously known as cake theory, because
these models use cake cutting as a metaphor for dividing goods equally.
These theories, even those that are technical, have common
assumptions. The first is that people want more goods, not less. Second,
the rules for how to divide up the goods must be fair for all players or
citizens, otherwise the game stops or the political community ruptures.
And third, whatever value conflicts exist (religious or ideological)
they cannot affect the fairness of the rules of the game or how
societies make rules.
In other words a constitution that says people X must have fewer
rights than people Y (and sadly their were constitutions at one time,
such as that of the United States that did imply this) is not something
that the world, or for that matter people X or Y would propose, leave
alone accept today.
I say this not to belabour a conceptual point, but to emphasise that
the ordinary citizens of societies that are deeply divided about the
rules of the political game, will never argue that some must be treated
less equally than others.
I have found in my experience of campaigning for a just and stable
peace in Sri Lanka, that the vast majority of Sri Lankans do not believe
that they must have an advantage over others simply because of their
ethnicity or religion.
Like the hardnosed mathematicians who think they are doing models
without any ethical standpoint, Sri Lankans who collide with each other
about the rules of the game, share with philosophers like Rousseau and
Rawls a basic commitment to equal dignity for all. And this is a moral
and political resource that I have always drawn on in advancing peace in
my country.
Resounding victory
It is this confidence in the people of Sri Lanka that gave me the
courage in 1994 to campaign on the basis of a political solution to the
ethnic conflict.
We had a resounding victory at nine out of eleven rounds of elections
in a period of eleven years, because the people unequivocally endorsed
my policy of a negotiated settlement in place of war, and a federal
solution as against a separate State.
With the support of a broad multi-ethnic coalition of parties I
proceeded to talk with the LTTE about ending the war, and discuss with
all the parties in parliament about a new more inclusive, political
constitution that would share power with all communities.
While talks with the LTTE broke down and they went back to war, my
governments continued in its efforts to bring them back to the
negotiating table.
I proceeded to work with other democratic parties to discuss a
political solution and presented in parliament for the first time in the
history of my country proposals for a federal style constitution.
Unfortunately, we lacked the numbers in parliament to make
constitutional changes.
I believe that the qualitative changes wrought by us in the approval
to the ethnic question changed the reality irreversibly in my country.
It created the climate for the two largest political parties to
evolve for the first time an important policy consensus: that war is not
a desirable political option for the country, that negotiations with
LTTE to the end the war should be pursued, and that a political C of a
Federal type that addresses the concerns of all communities should be
designed. I am proud to say that it would now be difficult to reverse
the political momentum towards peace created by my Governments.
Four elements
Let me now discuss in some detail the four elements of the peace
process in my country that I mentioned earlier - bringing an end to
armed hostilities, rebuilding the conflict-affected areas, strengthening
human rights, and working out a political solution. Ending armed
hostilities has been an important step in changing the climate for peace
in Sri Lanka.
In February 2002, the then Prime Minister, Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe,
signed a ceasefire agreement with the leader of the LTTE, Prabakharan.
While there are elements of this agreement that have an adverse effect
on the sovereignty and security of the country, its overall influence on
the context for peace has been and still is positive. For one thing, it
saved many lives.
It allowed civilians, particularly those living in the
conflict-affected areas of the North and East, to farm, fish and trade
more freely than they had done before.
There was greater people to people exchanges as students,
businessmen, civil society leaders, government officials and even
politicians got an opportunity to see for themselves how their fellow
citizens, particularly in the conflict-affected areas lived.
The ceasefire also provided a more conducive climate that enabled
several rounds of peace talks to take place, where important commitments
on the road to peace were sought and made.
Despite these important advances following the signing of the
ceasefire, we are now at a point where we have exhausted the positive
climate created by the ceasefire and are at the risk of escalating
violence.
Primary reason
The primary reason for this is the increasing number of violations
committed by the LTTE. The Nordic staffed Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission
of observers who monitor the Cease-Fire Agreement has ruled that the
LTTE has committed more than three thousand violations, while the Armed
Forces of Sri Lanka have committed about one hundred and fifty.
The actual violations committed by the LTTE as ruled by the Norwegian
led monitoring mission, includes more than one thousand and five hundred
child soldiers have been recruited and hundreds of cases of extortion.
This is backed up by reports from Amnesty International, Human Rights
Watch and the UNICEF.
The LTTE has also engaged in assassinating democratic political
opponents, mainly Tamil. Whereas the violations of the ceasefire by the
Sri Lankan security forces, the same Nordic led monitoring team has
ruled on, are primarily incidents of harassment at checkpoints.
While the ceasefire is necessary for the pursuit of a political
process that will lead to peace, it is obviously not sufficient. It is
clear that the human rights element of the Cease-Fire Agreement needs to
be worked out in greater detail and more attention paid to it, if the
peace process is to move forward.
The second element of the peace process is development or rebuilding
the conflict-affected areas of the North and East. I have always
believed that one of the reasons why the Tamil people in Sri Lanka felt
marginalized was because the regions where they have traditionally
lived, have been among the least developed in the country.
These areas have some of the lowest literacy rates, lowest growth
rates, and this has been further exacerbated by the armed conflict.
I have, since 1995, tried hard to develop these areas, including
areas dominated by the LTTE, and even during the fighting. Initially
these efforts were rebuffed by the LTTE. They tried to kill a senior
minister I sent to Jaffna to engage in development work for the Tamil
people.
Over the last few years we have quietly changed the attitude of the
LTTE towards development activities carried out by the government. They
have extended cooperation to the Ministry of Relief, Reconstruction and
Reconciliation, which I happen to head, in carrying out work in areas
they dominate.
We are deeply committed to undertaking development work in those
areas. It is the Governments duty to ensure that all of our citizens
irrespective of where they live, what ethnicity they belong to, or even
who they are forced to live under, must have access to health, education
and economic opportunities.
Good for peace
Second we believe that development is good for peace. It gives the
people living in those areas, particularly the youth, options other than
being recruited and forced to carry arms. And it gives the LTTE an
opportunity to engage in useful and constructive work that benefits the
people directly, instead of preparing for war.
Finally, it provides an area where the government and the LTTE can
work together on concrete activities that can build confidence and even
some trust that is vital for any peace process to move forward.
It is for this reason that I risked the stability of my government
and signed a joint mechanism - Post-Tsunami Operational Management
Structure - with the LTTE to engage in reconstruction of the tsunami
affected districts of the North and East. Unfortunately, some clauses of
this mechanism are being temporarily stayed by the Supreme Court for
constitutional considerations.
Nevertheless, the idea animating it - that the government, the LTTE,
leaders of the Muslim and other communities can cooperate on development
and build mutual confidence - should not be underestimated as steps
towards peace.
We believe that development is an area of common concern with the
LTTE, which offers a great deal of political space for greater
cooperation. This is because while there is a real desire for more
developmental work in the North by the people living there, there is
also a recognition and support for this work in the South.
LTTE's child recruitment
The LTTE has been engaging in a systematic campaign of child
recruitment, where they are abusing the lives of the most vulnerable
members of the Tamil community. The LTTE have also been killing
political opponents - members of Tamil groups who do not agree with
them.
The fact that these activities also took place prior to the
Cease-Fire Agreement, and did so at a higher rate, is no excuse for not
making every effort to bring them to a halt now.
A peace process cannot and does not operate in a vacuum. People
demand that a process of peace should include active engagement,
commitment and good conduct of all parties to a conflict. In a
democratic society, the opinion of the people is paramount and
fundamental freedoms are sacrosanct.
Therefore a peace process cannot move forward as long as the people
of the country, comprising of all communities, perceive and believe that
a party to the conflict remains immune to the consequences of its
actions and does not demonstrate signs of sincere commitment to peace.
This has serious implications for the ability of any elected
Government to garner the support of the people to its approach to the
peace process.
Strengthening human rights in the context of the peace process is
vital to saving lives, improving peoples living conditions, and
restoring public confidence in the possibility of peace.
It is therefore important that the parties seriously consider
ancillary arrangements derived from the Cease-Fire Agreement that can
lead to new mechanisms for monitoring and implementing human rights as a
part of the peace process.
This is also an area where the United Nations with its panoply of
conventions and its universality can play an important guiding role.
Whatever the risks to the peace process inherent in dealing with a
challenging issue like human rights, it is my conviction that the
failure to do so will lead to a greater risk to the peace process.
The fourth element of the peace process is the political solution. I
have always stated that you cannot defeat terrorism, militarily alone.
It is also a political, social and economic phenomenon.
While there may always be individuals who may take up arms or engage
in wanton acts of violence, these individuals become strong and
powerful, because they attract large numbers of others who feel
marginalised to join with them. So when I understand terrorism as having
root causes, I mean political social and economic causes, and not
military ones.
To put it more concretely, we as a responsible government would have
to address the challenge of transforming the State so as to include all
communities - Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim - equally. And this requires a
durable political settlement.
Ending armed hostilities
I have argued that it is hard to neatly separate the key elements of
a peace process - ending armed hostilities, rebuilding the war-affected
areas, strengthening human rights and working out a political solution.
Rather than thinking of a political solution as following these
developments, we should think of it as making these developments
possible. In other words a political solution is a framework that will
contribute to ending armed violence, re-building the country and
strengthening human rights, not one that precedes or succeeds these.
So security, human rights, and development are linked, both at the
national level and the international level. And a durable peace is not
possible without understanding these links. I want to conclude my talk
by highlighting what I see as the dual challenges we concretely face in
Sri Lanka - transforming the State and transforming the LTTE.
Concerns of all communities
As I have mentioned in my talk we need to transform the State so it
is more inclusive - equally reflecting the concerns of all communities.
My view and the view of overwhelming sections of Sri Lankan society is
that this will involve transforming the State from a unitary one to one
that is plural and federal in nature.
Through a series of proposals to parliament and discussions inside
and outside parliament my party and I have been at the forefront of the
efforts to transform the Sri Lankan State.
While a transformation of the Sri Lankan State from a unitary to a
federal one may help include the Tamil community and the Muslim
community, it alone will not bring lasting peace.
To achieve peace we also need to deal with the second equally
important, but neglected challenge - transforming the LTTE from a
dictatorial and ruthless militant group that regularly engages in the
use of terror, to a political force that engages with the State and does
not resort to violence to make its arguments heard.
This process needs to be analyzed and addressed in a conscious and
systematic manner together with the LTTE.
And just as the LTTE has a stake in the transformation of the Sri
Lankan State, all Sri Lankans have a stake in the transformation of the
LTTE.
The challenge of dealing with these dual transformations will not be
easy for any single political party in Sri Lanka, however powerful. It
requires a broad consensus and joint action between the major political
parties and groups in the country. |