Daily News Online

DateLine Wednesday, 6 June 2007

News Bar »

News: LTTE exploits places of worship ...           Political: Deal with US will benefit Lanka - Leader of the House ...          Financial: Colombo harbour expansion programme on schedule ...           Sports: Bangladesh recall Razzak and Rahim For Sri Lanka Tests ....

Home

 | SHARE MARKET  | EXCHANGE RATE  | TRADING  | PICTURE GALLERY  | ARCHIVES | 

dailynews
 ONLINE


OTHER PUBLICATIONS


OTHER LINKS

Marriage Proposals
Classified
Government Gazette


Theoretical perspective of peace process

PEACE PROCESS: Looking last week at the spanners being thrown into the body politic, and in particular the peace process, by Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ilk, I thought it would be useful this week to attempt some sort of a theoretical perspective with regard to that process.


Karu Jayasuriya


Nimal Siripala de Silva


Prof. Tissa Witarana

I do not mean by this the traditional theories that are propagated without attention to practicalities in the various peace studies courses that have sprung up over the last few years.

Having acted as External Examiner since its inception for the Bradford University Peace Studies Diploma, I was overwhelmed with information about Track 1 etc and Lederer and Co, but found little ability or motivation to apply all this systematically to the Sri Lankan context.

But, that does not mean such theories are irrelevant. The fault lies not with them, nor indeed with the Bradford approach.

The problem rather was the corrosive corruption engendered by our education system, in which lifting large chunks of material from elsewhere, without even marginal adjustments to disguise outdated references, passes for scholarship.

Unfortunately, with inadequate supervision, this passed muster more often than not, while the attitudinal changes such a programme should have promoted seemed a pipe dream.

Approaches

I was particularly struck in those days by the dogmatic approach of the candidates from Kilinochchi, who I was told were relatively high up in the LTTE hierarchy. Some of them seemed comparatively sharp, but many of their essays suffered from undigested recapitulations of the iniquities of the Sri Lankan state.

There were no attempts to distinguish between different approaches that had been adopted, nor any distinctions between racism, which certainly existed, and political pusillanimity, which was also relevant.

Of course it could be argued that the results were the same, a raw deal for Tamils, culminating in the state sponsored violence of 1981 and 1983. But if one is serious about peace, it is necessary to adopt a less rigid approach, to look for aspects that would lead to consensus.

In that sense there seemed greater flexibility in say the army candidates from the Colombo center, who were willing to grant that there had been much abuse on the part of the state.

It seemed a pity then that, in the flurry of apparent goodwill that had marked the Cease Fire Agreement in 2002, there had not been more concerted efforts to bring personnel at operational levels closer, to seek common ground instead of continuing in crucial cases with long established sectarian perceptions.

Such problems recurred to me when I began to think about the factors essential for pursuing peace, distant as that may seem in the present context. The first requirement obviously is to reduce aggression, which seems again to be reaching worrying heights, with the recent bombs in Colombo.

My own view is that aggression over the last five years has been largely the responsibility of the LTTE, with the activities of the Security Forces being primarily retaliation.

However that, that is a position that needs to be substantiated. Doing this should not be difficult, given the restraint of the Rajapaksa government during its first six months, despite the attacks on servicemen towards the end of 2005. Indeed its restraint led to the LTTE going back to the negotiating table, from which it had withdrawn nearly three years earlier.

However, with the subsequent not entirely straightforward withdrawal of the LTTE from negotiations, its provocations, most notably the attempt on the life of the Army Commander, led to retaliation which is now presented internationally as a resumption of hostilities by a warmongering government.

But having said all that, one has to realise too that perceptions are of the essence. Not, I emphasise, the distorted propaganda of the opposition leader, but the perceptions of the LTTE. I do not think it makes any sense to try to convince Wickremesinghe, because his hypocrisy is beyond repair.

However, clearly there are members of the LTTE who sincerely believe that they are victims, and their own hostile acts are merely retaliation for aggression on the part of the government. Setting the record straight with them is something that should be done with sympathy, with the government bending over backwards to show that, whilst terrorist aggression cannot be tolerated and will be met with retaliation, acts of war will not otherwise occur.

Sympathy

I use the word sympathy advisedly, for it seems to me that, apart from questions of aggression, the other area that must be addressed in any meaningful peace process is that of the resentments that must be reduced. In this respect I am absolute in my conviction that the balance is on the Tamil side, and that it is the responsibility of the government to do all it can to assuage feelings.

Certainly there is resentment amongst many Sinhalese, and the bombs the LTTE seems so free with now are clearly designed to increase that resentment until it leads to further conflagration.

But the bottom line is that, whereas the LTTE may be responsible for these acts of terrorism, they have nothing to do with Tamils at large. Contrariwise, Tamils at large were the victims of state terrorism, on two seminal occasions, which are without a doubt the rationale for the reliance placed now on the LTTE by many Tamils, particularly those of the diaspora.

Of course those horrors cannot be laid at the door of the current government, nor indeed the governments of the previous three Presidents. Except for President Wijetunge, the others have made it clear that they see themselves as representing all races in this country.

But the fact remains that an elected government of this country (or rather an elected President - most people would now accept that Parliament after the preposterous 1982 referendum was not legitimate) perpetrated atrocities upon a minority on two occasions.

Those lie at the heart of LTTE propaganda, as the recent debate in the House of Commons made only too clear. With acolytes like Wickremesinghe prepared to perpetuate the myth that the situation is now worse, resentments can only rise.

Privileges

Unfortunately for the government, though it has done nothing to rouse such resentments, it has a responsibility, as an elected government, successor to the monstrosity of the eighties, to assuage the feelings roused then.

Though it may seem irrational for the British government and church to apologise for the brutalities of the slave trade, given how long ago it happened, such actions make a lot of practical sense, for emotions have nothing to do with rationality. The assumption of office, in the context of perpetual succession, means that one has to pay for the sins of one’s predecessors.

In that light, it is the responsibility of the current government to do all it can to soothe resentments, to convince the vast majority of Tamils that they are an integral part of the Sri Lankan State, enjoying the privileges and dignities and security of their fellow citizens.

Many Tamils now, though by no means as many as the LTTE claims, see the LTTE as their only refuge, and this is the more serious amongst the diaspora which contributes so much, not only to LTTE funds but to the perceptions of foreign governments.

Proposals

Dealing with such perceptions will not be easy. Certainly it cannot be done only by argument, even if substantiated by the historical record. Rather, it also requires active measures now, to remedy the wrongs that were perpetrated.

Fortunately the proposals of almost all parties suggest lines on which consensus can readily be achieved, if not on the biggest issues of all, certainly on smaller ones that are particularly germane to the problem.

All parties for instance agree on measures that will ensure greater participation by the minorities in the administration and in the security forces. This does not require legal changes, but can be achieved by administrative action, as was done with regard to education, in theory to redress previous imbalances.

That was how standardization was introduced in the early seventies by the United Front, and also the UNP government’s vicious reintroduction of discriminatory quotas in 1978 after Cyril Mathew’s first disgusting outburst against Tamils in Parliament.

Of course, given the appalling levels to which education has sunk in many Tamil schools, and the eagerness and abilities of well educated Tamils to seek better positions, it may be necessary to provide special training to Tamils willing to serve the government in potentially senior positions.

But this is obviously an area in which assistance will be readily forthcoming, and the Ministry of Public Adminstration now clearly has both the political will, and the ability, to move swiftly in this direction.

Similarly the proposal of, for instance the EPRLF - P, that minorities should be recruited in greater numbers into the Armed Forces, can be pursued on the lines already proposed by the Ministry of Defence.

Though there may be some restrictions as to deployment in the current context, the point is to make it clear that official bodies, and particularly those that closely affect the citizenry, are not the preserve of just one segment of the population.

Again, with regard to both Health and Education, recent pronouncements show a willingness to move from the monolithic centralised controls that have done so much damage over the years.

The Health Ministry had made some excellent suggestions in its proposals published in the long term development plan of the government and, though there is less coherence in the educational proposals, a willingness to shift is apparent.

Sadly, there will be those who argue that, because any formula to devolve or even decentralise cannot readily be implemented in Colombo, where vested interests jealously guard the status quo in the grand schools, there should be no structural changes. But, as was shown when English medium was introduced, incremental changes that are made where possible will facilitate changes on a larger scale in the future.

But pursuing development through allocating greater responsibilities to subsidiary units will not be enough on its own. There is need also of rebuilding and reinforcing the dignity that majoritarianism had eroded over the years.

I used to think earlier that the proposal of two Vice-Presidents to represent the minorities was nonsense, lip service that served no purpose, and I see no reason to change this view. But I do realise that a formal recognition of the involvement of minorities in the body politic makes sense, and for this reason I welcome the suggestion in the SLFP proposals to involve them more at the center.

Satisfaction

Unfortunately the particular scheme suggested may not serve the purpose. But this is clearly an area in which, once the principle has been accepted, devising a formula that provides general satisfaction will not be difficult. And so too with electoral reform, which has recently once again seemed a contentious subject.

Once the principles are agreed - and I have thus far seen no one who disagrees with the basic principles of ensuring fairness as well as a close relationship between the representative and the represented - working out a generally acceptable formula should not be a problem.

I hope then that these two tracks, of constitutional and administrative reform, will proceed smoothly over the next few months. Obviously the larger problems cannot be solved, not at least until the LTTE returns to the negotiating table. But there is no need to assume that nothing can move until that happens.

On the contrary, incremental relief with regard to some of the problems that have arisen over the years will make a more comprehensive settlement much easier in the future.

EMAIL |   PRINTABLE VIEW | FEEDBACK

Gamin Gamata - Presidential Community & Welfare Service
TENDER NOTICE - WEB OFFSET NEWSPRINT - ANCL
www.srilankans.com
www.greenfieldlanka.com
www.wallauwa.arpicohomes.com
www.cf.lk/hedgescourt
www.buyabans.com
www.news.lk
www.defence.lk
www.helpheroes.lk/
www.peaceinsrilanka.org
www.army.lk

| News | Editorial | Financial | Features | Political | Security | Sport | World | Letters | Obituaries | News Feed |

Produced by Lake House Copyright © 2006 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.

Comments and suggestions to : Web Editor