‘Fight against LTTE and move towards political solution’
B. Muralidhar Reddy
The demand for a truce is a bogey raised every time the LTTE is
militarily weakened, says Sri Lanka’s Social Welfare Minister Douglas
Devananda.
Douglas Devananda, Social Welfare Minister and leader of the Eelam
People’s Democratic Party (EPDP), has clear views on the current
military and political situation in Sri Lanka and the humanitarian
crisis triggered by the ongoing war between the Sri Lankan Army and the
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Here are excerpts from an
interview he gave The Hindu.
Q: What is your assessment of the
current military situation and what is the significance of the capture
of Ponneryn by the Forces?
Minister Douglas Devananda |
A: Thanks to the
relentless offensive by the military and the determined leadership of
President Mahinda Rajapaksa, the Tigers are cornered like never before.
Since the current phase of the war in July 2006, the LTTE has lost
control of the East and a substantial territory in the North. Its supply
lines have dried up and the organisation has its back to the wall.
The LTTE is designated as a terrorist outfit in 30 countries,
including India, and is woefully short of manpower and ammunition.
People have deserted the Tigers and are desperate to get out of the
captivity of Prabhakaran. It is no longer a question of if, but when,
Kilinochchi, the so-called administrative headquarters of the Tigers,
would fall into the lap of the military. At the moment, the Tiger cadres
are confined to the thick jungles of Mullaithivu and leaders like
Prabhakaran are operating from deeply dug bunkers.
Against this backdrop, the fall of Pooneryn is very significant. It
is the last important strategic sea base of the Tigers on the western
coast of the Indian Ocean. With the control over Pooneryn for the first
time in two decades, a land route to the Jaffna peninsula has opened up.
Till now it was accessible only by sea after the military shut down the
A9 highway in August 2006 on grounds of security as it runs through
areas under the occupation of the LTTE. The gain of Pooneryn, a
strategic land that runs parallel to the neck of the Northern Jaffna
Peninsula across a narrow lagoon, will enable the military to strike at
Kilinochchi from three sides. Besides, the sea supply routes of the LTTE
from Tamil Nadu would be sealed. Such is the importance attached by the
LTTE to Pooneryn that when Chandrika Kumaratunga initiated talks in the
1990s, one of the main preconditions put by the Tigers was that the
military should move away from Pooneryn. The LTTE walked out of the
talks when she sought a time-frame for the withdrawal of Forces. What
has happened? Ever since, there has only been destruction and the
victims are ordinary citizens of the Jaffna peninsula. The people of the
peninsula would now have the benefit of a land-link to the rest of the
island and the fisherfolk could freely pursue their chores.
Q: There are concerns in India about
the humanitarian crisis triggered by the war and it was reflected in the
recent resolution adopted by the Tamil Nadu Assembly seeking a
ceasefire. How do you view it?
A: The humanitarian crisis
and a ceasefire are two separate aspects. The concern about the plight
of innocent citizens caught in the war zone is legitimate and we
understand it. As a representative of the people of the North in
Parliament I share their anguish. At the same time, let me hasten to add
that there is a huge communication gap about the ground situation in the
North of Sri Lanka in Tamil Nadu. Pro-LTTE elements have been engaged in
propaganda that there is genocide of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. It is
totally baseless. There is no genocide here. Yes, before the 1987
Indo-Sri Lanka agreement the situation was different.
Today only about 250,000 people are living in the areas under
Prabhakaran’s control and that too because they are forcibly kept as a
human shield. It is a fact that 54 per cent of the Tamils in Sri Lanka
live outside the North and the East. There is little doubt that the
citizens of the North are faced with enormous hardships due to the
conflict, but the real question is who is responsible for the situation.
It is instructive to remember that it was the LTTE that started the
current war. So many opportunities in the quest for a solution to the
ethnic conflict were lost only because the LTTE was never interested in
a negotiated settlement. The 1987 Indo-Lanka Accord was a golden
opportunity lost because of the attitude of the LTTE.
As for the demand for ceasefire, it is a bogey raised every time the
LTTE is militarily weakened. The record is there for anyone to see. The
LTTE has cynically used ceasefire and talks to strengthen itself
militarily - to rest, rearm and recommence fighting. In my speech on the
floor of Parliament on November 17, I asserted that till Prabhakaran is
alive he won’t allow anyone to solve this problem.
According to him, every Sri Lankan President who tried to solve this
issue starting from Premadasa to President Rajapaksa is wrong. Then who
is correct? Prabhakaran’s real problem is that he cannot survive in a
democratic environment. He needs a piece of dreamland called Eelam that
he can rule as a dictator.
The truth is that after the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement, every leader in
office has attempted to solve this issue. What was the approach of the
LTTE to these efforts? It walked out of talks every single time on some
excuse or the other. Three decades of war and destruction have brought
nothing but misery to the people of Sri Lanka in general and Tamils in
particular. We have to put an end to the politics of militancy and move
towards a negotiated political settlement. The LTTE is part of the
problem and not a solution and hence dealt with squarely. Ceasefire with
the LTTE, as history shows, should not be mistaken for peace. It is
postponement of war and prolongation of the sufferings of innocent
citizens. President Rajapaksa makes a distinction between the LTTE and
the Tamil people and concedes the need for a genuine political solution
to address the legitimate grievances of minorities.
Q: There are concerns in some
quarters that the Rajapaksa Government’s emphasis is on military
victories and little has been done to move towards a political solution
?
A: It would be unfair to
suggest that the government has not moved at all on the political front.
One might have differences over the pace of movement but there is
certainly progress. Even as he attempted to engage the LTTE at the
negotiating table within months of taking over as President in November
2005, President Rajapaksa constituted an All Parties Representative
Committee (APRC) to advise him on building consensus for a political
solution. I realise the APRC is not a fully representative body with the
mainstream opposition parties subsequently disassociating themselves
from it.
However, it is on the recommendations of the interim report of the
APRC that the Government held an election in the Eastern province and
the people elected their leaders.
Questions have also been raised on the fairness of the election and
it is normal as in any democratic process. What is important is that we
start wherever possible. Had President Rajapaksa also waited, nothing
could have taken place. He has set up a Task Force for the Northern
Province to look at development. I believe that this process will end
with a political solution on the table. India is supportive of the
approach.
The Rajapaksa Government is committed to a full and faithful
implementation of the 13th Amendment on devolution of powers to the
provinces. In fact, my party has put forward a pragmatic proposal for
the resolution of the ethnic question in three stages. Stage one
involves the implementation of the 13th Amendment. It is already part of
the Constitution and does not require Parliamentary sanction.
India is in favour of its implementation. We can take that as a good
start. At the second stage, we can add whatever possible powers to the
provinces. At the third stage, we need to mobilise the Sinhalese and the
Tamil people on the larger issues of constitutional changes. We have to
convince the people that with greater devolution of power the
communities can come closer.
Q: Talking of the East, recent weeks
have seen an upsurge of violence. At least 20 persons, mostly cadres of
the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikkal (TMVP), have been killed by
unidentified persons. Do you think the province is slipping back to
disorder?
A: Yes, it is a very sad
and ugly situation. But I do not think it is sliding back to the
situation that prevailed before the LTTE was ousted from the province. I
think the tensions in the East have more to do with the differences
among individual leaders. I do not want to comment on the internal
affairs of another party.
At the same time, we should be concerned about the developments and
correct the situation. People who have elected the leaders expect them
to rise above partisan considerations and address their issues of
day-to-day lives.
All I can say is that the President is aware of the situation in the
East and hopefully the irritants would be sorted out sooner than later.
There is also legitimate expectation on the part of the Eastern
province, like other provinces in the island nation, for greater
devolution of powers particularly pertaining to the police and land
development. It is not a major issue and can be done.
Q: In a recent interview to The Hindu
President Rajapaksa talked of his four Ds approach - de-militarisation,
democratisation, development and devolution in that order. How do you
look at it?
A: I have been in regular
touch with the President. There is no rigidity in the four Ds approach.
It is true that the immediate concern is to neutralise the military
threat posed by the LTTE, but that does not mean political issues would
be relegated to the background.
I personally believe, and in my conversations the President has
concurred with me, on the need for a simultaneous progress on the fight
against the LTTE and the move towards political solution. |