Mumbai terror strike and Prabhakaran’s expectations
Col R. Hariharan
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) chief Prabhakaran’s
usually much hyped Great Hero’s Day speech on November 27 became a
casualty of the daring terror strike on the same day in Mumbai. Holding
the city to ransom for three days the terror story hogged headlines and
only few of the Indian print media carried Prabhakaran’s speech on the
sidelines, while the visual media ignored it.
 And this time he needed the ears of New Delhi, more than Tamil Nadu,
to act upon his strong plea for India’s support for his armed struggle
and lifting the Indian ban on the LTTE. Actually this was the central
theme of his, otherwise recycled, annual speech.
survive
The Manmohan Singh coalition is fighting a battle to survive the
ground swell of criticism for its abysmally poor performance in handling
the Mumbai terror strike. In a knee jerk reaction so typical of New
Delhi, long standing proposals to strengthen the counter terror
apparatus at the Centre and the states are hurriedly being resurrected.
With the general elections in another three months, no Indian
political party can afford any more to soft pedal terrorism of any hue -
religious, ideological or ethnic. The national impact of the Mumbai
terror raid is so strong that policy makers from now onwards can only
take a hard line on activities of terrorist organisations. And in India
that includes the LTTE, whose conduct had qualified it to be banned as a
terrorist organisation. Only recently the Delhi High Court has upheld
the ban on the LTTE.
control
The first counter measures against terror are already in the pipeline
and relate to coastal and marine terrorism. Stricter control of illegal
entrants, tightening of security at airports and harbours, tightening of
shipping and fisheries control, and tougher vetting of visitors from
neighbouring countries would probably follow.
The proposed federal agency for integrating the national response to
terror attacks and expansion of the reach of the counter terror force -
the Natinal Security Guard (NSG) to the metros might take a little more
time to come through. But surely come they will, for the government had
been dithering on these issues for years now.
And all this is bad news for Prabhakaran’s mission to win friends and
influence people in India.
Happy at the resurgence of political support in Tamil Nadu for the
LTTE, Prabhakaran called it a “great changes taking place in India.”
Prabhakaran is probably expecting greater acceptance of the LTTE in
Tamil Nadu encouraged by the revival of pro-LTTE elements in Tamil Nadu
as the “dormant voices in support of our struggle” re-emerging aloud
again, as he termed them.
Perhaps in a bid to save the face of Tamil Nadu leaders who are
demanding immediate ceasefire, he explained his readiness to talk peace,
after listing out the record of failed peace efforts in the past. He
stressed that Tamil genocide was taking place as a result of the war, to
strike a chord among Tamils everywhere.
It is significant that Prabhkaran wants India’s help on his own terms
as there is not a word of regret or remorse in the speech for his own
betrayal of India when it had actively intervened in support of the
Tamil cause in the past. He has not even provided a fig leaf of apology
for the role of LTTE in the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, former Indian
prime minister on the soil of Tamil Nadu.
assassination
It is out of question for any politician in India to ask people to
wish away (as Prabhakaran had done) not only the Rajiv assassination but
also the LTTE’s black record of killings of his own kind let alone his
opponents, Tamil or otherwise. This attitudinal problem of Prabhakaran
will make it difficult for any worthwhile Tamil politician to openly
express support for the LTTE, even if the ban on the LTTE is lifted.
Many Sri Lankan Tamils apparently consider these issues as not germane
to their struggle which has been militarily taken over by the LTTE.
depended
But across the Palk Straits it is still considered as the LTTE’s
unacceptable conduct, particularly when it had depended upon India’s
goodwill for its survival, not once, but many times in the past.
Prabhakaran’s refusal to recognise this is manifest in his description
of the earlier Indian interventions as “injurious to the people of Tamil
Eelam, as well as to their struggle.”
Obviously this was to justify his collusion with President Premadasa,
of the same “racist Sinhala state, “to throw out the Indian forces which
went to Sri Lanka to help Tamils. Not only that, his love-hate thoughts
on India were evident when he blamed “the racist Sinhala state, with its
intrigues, conspired to bring enmity between our freedom movement and
the earlier Indian administration.” So his platitudes of India “the
super power” sound hollow.
Prabhakaran has castigated “some countries which identified
themselves as so-called Peace Sponsors, rushed into activities which
impaired negotiations.” Obviously this was a reference to the U.S. and
the EU who have banned the LTTE as a terrorist organisation. They have
also busted LTTE clandestine arms procurement rings and clamped down its
front organisations including some NGOs. He probably felt no more
confident of influencing them to mend their ways in favour of the LTTE.
As a corollary, his need for India to bale him out is more than ever
before as the security forces are closing in on the LTTE bastion at
Kilinochchi . So it was not surprising to read that he had “great
expectations that the Indian super power will take a positive stand on
our national question.” Probably, he expects further political pressure
from Tamil Nadu to influence India.
gratified
He felt Tamil Nadu “has taken heart to rise on behalf of our people
at this hour of need. This timely intervention has gratified the people
of Tamil Eelam and our freedom movement and given us a sense of relief.”
Of course Sri Lankan Tamils plight is dear to the heart of Tamils but
not the self-inflicted plight of the LTTE.
Though India has unequivocally stated that it was against the
creation of an independent Tamil Eelam, the LTTE leader had “cordially”
requested them “to raise their voice firmly in favour of our struggle
for a Tamil Eelam state, and to take appropriate and positive measures
to remove the ban which remains an impediment to an amicable
relationship between India and our movement.” Does he really believe in
his call? Or a stray event like the celebration of his birthday by a
group of lawyers in the Madras High Court has kindled his high
expectations? Prabhakaran is too shrewd for that.
boost
All this hype built over Indian support is probably to boost up his
constituency among expatriate Tamils and the LTTE cadres battling it out
in Wanni under adverse conditions.
The Great Heroes Day statement only shows that despite his strategic
blunders Prabhakaran is yet to introspect and come to term with the
dynamics of sub-continental reality. If he wants Indian support he has
to change his script drastically. And it has to be on India’s terms, not
his. That might well be an academic question in the case of Prabhkaran.
(The writer is retired Military Intelligence specialist on South
Asia, served as the head of intelligence of the Indian Peace Keeping
Force in Sri Lanka 1987-90.He is associated with the South Asia Analysis
Group and the Chennai Centre for China Studies. E-mail: [email protected])
|
