‘Eelam is still the endgame?’

Durand APPUHAMY

The speech made by R. Sambandan at the Ilankai Tamil Government Party (forget the name Federal Party) convention in Batticaloa is patently challenging our country’s existence as one nation both in spirit and in territorial integrity. At least one Tamil MP has criticized it as controversial.

Silence or default on this issue will be construed as acceptance and will legitimize the many unacceptable assertions in this speech. In the meanwhile I wish to draw the attention of the readers to a couple of tendentious points in the speech beckoning the Tamils to Eelam paradise.

Let me remind the readers that in 2004 the LTTE tabled their ISGA (interim self-government authority). Among many things, it also ignored the Parliament and the Supreme Court so that it could claim to be beyond the control of Parliament and beyond the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The echoes of those assertions have found a fundamental base in Sambandan’s speech. Couched in words of liberal sentiments the end game is still Eelam come what may.

This speech is full of expressed desire for the solution of self-perceived problems of TNA within a 'united (not unitary) Sri Lanka'. In fact the phrase 'united Sri Lanka' has been used seven times in the speech. The country cannot be fooled by this artful ploy, because Sambandan’s end objective is to 'expose the Sri Lankan government and to prove to the international community that we will never be able to realize our rights within a united Sri Lanka'! In a way this is true, because the demands made by TNA are both unacceptable and impossible to be met without breaking up the country. 'Soaring (political) aspirations' of just a tiny ethnic minority cannot be accommodated in a society composed of multi-religion, multi-language and multi-ethnicity. Compromise is required from all for a peaceful life.

Another point in this speech is the 'historical decision to establish the separate government of Tamil Eelam in 1976'. Sambandan’s party has not 'strayed from this objective and aspirations of its forefathers. The struggle is the same. Our aim is the same. But our strategies are different'. He wants the international community - India and USA - to provide the opportunity to achieve this end-objective without loss of life.

There can be only one sovereign in a country. This speech advocates multi-sovereignties in one country, especially the sovereignty of the Tamil nation. The rest of the people are in 'another country' living in their own homelands.

The speech demands 'the right to govern our civil, political, economic, social and cultural affairs - an unrestricted authority to govern our own land, protect our own people and develop our own economy, culture and tradition - powers should be allocated based on a structure outside that of a unitary government and beyond the 13th Amendment'.

Well folks, this is self-determination to achieve Eelam. Here comes the threat that if these demands are not met 'we will not hesitate to gather our people together and engage in non-violent struggle' with the hope that the rest of Sri Lankans will be provoked to violence against the Tamils that could then be blamed on them resulting in international intervention and the creation of Eelam. This in my books is a diabolical plan to break up our country.