Victory Day Is Victory Day, not mourning day
Dr Dayan Jayatilleka
The usual polarised debate is on again, on the issue of the Victory
Day commemoration. This time there are three sides, not the usual pair
of suspects. One side denounces the commemorations as divisive, upholds
the right of the Tamil people to commemorate their dead and calls for a
national day of remembrance or mourning. Another commemorates the Tamil
side, uses the occasion to denounce as ‘genocidal’ the Sri Lankan state,
government, leadership, Armed Forces and the climax of the war itself.
|
Navy personnel participating at the
fourth Humanitarian Victory Parade at Galle Face Green on
Saturday. |
The third side commemorates the victory of May 18 and arrests or
justify the arrests of those who celebrate it as a day of mourning.
A positive historic event must be celebrated irrespective of
developments further downstream from that event. To reiterate, however
negative subsequent developments may be, a historically positive event
must be commemorated. This is why the Fourth of July, America’s
Independence Day must be celebrated irrespective of slavery, segregation
and the Vietnam War.
War victory
It is why July 14 Bastille Day must be celebrated irrespective of the
Great Terror or the Battle of Algiers. It is why the October Revolution
must be celebrated, irrespective of the Gulags. It is why our
Independence Day February 4 must be celebrated notwithstanding July ’83.
It is also why it is right and necessary to commemorate our war victory
of May 2009, despite the erroneous path we have taken in the postwar
years.
As a country we were resurrected, even reborn on May 2009. That month
blessed us with two broad consensuses. One was national, local,
domestic: the relief and celebration over the victory of May 18. The
other was international, external and took place ten days later in
Geneva.
No Sri Lankan citizen or concerned observer of Sri Lankan affairs
should fail to observe the photographs of the demonstration in London on
May 18. Described as the largest since May 2009, the pictures showed
thousands of Tamil demonstrators denouncing the events of May 18, 2009,
which in and of itself, may be said to be fair enough. What cannot fail
to escape attention is that the demonstration was replete with Tiger
flags; not one or two or a few dozen, but hundreds. The event was
addressed by members from all major British political parties. (It was
also addressed by video by a member of the TNA and another of the joint
opposition alliance Vipaksha Virodaya). If they had any problem with the
ubiquity of Tiger flags, they didn’t say so.
The demonstration wasn’t a figment of the imagination of the Sri
Lankan state. Nor did High Commissioner Chris Nonis pay the bill for it.
Pro-Tiger activists
Colombo can only be held responsible in the most indirect sense for
what happened on the streets of London on May 18 this year. This is
because there were similar and actually far larger demonstrations on the
same streets in the last months and weeks of the war in 2009. Therefore,
the demonstrations and the Tiger flags are not the result of what took
place after the war or even what happened on May 18-19. I know. I was
there when Geneva traffic was snarled up by tens of thousands of Tiger
flag bearing demonstrators and a 21 year old man from London immolated
himself in front of the Palais de Nations.
Neither in 2009 nor in 2013 have any of the significant Tamil
nationalist political formations or frontline political personalities
condemned the demonstrations for bearing the Tiger flag (with the 33
stylised bullets). This is why, in the eyes of the Sinhala majority and
the Armed Forces, they are not devoid of the taint of collusion with
separatist terrorism and may prove incapable of not behaving as proxies,
if push comes to shove.
This is also why the entirely justifiable criticisms that Tamil
parties and public personalities make of the post-war policies of the
government, do not carry the full moral weight that they otherwise
might.
British politicians
It is difficult to occupy the moral high ground when you are blind to
the atrocities of the worst of the perpetrators and to their continued
presence in the ranks of offshore politics (in Tamil Nadu and the
Diaspora).
There was another noteworthy event on May 18. Mr Rudrakumaran of the
TGTE issued a Charter for an independent Tamil Eelam. No Tamil party has
rejected or criticised it, so far.
|
Disabled
service personnel. Pictures by Sudath Silva |
As for the Southern liberal/pacifist critics of the State, their
often justifiable criticisms are morally vitiated and lack resonance,
when these criticisms are devoid of any stronger or even corresponding
criticism—and in some cases any criticism at all—of the LTTE flags, and
the pro-Tamil Eelam slogans issued on May 18. It sometimes seems as if
they have more of a problem with President Mahinda Rajapaksa than they
had with Velupillai Prabhakaran and have with those who carry his
effigy.
What do those flags show? The most charitable interpretation is that
these mobilisations are uncritical of the LTTE. The more realistic
explanation is that they are essentially pro-separatist; even pro-Tiger.
What does the presence of British politicians prove? The fact that they
fail to insist on an absence of Tiger banners if they are to address a
gathering shows that they are either uncritical of or tacitly supportive
of the cause of Tamil separatism. These are not merely enemies of the
Rajapaksas. If they were they would limit themselves to issues of
governance, human rights, a critique of nepotism and oligarchy and
post-war policies in the North. No, these are enemies of the war and our
common victory; they are enemies of our Armed Forces; they are enemies
of the very idea of an independent, united and sovereign Sri Lankan
state; of Sri Lanka as a single country.
The vast majority of the people of this country will never regard the
Rajapaksas as greater enemies than those who brandish Tiger flags in
London and Chennai. The people are right not to do so. It is both shame
and folly that there are those who seem to regard the Rajapaksas as the
greater enemies.
Those who fail to recognise Sri Lanka’s enemies and take a stand in
defending the country from them, will fail to convince the people and
will therefore discredit their own valid arguments on other issues. A
viable opposition to the Rajapaksas can only issue from within a defence
of Sri Lanka and the war against the Tigers; from the ranks of those
patriots who continue to oppose the Tigers and the Tamil separatist
project.
Armed Forces
What then of the Tamils’ right to mourn? The matter is easily
resolved.
There is a crucial point that needs making. The Day of Mourning or
Remembrance cannot and must not be May 18-19. Victory day is just that:
it commemorates a historically significant triumph over a cruel foe. It
commemorates the heroism of the Armed Forces and our citizens who did
not capitulate to terrorism and separatism. It celebrates the spirit of
resistance of our nation. It salutes the memory of the sacrifices of the
soldiers, sailors and airmen, and the families and communities from
whose womb they emerged. It was a glorious day of liberation and
reunification of a divided state, an island country. It needs
celebrating down the ages. It must be a stand-alone event. In that sense
May 18-19 are sacrosanct.
There is an element of forgetfulness or subterfuge in the attempt to
commemorate May 18 as the day of National Mourning.
There were no significantly high Tamil civilian casualties on that
day. May 18-19 were the days in which the army closed in on and finished
off Prabhakaran and his praetorian guard, in the Nandikadal lagoon.
What’s there to mourn? What’s there not to celebrate? By then, the Tamil
civilians had for the most part been liberated by the soldiers who
sacrificed life and limb to break through the impressive bunker-bund
complex of the LTTE.
Those Tamil civilians, who had died, as collateral casualties or by
design, had done so in earlier weeks and days. Those horrific episodes
of a few Tiger captives who may have been executed after the conflict
–because 11,000 surrendered of which 10,000 have been released—were not,
by definition, ones which involved civilians. Therefore there is no
logic by which May 18 should be declared a national day of mourning or
remembrance, or anything other than Victory day. I correct myself: there
is such logic; one which mourns the end of a Tamil secessionist war by
the defeat of the Tigers and the victory of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces.
That logic will never be acceptable to the vast majority of the Sri
Lankan citizenry.
The same goes for November 26/27, so-called Mahaveera Day. It is not
a day for commemorating the Tamil dead or those of all communities who
have died. It is the day on which the LTTE commemorated its fighters,
including terrorist suicide bombers. Such commemoration on that day must
not be permitted on Sri Lankan soil.
A Day of Tamil Mourning or Sri Lankan Remembrance is a necessary
catharsis. Perhaps it should be July 23 or 29. It should just not be on
Victory Day, May 18.
|