Wanted a Presidential candidate

Very soon the so called common opposition (podu vipakshaya) will have to display paid advertisements in the media calling application for a “common candidate” for the post of President of the Socialist Democratic Republic of Sri Lanka. True to the international character of the "common opposition” the advertisement could appear in the “international media” as well. There are so many “international politicians” who would lose their jobs in the year 2014, and assuming that the Sri Lankan Presidential elections would be held late this year or early next year some of them could apply. The applications would probably have to be directed to the leadership council (nayakathva mandalaya) of the common opposition, which could be expected to be formed in due course well in time to entertain applications. (Sometimes I wonder whether Ravana also had a leadership council of ten people as he is often referred to as Dasis- ten heads). Of course the question would arise as to whether foreigners who are not citizens of Sri Lanka could apply for the job. However, the government, I am sure would corporate with the opposition to bring in legislation to help those jobless politicians from abroad. In any event some of the leaders of the oppositions parties are not different from foreigners as they do not seem to understand the psyche of the common man especially of the Sinhala hoi polloi, and the President Rajapakse might first respond by saying no new legislation is necessary as already there are foreigners contesting at various elections in Sri Lanka.

It is not only the “common opposition” that would be interested in the advertisement. The “intellectuals’, NGO personalities, the various high commissions and embassies in Sri Lanka representing other countries would also be interested for various reasons. Unlike USA, Sri Lanka respects the officials in the embassies and high commissions of other countries in Sri Lanka the Sri Lankan Police or any other authority would not question these officials after removing their clothes. Incidentally no human rights organization or women organization in Sri Lanka appears to have protested against the mishandling of the naked body of the Indian female diplomat by male officials in uniform in USA. It may be that there is no Darusman Report, which these organizations could base their protests on, nor Videos that have been released to the media by Chanel 4, but only some photographs purported to be released to the “international” by a non Indian. In the absence of such reliable reports and video footage, and of course foreign exchange, it is understandable that the champions of human rights in Sri Lanka are silent on this issue.

Karu Jayasuriya, the great companion of Sajith Premadasa goes to the extent of explaining to the media that the “common candidate” of the “common opposition” could be from the UNP with precise logic and thinking. He should be thanked for this explanation as many people would have begun to think that the “common opposition” does not constitute the UNP as most of the UNP MPs are now in the UPFA, and many others are thinking of supporting Mahinda Chinthana.  On the other hand Kary Jayasuriya may be thinking of nominating Sajith Premadasa as the candidate of the “common opposition” and helping the latter to lose the election thus saving Ranil Wickremesinghe to fight another day.  However, Ranil would have become an octogenarian on that day but he could take solace from the fact that his uncle J R Jayawardane was not the youngest to become the President of the country.

In any event Karu Jayasuriya should explain as to why the UNP could not go it alone. Even if a common candidate could be found ultimately there would be many outside the “common opposition” , and nobody would be able to prevent at least a few of them running for Presidency thus splitting the anti Rajapakse regime votes in the words of Ranil Wickremesinghe. The UNP may be the United National Party but not a nationalistic party. In the absence of an SLFP, D S Senanayake could be projected as a nationalistic leader, and to a certain extent Dudley Senanayake as well, especially against the left parties that dreamt of the international “proletariat revolution”. The left parties were able to attract the Jathika Balavegaya during the colonial period as they appeared to fight for independence, but after the formation of the SLFP, and especially after the SLFP adopted Sinhala only policy the support by these forces to the left parties began to lean away, making the left parties left out for all purposes.

The SLFP has nationalistic credentials and under the leadership of President Rajapakse, it has turned out to be the party that respects the Sinhala opinion following the examples set by the Bandaranaikes.  S W R D Bandaranaike could be called a man who bowed down to public opinion as a democrat, and not somebody who attempted to push his policies through the throats of the people. The present President of the country is only following the Bandaranaikes as could be seen from his actions. As we have said very often, Sinhala nationalism is bottom up and the leaders of the SLFP know how to maintain the party as the party of Sinhala nationalism.

There are many names that have been mentioned as the “common candidate” for the forthcoming Presidential elections. These are only day dreams of “intellectuals” who have no understanding of the Sinhala people. Ven. Maduluwae Sobhitha Thero appeared to be a popular candidate among the NGO and other “intellectuals” but the Sinhala Buddhists have never had a Bhikku as the king of the country. There have been few instances where ex Bhikkus had become kings, and if the Ven. Thero was interested in becoming the Presidential candidate he would have had to become a lay person according to Sinhala Buddhist tradition. The “intellectuals” having had no knowledge of the Sinhala Buddhist traditions would have wanted to clung to the “sivuru pota” to defeat Mahinda Rajapakse. Sarath Fonseka cannot be used again as the Presidential candidate as he failed last time by millions of vote. With the white flag (sudu kodi) story is bound to come up if he becomes the Presidential candidate, and he will have to explain how he had been freed from alleged war crimes. He was the commander of the Army during the last two weeks of the humanitarian operations whether he was in the country or not and why the west is interested only in the scalps of Rajapakses is a question that has to be answered by him.

Chandrika Kumaratunga was imported by some people with vested interests to contest J R Jayawardane and to establish a federal state forgetting that Sinhala nationalism is bottom up and not top down. Chandrika Kumaratunga did not know the Bandaranaike policies and her concept of democracy was pushing down her policies through the throats of the policies. The “intellectuals” and the other NGO pundits also thought that a federal state could be established through the wife of the leader of the Mahajana Party. However, to the dismay of these “intellectuals” and the pundits the Sinhala nationalist movement (Jathika Vyaparaya) was able to defeat all their plans and Chandrika Kumaratunga was driven into political wilderness. Mangala Samaraweera who has no future in politics except in the leadership council of the UNP that itself is being driven into same wilderness as Chandrika Kumaratunga, could continue to throw parties at his Gorakana residence reciting “Raja ho ma ho ganga ho” by the Bolgoda lake (Panadura ganga).

What the opposition common or uncommon does not understand is that single issues such as abolishing the presidency are not going to win the Sinhala masses which is the main balawegaya (force) in the country that opposes colonialism. There was a time when the intellectuals and the pundits tried to force their view that without the Tamil vote no party can come into power. However these views have been changed by the Sinhala Jathika Vyaparaya and no non nationalistic party can come into power after the defeat of the LTTE.

Nalin De Silva

10-01-2014

The destroyers of peace

As we said last week peace was won after about thirty years in May 2009. To win peace it was a necessary condition that the LTTE should be defeated by the armed forces. Even India in 1987 thought so as Rajiv Gandhi sent the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) at the “invitation” of J R Jayawardhane, the then President of Sri Lanka who signed the infamous Indo Lanka Agreement with the former under duress. However, what India wanted was peace under Indian hegemony, and was interested in having a subordinate President in the country with the Indian high commissioner acting as the Viceroy. The notorious Dixit played this role for a while, but what India did not realize was that even in the past no dynastic kingdom in Bharat had not been able to rule Sri Lanka or even part of it for  more than a short period. Even Ashoka who had a different formula of Dharamavijaya could not succeed and the Sinhala Kingdom (Sinhale) that was not dynastic, even after the western colonialists came, had an independent existence at least in Udarata that was called Sinhale until the Sinhala leaders by the Sinhala English Pact of 1815 handed over the reins of the country to the English. However, the English being gentlemen forgot that they were given only the reins and not the rules as the pact clearly stated that the country (not only udarata) should be ruled according to the Sinhala Law and that Buddhism should be protected. India having realized that they could not have a viceroy in Sri Lanka changed their strategy and went back to the policy of supporting the LTTE.

The Sri Lankan armed forces under the political leadership of the President and direction of the Secretary of Defense were able to defeat the LTTE that had the support of England led west and India. It has to be mentioned that the Sri Lankan armed forces did not a fight a war with the LTTE but only conducted operations against an armed terrorist group that was threatening the sovereignty of the nation and the territorial integrity of the country. There was no civil war as such by any stretch of imagination of the word, and there was no Tamil nation fighting a war with a so called Sinhala government. The Tamils living in and outside of Northern Province including Wigneshwaran, the present Chief Minister of the Northern Province were only subject to the terror of the LTTE like the Sinhalas, Muslims and others living in the country. It is fortunate that Wigneshwaran who presumably was living outside Jaffna during most of the period, and Sampanthan, Sumanthiran and others were not killed by the LTTE contrary to the case of Amirthalingam, Kadirgamer and Neelan Thiruchelvam nor were the victims of a bomb explosion. Defeating the LTTE was not only a necessary condition but a sufficient condition as well for peace in the country. The peace that was won in 2009 continues but there are parties with vested interests who want to destroy it and establish an Eelam in the Northern and the Eastern Provinces, forgetting that the Eastern Province is now enjoying their own Provincial Council that cannot be amalgamated with the Northern Province as there is no provision under any Act of Parliament. The Indo Lanka Accord is now defunct and in any event the Parliamentary Acts of Sri Lanka were never controlled by this wicked Accord.

Those who claim that peace has not been won though the “war” was won are very often those who did not want the armed forces to defeat the LTTE. The slogan that the war was won but peace was not won is the biggest lie  uttered not only in political platforms but in the academic circles as well. The tactic of the peacemakers or piece makers (separatists) was to claim that (i) the “war” could not be won by either party, (ii) Prabhakaran was one of the greatest warriors that the world has seen, (iii) the Tamils have been discriminated by the “Sinhala governments” (iv) the Tamils should be given the power to rule their so called traditional homeland (historical habitats) (v) power should be devolved to the Northern and Eastern Provinces, which are the traditional homeland of the Tamils, (vi) the so called ethnic problem could be solved only by discussions, (vii) the peace talks are essential in the process, (viii) an international  facilitator has to engaged, (ix) the peace talks should be based on the Indo Lanka Accord and the thirteenth amendment, (x) the LTTE is the sole representative of the Tamils. The England led west often represented by Norway and Sweden, India, the NGOs, INGOs, Peace Vendors, some clergy of some Christian and Catholic Churches, the present leaders of the TNA, the leaders of the leftover left parties”, and some “enlightened” Sinhala Buddhists as well were all against the “war”  and were for peace talks. There were threats from some of these elements to the government of Sri Lanka to the effect that economic sanctions would be applied, and in fact quotas were cut in the apparel industry. However, the Sinhala opinion was such that the government and the nationalist forces joined hands to continue with the operations by the armed forces. It was clear that all the parties mentioned above were anti Sinhala Buddhist in one sense or the other.

What would have happened if the Sri Lankan Government succumbed under pressure to the above parties and did not continue with the operations or allowed Prabhakaran and his cohorts to escape in that ship Nambiar was trying to organize with the help of England led west? In the former case by this time Prabhakaran would have established an Eelam in the Northern Province and declared war to annex the Eastern Province. In the latter case he would have established an Eelam in exile. Having failed to achieve either, the west together with the displaced Tamils in their countries, NGOs, some clergy in certain denominations, TNA, leftover leftists some of whom are cabinet ministers having become MPs through the national list as they cannot think of polling enough preferential votes, have begun a campaign to destroy the peace that has been achieved. The first step in their campaign is to claim that peace has not been won as they want to project the image that there is no peace in the country so that they would not be accused of destroying peace. The moment one says that there is no peace it is clear that there cannot be any destroyers of peace.  

The claims of these groups are the familiar set of “reasons” that has been stated above in connection with so called peace talks. However, they have added one more to the set after the defeat of the LTTE. That is the violation of the so called human rights of the innocent Tamils during the last two weeks of the humanitarian operations. Those who claim that the national anthem should be sung in Tamil as well, belong to “the discrimination against the Tamils” group. Similarly those who complain that there are no police officers in the Northern Province to take down a complaint in Tamil when the situation is the opposite, or those who go back to the talk of habitats of the Tamils, among others, are trying to destroy peace.  Channel 4, Cameron with his phony claims, Rathika Sitsabaiesan the Canadian MP of Sri Lankan origin who under the pretext of visiting her former home, trying to get political mileage with somebody claiming that she is under house arrest, the TNA MPs who invite Tamil racists from Tamil Nadu to take photographs to construct spurious stories are all destroyers of peace. It is said that this particular Canadian MP left Sri Lanka as a child with her parents in order to escape from the IPKF. If it is true she should start a campaign against India for making her parents to leave Sri Lanka, unless of course she loves the visits to Niagara Falls now and then.   

The destroyers of peace will go on making news to give ammunition to England and the rest of anti Sri Lankan lobby so that the latter could claim human rights violation against the Tamils, and to pave the way for an Eelam. They may claim that they are against separation but often act contrary to their assertions. The Chief Minister who has no authority over the armed forces and the camps visiting a high security zone is a case in point. The learned former judge should first read the constitution and the relevant Acts of Parliament before trying to disrupt peace in the country. By their acts the destroyers of peace are only prolonging the presence of armed forces in the streets. The armed forces could be confined to the barracks only if the destroyers of peace corporate with government and the armed forces to maintain peace that has been won.

Nalin De Silva

03-01-2014

Habits, habitats and armed forces

Those who were not in favour of operations against the LTTE have a habit. They wanted the operations to be stopped and engage in so called peace talks with the terrorists. The UNP ridiculed the armed forces and Ranil Wickremesinghe referred to Thoppigala as a jungle. Ravi Karunanayake wanted to find out whether the army was in Medawachchiya when they were in Killinochchi. He probably does not know where Alimankada is as he thought it was another name for Pamankada. As far as he is concerned it appeared that all mankadas were the same. Then Lakshman Kirielele said any ass or some other animal could fight a war. The NGO pundits and self appointed specialists on warfare, echoing the westerners, said that the “war” cannot be won by either party. However, the Sri Lankan armed forces were able to defeat the LTTE and to become the first to defeat a terrorist organization.

The peace talks were to be based on the thirteenth amendment, which was a result of the infamous Indo Lanka Accord which is not a document valid politically or legally. The Indo Lanka Accord referred to the historical habitats of the Tamils in Sri Lanka, and it was to these so called habitats that power was to be devolved in order to solve the “discriminations” against the Tamils by the Sinhala Buddhists, who in the eyes of the westerners and NGO pundits are the worst Chauvinists in the world. The government of the Sinhala people as the Tamil racists call the Sri Lankan government has no respect at all for human rights according to the west, their agent UNP and of course the NGO pundits and the TNA.

Almost all these anti Sinhala Buddhist organizations habitually tell us though the war was won, peace was not won. They seem to be of the opinion that peace could have been won without winning the war. For them winning the “war” was not a necessary condition for peace. It is clear what they mean by peace is not what the vast majority of Sinhalas and probably Tamils have in their minds. As far as the UNP, NGO pundits and others are concerned peace is nothing but betraying the sovereignty of the people and the territorial integrity of the nation. For them peace is handing over a piece of the country to the Tamil racists. In any event most of them talk of a non-existing Tamil nation and their self determination.

It is wrong to say that there is no peace in this country. Peace was won by the Sri Lankan armed forces under the political leadership of the President and the direction of the Defense Secretary. However, England and some other western countries want another \war against the Sinhala people this time through various means. They employ the dispersed Tamils in their countries on one hand and on the other, their so called international organizations such as the UN and human rights agencies, and of course the NGOs. The displaced Tamils operate through a faction of the TNA that had its annual conference recently in Vavunia without Ananda Sangari who was not sympathetic to the LTTE but with the widows of the terrorists and others such as Sumanthiran the MP appointed on the national list. The anti Sinhala lobby shout slogans inside and outside the Parliament, stage demonstrations in London and Geneva and attempt to give the impression that there is no peace in the country. In the whole of Sri Lanka the arrival of the prince of peace was celebrated day before yesterday unlike in the days of Prabhakaran the devil of terrorism and some Bishops of the Catholic Church who dominated the Church then, and some other Churches. We cannot forget that the Bishop of a Christian denomination referred to the terrorist leader as a humane person. It is time for the Catholic and other Christian Churches to look back and correct the mistakes. After all there are Sinhala Catholics and Christians whom the Church cannot ignore in the name of finding so called peace that is detrimental to the sovereignty of the people and the territorial integrity of the nation.     

As we have said very often, this so called solution is backed by the Tamil racist Vadukoddai resolution, though the Tamil problem is more than hundred and fifty years old. The Tamil racists took so much time to formulate “the problem” in order to suit the solution that they had from the state council days. Nagnathan who became the treasurer of the Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchchi (Lanka Tamil State Party) later wanted a separate country for the Tamils even before the first Parliament was elected in 1947. In the case of Tamil racism the solution came first and then the problem was formulated.

However, the process was so artificial that the solution does not address the problem. The problem is “discrimination against the Tamils by the Sinhala Buddhists and their government”. The solution is devolution of power to the historical habitats of the Tamils, identified by the Indo Lanka Accord as the Northern and Eastern Provinces, though the “Eelam Map” refers to an area to the north of Chillaw on the western coast and Panama in the eastern cost. This “Eelam Map” is based on judicial districts demarcated by the Dutch who imported the Vellalas to the country. Incidentally the word Eelam was coined by C Sunthralingam who spelt it as Eylom. If the Tamils are discriminated then a solution has to be found for all the Tamils in the country and not only for the Tamils living in the Northern and Eastern Provinces.  

It has to be emphasized that the solution depends on the concept of habitats as stated in the Indo Lanka Accord. It does not depend on the so called homeland concept and it is clear that it is the concept of habitats that is used to justify the solution of devolution of power to the Northern Province and the Eastern province. Thus when the Catholic Church issues a statement recognizing habitats of the Tamils, the Sinhalas especially the Sinhala Buddhists are disturbed to say the least. The Church in its defense may say that they do not refer to the homeland, but then the notorious Indo Lanka Accord also does not refer to the homeland of the Tamils. The Catholic Church like any other organization is entitled to engage in politics forgetting the differences between the God and Caesar without correcting its mistakes, but then the Church should realize that it is not immune from criticism.

It should be realized even by some ministers belonging to the leftover left, not to mention the TNA leaders that the Provincial Councils in operation today do not confirm to the Indo Lanka Accord as such. The Northern and Eastern Provincial councils act separately and the provinces are not amalgamated for the purpose of implementing the thirteenth amendment and the provincial councils act. The present provincial councils are not a solution to the so called discrimination of the Tamils and they function in the framework of the “eksesath rajya” a form of unitary state if one were to use modern terminology. The Northern Province Provincial council is not different from any other provincial council in the country and this is something that the TNA should realize sooner than later. The original idea of provincial councils was bound to fail as there was no problem to be solved envisaged by the so called solution.

It is in this background that we have to consider the employment of the armed forces in the country. Sumanthiran who said a few weeks ago in a television discussion that there were no Tamil speaking policemen in most of the police stations in the Northern Province, but  did not respond to the media spokesperson for the Police who challenged the honourable MP, is now shouting slogans against the presence of the Army in the Jaffna Peninsula. It is the commander of the Army who decides where to employ the platoons, and as long as Premachandrans, Sritharans who want a separate state it appears that the commander cannot confine the army to the barracks. The Provincial Council of the Northern Province has no authority to decide where the army should be stationed and as long as the Army is not involved in civil administration there is nothing wrong in having the army in the streets of Jaffna or Colombo, if the commander is of the opinion that there are separatists who are controlled by external forces that act against the sovereignty of the people and the integrity of the nation. The faction of Sampanthan and Wigneshwaran is only using Sumanthiran to counter the faction of the dispersed Tamils in the TNA, and this policy would not succeed.

Nalin De Silva

27-12-2013

Preparing for Geneva

Geneva has now become an annual event as the Avurudda, Vesak, Deepavali, Christmas, Ramadan etc., or even the school big matches and other such events, and we have to prepare in advance for the occasion. However, there is a difference. Geneva is a match played on a turf prepared by the western countries according to their rules that may be changed at any time even during the match to suit the organizers. Geneva is another weapon in the armoury of the west, which is used to maintain the hegemony of Greek Judaic Christian (GJC) Chinthanaya and Judaic Christian culture. The umpires and the scorers are drawn by the organizers from their team and in order to survive we have to get as much support as from those who are not with the organizers.

It is the “human rights” that is bowled by the organizers with a ball tampered by the umpires. The human rights is a concept of the present western rulers (if one insists the bourgeoisie) first formulated against the western feudalist states to “protect” the individual from the state. The west can think in terms of dichotomies only and the GJC Chinthanaya promoted the individual against the society (collectiveness) of the Catholic Chinthanaya. However, as far as human rights were concerned the individual was not any ordinary person found in the streets but belonged to the rising bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie was based on the GJC Chinthanaya while the feudalistic rulers were emerged in the Catholic Chinthanaya. Having come to power the bourgeoisie adopted human rights to suit them and the Afro Asians did not have any human rights as such. In Sri Lanka we are reminded of English governors such as Brownrigg who rigged the western concept of human rights and Torrington who tortured the Sinhala Bhikkus and lay persons not necessarily in the battle field.

It should be mentioned that the GJC Chinthanaya is older than the bourgeoisie having incepted towards the end of the fifteenth century in Southern Europe, especially in Italy. Renaissance, Reformation, Western Science, Technology, Art, Industrial Revolution, Capitalism, French Revolution, Enlightenment etc., are all products of the GJC Chinthanaya that is now declining though it still maintains its hegemony. The GJC Chinthanaya at present is so bankrupt that it cannot identify phenomena. The use of the word “post” to identify events is a case in point in this regard. In its heyday the GJC Chinthanaya did not identify capitalism as post feudalism, but now there is a plethora of terms such as post modernism, post cubism, and even post conflict Sri Lanka. The use of the term post stems from the inability of the thinkers in the west in GJC Chinthanaya to identify phenomena. The other term used by the western thinkers is neo–something, in order to hide certain aspects of the phenomena. Thus we have concepts such as neo - colonialism, and very soon we will have neo-human beings. In Sri Lanka we do not have thinkers but only tinkers who mess around with the western concepts.  

In Geneva the organizers including the umpires and scorers will be discussing the human rights of “post conflict” Sri Lanka, however post conflict referring to the last two weeks of the “conflict” as well. It is mainly the last two weeks of the “conflict” that they would be interested though we are interested in the whole of the colonial period, which extends even up to the present “neo-colonialism”. The human rights as far as Sri Lanka is concerned can be divided into two categories. The two categories being those associated with the Tamils and that are applicable to the country in general. So called freedom of expression, independence of the judiciary, independence of media belong to the second category. However, there would not have been a second category if not for the first category. As far as the west is concerned the human rights violation in this country exist simply because the present government does not adhere to the dictates of the west in certain matters, especially in connection with the Tamil problem created, nurtured, nourished and maintained by the English. If Prabhakaran was given the opportunity to escape in the ship that Nambiar tried to organize on behalf of the west there would not have been any human rights problem in Sri Lanka, though an Eelam in exile would have been established to the satisfaction of England and recognized by most of the western countries.     

The present government with all its problems, does not bow down to GJC Chinthanaya on certain aspects of the sovereignty of the people and territorial integrity of the nation. This is what the west does not like and the human rights violations as interpreted by them will be made or the tampered ball will be bowled at us in Geneva. In 1989 -92 period human rights issue was not taken up by the west against the governments of J R Jayawardhane and Premadasa and one cannot say that they were the best democrats found in the world. Premadasa may have declared Gladstone persona non gratia but he was prepared to bow down to the England vis a vis India and went to the extent of supplying arms to the LTTE against India. The IPKF had to be sent back, but giving arms to the LTTE cannot be justified, and the west did not have anything against Premadasa on this count. Perhaps when the Sinhala youth are slaughtered it is all right as it was the Sinhala people who fought the English colonialism right throughout. The question remains as to whether the armed forces killed the Tamils indiscriminately as they did in the case of the Sinhala youth who were sometimes not even associated with the JVP. As far as the GJC Chinthanaya is concerned it is clear that the Sinhala people, except those paid by the NGOs, do not have human rights as interpreted by the west.  

As we get ready for Geneva all the familiar arguments by the Sri Lanka NGO tinkers, could be heard.  We are told that in order to win in Geneva it is essential that we implement the 13 A plus, implement the LLRC report etc. Similar arguments were heard during the thirty year “war” period and the Sri Lankans were told that the so called discrimination of the Tamils must be stopped. However, nobody has defined what these discriminations are, and what the west says amounts to that the sovereignty and territorial integrity should be given up by Sri Lanka. The loss of privileges of the English educated Tamils under the English colonial rulers is interpreted as discrimination against the Tamils in general. The solution for the so called discrimination as proposed by the Tamil leaders is nothing but continuation of their dominance at least in the Eastern Province and the northern Province as demarcated by the English, leaving the Tamils in the other provinces to be continued to be discriminated! The “solution” itself suggests that there is no discrimination of the Tamils in this country. It should be clear that there is no so called genocide against the Tamils in Sri Lanka, and the fact that the Tamils came over to the armed forces during the last two weeks of the humanitarian operations running away from the LTTE and that about 280,000 of the human shield was rescued by the armed forces speak volumes much more than the bogus reports by Darusmann, Navi Pillai and others. The 40,000 killed during the last two weeks stem from false assumptions regarding the numbers in the human shield as assumed by Samapanthan and others, and it is not a difficult task to expose their calculations.

We should not agree to any so called international investigations for the simple reason international is only a substitute for the England led west. These “internationals” are biased and what the government has done so far in connection with the missing people, lost property is more than enough. The LLRC was a committee appointed by the government and not a committee whose recommendations in its entirety have to be implemented. It is the government that decides what recommendations have to be implemented, and in that connection the Sinhala opinion should not be disregarded. If we “won” in Geneva in previous years giving false promises by those who represented Sri Lanka then those representatives have to be reprimanded. We are not bound by false promises given by representatives who are biased against Sinhala people, especially against Sinhala Buddhists, with vested interests, and think that the Tamils have been discriminated against and devolution of powers to the Northern and Eastern Provinces is the only solution to the Tamil problem. Let us campaign among our friends in the world exposing the hypocrisy of the English led west, which uses the dispersed Tamils in their countries against Sri Lanka. We should expect more acts such as attempted visits by Wigneshwaran to high security zones, sathyagrahas by some TNA members in order to “attract” the attention of the western media and also of video footage by channel 4 but we should be able to expose these gimmicks of the Tamil leaders and the west to our friends. 

Nalin De Silva

22-12-2013

India is irrelevant in our domestic affairs

The governments should protect the human rights according to the so called political scientists and others in Sri Lanka following their western counterparts. However, human rights as a concept has evolved in the western world in protecting the individual from the powers of the governments. As it is the governments which are responsible to protect the human rights of the individuals a problem arises when the rights of the governments are not protected or recognized by the individuals. The concept of human rights in western culture, as all the other western concepts formulated within the Greek Judaic Christian Chinthanaya, is restricted by this dichotomy stemming from the limited Aristotelian logic, and one does not need a Derrida to tell us that the westerners think in terms of dichotomies or dualities. If the westerners could not realize it before Derrida then it points out to an inadequacy of their thinking. The incipient bourgeoisie would have loved the concept of human rights as against the western feudal states, but having come into power they would have had different thoughts about the concept in the states that they established. However, they are a managing class and they know how to manage even human rights. The western countries belonging to the Judaic Christian culture based on Greek Judaic Christian Chinthanaya have a monopoly of not only creating concepts and theories but of interpreting them as well.       

However it is not my intention to delve into a discussion of human rights as such but to draw the attention of the readers to the reciprocity involved in human relationships whether between individuals, between organizations including states or between an individual and an organization. The question that is being asked is where is the reciprocity in the relationship between India and Sri Lanka. Why should India (for that matter any other country) attempt to dictate terms to Sri Lanka as far as the Tamil problem is concerned? At least in the case of England one can understand their interest in the problem as it is that country that created the Tamil problem and at present wants to use Tamil racism in the form of the dispersed Tamils mainly in England, against the Sinhala people who continue to fight against English (American) hegemony in the country. This does not mean that we should be dictated by the English and should try to please them the way the UNP would have done gladly.  

India got involved in the problem not due to any love for the Tamils in either Sri Lanka or India but due to the pro western anti Indian foreign policy of the UNP governments, especially that of J R Jayawardhane. The UNP neither then nor now know of any middle path and they are prisoners of western thinking in terms of dichotomies. Even the little bit of nationalism in the times of the Senanayakes was lost in the Jayawardhane era, and Premadasa being a misfit in the UNP did not know whether he was coming or going. Premadasa took a very anti Indian line and his pro western policy was to be seen despite declaring the high commissioner Gladstone a persona non grata. India reacted to this foreign policy of the UNP and not to the politics of Tamil Nadu at the beginning.  If any party is responsible for adopting a wrong foreign policy it is the UNP.          

It was subsequently that Tamil Nadu politicians attempted to influence the central government and Indian national politicians chose the easy way of winning votes in Tamil Nadu by deciding to favour the racist policies of the former. However, we cannot forget that from the very beginning India had a policy of controlling the Indian Ocean following the infamous Panikkar formula that Indian Ocean is the ocean of India. This policy is nothing new as it has been followed in some form or other from very ancient times. Even today the Indian fishermen fish in Sri Lankan waters and Tamil Nadu has apparently said that the former should be allowed to come to Sri Lankan waters without any restrictions.

The Indian policy towards Sri Lanka is dictated by the above three facts. The first and the third stem from Indian national interests but the second is a result of local politics. What India does not realize is that by adjusting their foreign policy to satisfy the demands of a particular state they have only fuelled separatist policies of  Tamil Nadu.  One should not forget that it was in Tamil Nadu that separatist policies first arose even before Muslim separatism that led to the establishment of Pakistan. If the west decides to support Tamil racism India is in for a big problem. However, the west would support a united India at present since it does not want to destabilize that country as it can be used as a buffer against Muslim politics and China. The Congress is bound to lose at the next general elections whether Tamil Nadu politicians support it or not as has been illustrated by recent elections in some other states.

Now why should India be interested in the “welfare” of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. The Tamils in Sri Lanka are not citizens of India and if we go by the same “logic” Sri Lanka should take an interest in the affairs of Buddhists in India. It is true that our constitution does not allow the state (government for most purposes) to protect Buddhism in India, but then there is no provision in the Indian constitution to get involved in the affairs of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. However, the interest of Tamil Nadu in the affairs of Tamils in Sri Lanka proves that the Sri Lankan Tamils have come to Sri Lanka only in the recent past. The Sinhala people and the Maldivians do not have that kind of relationship, though the Maldivians are descendents of the former who  have migrated from Sri Lanka. The language spoken in Maldives though called Divehi Basa reminding us of Deepa Bhasa that refers to Sinhala in ancient chronicles has evolved independently over the years.

We have been dictated by India over the Tamil problem from the time Indira Gandhi who wanted to teach a lesson to the UNP leaders over the pro western policy of the Jaywardhane. Now what has India done to Sri Lanka to compensate for these dictates. If not for India there would not have been a thirteenth amendment and no provincial councils, an utterly illogical solution to the Tamil problem. If Tamils are discriminated in Sri Lanka then one has to solve the so called problem in the whole of the country. However, the solution proposed is giving self determination to the Northern and Eastern Provinces where less than fifty percent of the Tamils live. Thus the so called problem, the discrimination of the Tamils in the other provinces is not solved. In any event the Tamils in the Eastern province are not in  a majority in that province, and there is no possibility of a merger of the Eastern Province and the Northern province at present. In India states were demarcated along language differences for different reasons and the Sri Lanakn situation is entirely different.

India has no right to intervene in the affairs of Sri Lanka even if the Jayawardhane government was following an anti Indian pro western line, and after the boycott of the CHOGM by the Indian Prime Minister has told the world that they do not have any interest in Sri Lankan affairs whether for good or bad of both countries. As they kept aloof at the CHOGM India should keep away from our activities and we have no reason whatsoever after the boycott to give a hearing to the Indians.

Nalin De Silva

13-12-2013

The so called mahavir celebrations, England and the TNA

There were attempts by some members of the TNA to celebrate the so called mahavir day. In the Northern Province some members of the TNA wanted to respect the mass murder Prabhakaran ignoring the fact the latter had brought nothing but misery to the Tamil people. The man who wanted the other terrorists to wear the cyanide capsule around their necks did not want to do the same. Perhaps he thought as he had been told by various war specialists especially from the west, that he was one of the greatest soldiers ever to live and that he was invincible. In any event he died in the Nandikadal Lagoon without swallowing the cyanide capsule. It may be that he expected the west to rescue him by sending a ship with the approval of the Sri Lankan government during the last stages of the humanitarian operations. We know what Vijay Nambiar was doing in Sri Lanka at that time giving frantic telephone calls from the Katunayake Airport. The west would have realized that the President of Sri Lanka is not some so called third world leader who could be dictated to follow their orders. Prabhakaran may be a veeraya to some people in spite of the fact that he was a mass murder. He proved to be a coward by trying to escape to the west, after making the Tamil youth to sacrifice their lives for a so called cause of the Tamils with the tacit support of the present day TNA leaders who were proxy to the LTTE in the Parliament, with the assistance of the west led by England though at that time the English were not open as they are now.  

TNA leaders may now say that they have nothing to do with the LTTE and that they condemn murders by the terrorists led by Prabhakaran. However, they never condemned the LTTE those days and accepted the LTTE as the sole representative of the Tamils. The TNA leaders cannot say now they had to act the way they did then as otherwise they themselves would have been killed. It amounts to cowardice and political bankruptcy of the leaders as the Sinhala politicians  behaved differently during the JVP days. Those politicians who opposed the JVP did not keep quiet in fear of death, and when the JVP was killing the politicians who were opposed to them, the latter organized themselves and faced Wijeweera, Somawansa Amerasinghe and the rest courageously.      

If Prabhakaran had escaped during the last days of the humanitarian operations, by now he would have established Eelam in exile, of course aided and abetted by England. The plans by England and some other western countries were thwarted out by President Mahinda Rajapakse and the English are now desperate to take revenge from the President for not obeying them, by threatening with charges of war crimes. England now cannot use Norway or Sweden as it did during the time of peace vendors in the NGOs and has been forced to support nakedly Tamil racism and separatism. The English Prime Minister will deny these charges, what else he would do, but the fact that England has not taken any action against Adele Balasingham who was instrumental in organizing terrorist activities against not only the Sri Lankans but against humanity speaks volumes for the policy of the English. England may have proscribed the LTTE but true to the English hypocrisy allows the front organizations of the terrorists to operate in England, probably in the name of freedom of organization. Why not allow front organizations of Al Qaeda to hold demonstrations in Westminster and Trafalgar Square. Why does England keep a Nelsonian eye when the front organizations of the LTTE demonstrate in the Trafalgar Square? These front organizations were allowed by the government of Cameron to celebrate the so called mahavir day in London waving the tiger flag of the LTTE.

The TNA  leaders were also involved in celebrating the mass murders of the LTTE. The TNA MP Sritharan made a speech in the Parliament praising Prabhakaran as a hero and wanted to celebrate the so called mahivir day. Now it is known even to the Camerons and Milibands that Prabhakaran was for separation and wanted to establish an Eelam with the support of England contrary to what the former may say to the contrary. The Tamil problem was not “internationalized” by the Rajapakse government but by England who created the problem way back in the early part of the nineteenth century. When Sritharan speaks of Prabhakaran as a hero and father of the nation, meaning that Tamils constitute a nation sticking to the Tamil racist policy made official by the infamous Vadukkodai Resolution, he is speaking for separation. The TNA leadership cannot merely state that Sritharan’s views are not those of the TNA. Has the TNA taken disciplinary action against Sritharan?

Sritharan as an MP would have taken the following oath with the other MPs of the TNA under the seventh schedule of the constitution. "I ..................................................... do solemnly declare and affirm / swear that I will uphold and defend the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and that I will not, directly or indirectly, in or outside Sri Lanka, support, espouse, promote, finance, encourage or advocate the establishment of a separate State within the territory of Sri Lanka.”  Now it is clear by his speech on Prabhakaran and the so called mahavir day Sritharan has gone against the oath. The government should take steps to impeach Sritharan  irrespective of the consequences. There will be opposition from the NGO clique financed by the western governments led by England, on the freedom of speech etc., However, the government should take no notice of these demonstrators paid in pounds sterling and dollars. Freedom of speech is not absolute as for example one cannot abuse another person in the name of freedom of speech. If one cannot abuse another person can an MP or any other person agitate against the sovereignty of the people? In the case of an MP it is worse as he is under the above mentioned oath. Unless the government takes against this MP who does support, espouse, promote, encourage or advocate the establishment of a separate state there will be others in the TNA encouraged by the leadership that is all out to project a wrong picture to the “international” community. Recently when Sampanthan was disturbed in the Parliament, he said that it has be brought to the notice of the “world” that they, implying the Tamils do not have the freedom even to speak in the Parliament. What Sampathan conveniently forgets is that he is not the first MP to be disturbed, and the Sinhala MPs both from the government and the opposition have to go through this ordeal whenever the Parliament sits. Samapnthan’s anxiousness to tell the “world” of discriminations against the Tamils is nothing new. I remember forty five years ago a Tamil academic of Sri Lankan origin spreading the story that he was not made a permanent member of the university academic staff thus depriving him paid leave to study in England because he was a Tamil. What he did not mention was that he had only a second class (lower division) degree and so many other Tamils were on the permanent academic staff of the university staff. When will the TNA leadership headed by Sampanthan give up these low level tactics to promote Tamil racism?  

Finally the difference between the JVP and the LTTE has to be emphasized for those who ask why the JVP is allowed to commemorate the “Ill maha samaruwa” but not the mahavir day by the LTTE. Both were engaged in terrorist activities but the JVP misguided by one form of Marxism or the other was fighting to change the system from capitalism to socialism as they believed to be doing. They did not fight against the sovereignty of the people or against the territorial integrity of the nation. They did not talk of nations within Sri Lanka. On the other hand the LTTE talked of nations and fought against sovereignty of the people and territorial integrity of the nation. The fundamental responsibility of a government is protection of the sovereignty of the people and the territorial integration of the nation. Prabhakaran’s friends and relatives may remember him in their personal capacities, but no government can allow any organization whether a political party or a government of another country to commemorate the LTTE on a political basis. In this regard the Sri Lankan government should take action against Canada still dancing to the tune of England, for laying a wreath to commemorate the LTTE. Canada has deliberately interfered with the sovereignty of Sri Lanka and deserves to be expelled from the commonwealth.

Nalin De Silva

06-12-2013