Tamils call for international solidarity
By Ana Pararajasingham
The Sri Lankan army's humiliating defeats at the hands of the Tamil liberation fighters since the first week of November has proved beyond doubt the futility of a "military solution" to the conflict in Sri Lanka. President Chandrika Kumaratunga's strategy of "peace through war" lies in shambles as thousands of soldiers desert the army.
Yet, there is no attempt by the establishment to consider an honest political solution. Sri Lanka's political establishment is acutely aware that it cannot win this war. Why is it determined to pursue the military option?
The Sri Lankan Sinhala-dominated government (and opposition) is a prisoner of the huge war machinery and economy that has arisen as a direct consequence of the 16-year war. The Sri Lankan military, which was largely ceremonial in 1983, has become a monster; it consumed more than 25% (more than US$850 million) of the annual budget in 1999.
The senior ranks of the army oppose an end to the war because they realise that it would also mean an end to their power and prestige. There are also those who continue to profit from the war. These include importers of arms and ammunition and suppliers to the armed forces. The influence and power exerted by those who oppose the war is significant.
There is also the political strength of Sinhala chauvinism, which views the entire island of Sri Lanka as belonging to the Sinhalese people and regards the Tamils as interlopers. A political solution recognising the Tamil people as a distinct nation is anathema to these chauvinists.
Their stranglehold on Sri Lankan politics was demonstrated recently when President Kumaratunga was forced to withdraw a bill granting equal rights to all people of Sri Lanka. The bill was withdrawn after pressure was applied by Sinhala organisations backed by students and teachers.
The elitist Sinhala political establishment — which has held political power over the last 50 years by selling to the Sinhalese masses a thoroughly hollow and foul vision of a monolithic, indivisible sovereignty based on the superior rights of the Sinhalese — will not agree to any meaningful sharing of political power (and sovereignty) with the Tamil nation. Doing so would be tantamount to admitting that the ruling class' political posturing over the past 50 years has been political opportunism, and could lead to the Sinhala masses realising that innocent Sinhala lives have been sacrificed by the political establishment to keep itself in power.
Western backing
It is time for other states to intervene to end the bloodshed by withdrawing their support from the Sinhala political establishment and recognising the Tamil people's right to national self-determination. Such a move could begin to bring the conflict with the Tamil nation to an end and also pave the way for true democracy for the Sinhala people as well.
So far, the West's response has been unhelpful. The Tamil rebels are deemed "terrorists" by the US State Department and the US military's "Green berets" have provided training to the Sri Lankan forces.
The Australian government's policy has been to support the Sri Lankan government, whose atrocities are ignored while the Tamil rebels are condemned for committing violence. This is despite mounting evidence of the genocidal nature of the Sri Lankan government's war.
Canada and Britain are more circumspect, but their policies are no different. Germany, France and Switzerland, home to more than 250,000 Tamil refugees, have remained silent, despite having to pay an economic price for the continuing conflict.
The West as a whole is bankrolling the war by providing aid and loans through various institutions.
There are some hopeful signs of international pressure on the Sri Lankan government. Last October, a member of the Indian coalition government compared the situation in Sri Lanka to Kosova and East Timor. India's defence minister, George Fernandes, is also known to recognise Tamil aspirations. The chief minister of the 60-million Indian state of Tamil Nadu has recently expressed his support for an independent Tamil Eelam.
The Foreign Policy Centre in England proposed to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in South Africa in November that Sri Lanka, along with Kenya, Zambia and Zimbabwe, be expelled from CHOGM if those governments do not improve their treatment of their citizens.
Even within Australia, there are signs of change. The NSW Labor Party conference in early October passed a resolution that recognised "the terrible impact of the 16-year conflict between the government and the Tamil Tigers to the development of the country". It stated: "Conference calls on the Australian government to lobby the United Nations to take action to resolve the conflict ... taking into account the last free election results in 1977 when the Tamil people in the north-east of the island voted for independence."
In shaping its policy, the Australian government should take into account the views of Justice Marcus Einfeld, former chairperson of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and one of Australia's leading human rights activists. Addressing a conference co-sponsored by the Australian Human Rights Foundation on "Peace with Justice in Sri Lanka" in June 1996, Einfeld identified the Tamils' call for self-determination to be "at the heart of the war" and called on the international community to respect "the plea by the Tamils for self-determination".
This appeal was reinforced by the current chairperson of the ICJ in a letter sent to foreign minister Alexander Downer in January last year which called "upon the Sri Lankan government to secure a political solution through third party mediation so as to permit the Tamil people realise their right to self-determination".
The Tamil nation
The conflict in Sri Lanka is not about minority rights, nor is it about fostering a multi-ethnic pluralistic society. A parallel cannot be drawn between societies being forged in Australia, Canada and, to some extent in the US, where ethnic minorities have willingly embraced a dominant culture, its institutions and way of life.
Sri Lanka is a multi-national state in which the dominant (Sinhala) nation has sought to impose its rule by crafting a constitution to institutionalise its dominance. Those deemed the "minority", the Tamils, are a nation in their own right, with a distinct culture, language and, most importantly, a homeland.
The desire for independence was democratically expressed in 1977 when Tamils voted overwhelmingly for the restoration of Tamil sovereignty over their homeland. At the general election held that year, 18 of the 22 candidates who campaigned on a platform of restoring Tamil sovereignty won, to emerge as the largest opposition party.
The war is the direct consequence of the Sri Lankan political establishment's denial of the Tamils' basic right. It can only end when the Sri Lankan army withdraws from the Tamil homeland and ends its use of food and medicine supplies as weapons of war. Only sustained international pressure can make this happen!
[Ana Pararajasingham is secretary of the Australasian Federation of Tamil Associations. This is an edited version of a paper presented to the Marxism 2000 Asia-Pacific Solidarity and Education Conference in Sydney, January 5-9.]