tw news-features

Victor Ivan, Editor of Ravaya speaks to C. A. Chandraprema on the current state of the ethnic conflict and the need to radically rethink our attitudes. Ivan, one of the most respected figures in Sinhala journalism has often combined activism with his journalism. He has campaigned vigorously for democracy and the rights of minorities.

Q. Don’t you get the feeling that we have reached a turning point in the ethnic conflict?

A. We have, indeed, reached a stage where we cannot continue like this. Prabhakaran also cannot continue as he is doing at present. Prabhakaran will not be able to sell the concept of a separate state even among his own people in the future, because`A0the Tamil people are beginning to realise that this is nothing but a Utopian dream. When I speak to the Tamil people I know, they accept that a separate state is not a realistic goal. We are caught up in a vicious cycle. They have been wronged by us. They, too, have wronged us in turn.

In my view, the real problems of the Tamil people do not relate to the demand for a separate state. I do not deny that`A0constitutional reform will be necessary to solve the problems of the Tamil people. But even without constitutional reform, many problems can be solved. I do not understand why the Sinhalese leadership does not resolve these problems that can be cleared up without waiting for constitutional reform, and why the Tamil leadership does not ask the Sinhala leaders to solve these problems.

For example, the language issue still exists. If someone goes to a police station in the Tamil areas, quite often there aren’t officers who can write down a statement in Tamil. In the Colombo High Courts complex, there is only one Tamil typewriter for all the courts. These basics are no longer on the agenda. Look at the latest set of proposals, the majority report of the all party conference expert panel. They talk of big issues, but the actual causes of the conflict which can be solved quite easily, have escaped our attention.`A0 Before we go on to big issues, an effort should be made to address these lesser issues which can win the goodwill of the Tamil people`A0 and see how`A0 they`A0 react to it. We need a radical change in the approach of both the Tamil and the Sinhalese sides.

In my view, there is some justification for the suspicion the Sinhalese have of`A0Tamil demands. On the other hand, the mistrust the Tamils have of the Sinhala leadership also has some justification. There is some truth in the claims of the Tamil nationalists. There is also some truth in the claims of the Sinhala nationalists. Take for instance the question of merging the northern and eastern provinces. This is an attempt to lay claim to a certain territory. This is a small country. When a small segment of the population lays claim to a large portion of the land, people naturally look askance at it. The slogan “Tamil speaking people” had some validity only if the Muslims supported it. At some point they may have supported it, but not any longer. That means that this slogan of “Tamil speaking people” is no longer valid. Why can’t the Tamil people agree to a formula like this - an exclusively Tamil regional government cantered on the Jaffna peninsula and a regional government for the eastern province which belongs to all three communities?

Q. Separate governments for the north and east?

A. Yes! It will be such a beautiful arrangement. An exclusively Tamil area and a mixed area! The demographic mix`A0 in the eastern province is not found even in Colombo.`A0 The eastern province is unique in this respect, and it can set an example for the rest of the country, as to how to live together and share power. I can’t imagine why anybody would oppose an arrangement like that. Once an arrangement like that is in place, if the two provinces were to merge, they should be free to do so.

If the two provinces are merged from the top, the Sinhalese and the Muslims in the east think they will become minorities and suffer marginalization. How are we to allay these fears? The Muslims argue that in a stand-alone eastern province they have strength in numbers, which they feel will be diluted if the east is merged with the north. This is a valid argument which we have to take into account. Another important point to consider is that there is a`A0difference between the Tamils of the north and the Tamils of the East. This is a historical fact.

The Tamil community in Sri Lanka is not one homogeneous group. When the Up-country Tamils were being disenfranchised, the Ceylon Tamil leadership did not stand up for them. A few, like Chelvanayagam spoke up.`A0 But those who really opposed the disenfranchisement of the Up-country Tamils were Sinhalese - the leaders of the LSSP and CP and people like D. M. Rajapakse, Sri Nissanka, Iriyagolle, W. Dahanayaka.`A0 The vast majority of the northern Tamil leadership actually supported the disenfranchisement of the Up-country Tamil people. It is only now that the northern Tamil leadership speaks of the Up-country Tamils with some sympathy.

It is interesting to observe the behaviour of these minority communities. In 1956, the Muslims thought that the problem is between the Sinhalese and the Tamils, therefore, they should make a separate peace with the majority community and solve their own problems. When the northern problem boiled over, Saumyamoorthy Thondaman made use of it to leverage his own interests. He pointed to the north and said, “We are not like that” and used it to solve his own problems. The powers that be also thought it was going to be a big problem if the Up-country Tamils joined the north. So, they took steps to solve their problems. All these minority communities acted very opportunistically to get their own problems addressed. We also made use of this opportunism for our purposes.

When it comes to the question how we are going to bring about a radical change in attitudes, my personal view is that the Sinhala leadership should apologise to the Tamil people. That will give the Tamil leadership the opportunity to apologise in turn to the Sinhalese. If they do not do that, its going to become a major issue because they, too, have caused grievous harm to the Sinhalese. One thing that the Tamil leadership has never understood is that if a struggle of this nature is to triumph, they need the sympathy and understanding of the Sinhala majority. This is the only such movement in the world that I know of, which has rejected wooing the majority community to their cause. Even in a struggle against an oppressive majority community, you have to have friends within that majority community. You should carry on your struggle in such a way as to win the respect of the majority community.`A0 The Tamil armed struggle has failed in this regard. Had there been no attempt to form a separate state, to demarcate boundaries and territories, and had they not been cruel towards`A0the ordinary Sinhala civilians,`A0 the Sinhala public opinion would have been different. They have created a fear in the minds of the Sinhala people. It is they who should take the initiative to allay those fears. If they are to allay those fears, the first step they should take is to move away from the concept of a separate state and refrain from talking about`A0boundaries and territories. If they are unable to do that, they should at least eschew violence. They should cease being cruel towards the Sinhala public and they should apologise for what they have done. We, too, should be humble enough to apologise to the Tamil people for the wrongs done to them. If this happens, it will be easy to change the way things are.

There is, of course, the question whether we have gone too far to turn back. The LTTE will find it difficult to change, considering the distance they have travelled on the path of violence, sacrificing thousands of`A0lives for a separate state. They may be a very effective armed movement, but in my opinion,`A0they are not an astute political movement. Had they been an astute political movement, they would never have killed Rajiv Gandhi. They have been able to put on a show of indomitable fearlessness through such acts, but it alienated the whole of India. This shows that they did not have the ability to take the big picture into account in political terms. This limitation is not confined to Prabhakaran but common to the entire Tamil movement.

Q. Previous leaders as well?

A. Yes! A golden opportunity that came the way of the Tamil leadership was when they got the leadership of the Opposition in 1977. While fighting for their rights, they could also have fought for the rights of the Sinhalese. Even today, Tamil political parties say they have no interest in other people’s problems. I think this is a wrong policy. They should be sensitive to the problems of the Sinhalese people as well.

The next issue is the peace movement. I do not see anything wrong in talking about peace. King Asoka became a righteous ruler because his conscience was troubled by the large number of`A0deaths caused by his wars of conquest. King Dutugemeunu is said to have been troubled by the large number of deaths caused by his wars of unification. The Mahavamsa has not tried to conceal that fact. These people had a conscience.

The war has raged over the past 20 years or so. In the LTTE controlled north and east, I have seen dwellings that are less than seven feet in height. In the south, the only dwellings below seven feet in height are constructed for animals. When the LTTE tells these hapless people to move, they migrate in their thousands with all their belongings. When the Army tells them to move in the opposite direction, they do that as well. If I were told to live in a large hall for an indefinite period with 300 families, I would commit suicide. But some people have been living in such conditions for years. What have we gained or they gained from this war?

Take the IRA for instance, there is a story about a man who contributed to the change in the IRA. He was a man who had spent a long time in Jail and was held in very high regard by the Irish people. After his release, he had asked some searching questions. “When is this going to end? Is there no end to this? Is there no timeframe to gain national self-respect? Are we going to be ruled all our lives by this conflict? Is that fair?” This kind of questioning led to a change in Irish attitudes. I cannot understand why the same does not apply to the Tamil people. Look at the way people die here. Dying for the ideal of a separate state may evoke a great deal of respect in that society, but the goal is Utopian. Does the person killing himself`A0for the cause know that there will be`A0 a worthwhile result of his actions?

He not only destroys others, but himself as well. Before this conflict erupted, the northern and eastern provinces were arguably more developed than most areas in the south. Today, those areas are the most backward in the country. The government is responsible for this to some extent. But can we absolve the armed Tamil groups of the blame? Isn’t there a better way to do things, to win their rights without subjecting their people to such hardships? The Tamil people should begin to look at this problem rationally.

Q. Are you saying that there is a certain poverty of philosophy within the Tamil movement?

A. I do not claim that the philosophy of the Sinhala leadership is highly developed, but a movement that engages in armed struggle, needs a sound philosophy much more than ordinary political movements. Their philosophy should deal with`A0the`A0goals of the movement and the course of action adopted to realise those goals. But, if the goals are Utopian and the course of action adopted to achieve those goals`A0consist of nothing but unbridled ruthlessness, the result achieved will not be of any benefit to them. Look at the example of Vietnam. They fought the French and later the Americans and defeated them both. But amidst all that bravado, what was the Vietnam that was left in the end? It was a Vietnam that knew how to fight but not much else. Now the Americans have come back to rehabilitate that Vietnam. The result gained was basically useless. Is this what we, too, are going to achieve?

Prabhakaran lives in a bunker. The President of the country also lives in a bunker. They can’t move around freely. We should ask ourselves how to destroy these bunkers. Those who live in bunkers can’t think properly. We need a Tamil-Sinhala initiative for this. The Tamil people have reasonable grievances, the Sinhalese, for their part, have reasonable criticisms of the Tamil armed movement. These have to be brought together and a new discourse initiated.

A criticism levelled against the present day peace movement is that there is no common movement to protest against ALL killings in the country regardless of who perpetrated it. Had such been the policy, the peace movement would have been held in very high esteem. Whether the killings are carried out by the LTTE, the armed forces or by some other group, they should come out in protest against them all, and call for a halt to the blood letting. Had there been a common campaign like this, such a campaign would not have been labelled as pro-LTTE or`A0pro-government. They would have won the respect of the people.

Q. What you are saying here is a question of commonsense. If we talk of peace, we should oppose all killings, instead of protesting selectively. Why has this commonsense approach not been adopted by the present day peace movement?

A. The way I see it, this is a society that is inured to conflict. People tend to look at rebels with some sympathy. But, at times they go over the limit. Because of that sympathy, people tend to look at the killings perpetrated by the rebels also with sympathy. We should look with sympathy only at their grievances, their acts of barbarity should not be approved or condoned. We have arrived at a crossroads in this cycle of violence. Over a 100,000 people have died as a result of armed conflict in this country. Those who remain are alive physically, but their sensibilities and conscience are dead. They can’t distinguish between sweet and foul odours. This society needs to be rehabilitated.

Q. What is the first step that should be taken in this regard?

A. A respected European academic once told me that there were only two successful peace movements in the world - one in South Africa and the other in Germany. In South Africa, the success of the peace movement is well known, but I found the mention of Germany curious considering the killings that occurred in that country. He told me that in the 1960s, the then German Chancellor was shown on TV kneeling at a Jewish cemetery. There was no fanfare or major pronouncements - it was a simple symbolic act of contrition shown on TV. The Jewish people accepted this as an apology for what had happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany. The Chancelleor did not stop at that. In German schools at that time, text books did not mention that dark phase of German history. He ordered that everything should be included in the textbooks as they had happened. I think the healing process should begin in Sri Lanka with a similar symbolic act. I do not know what form this symbolic action should take. But we cannot continue as we are doing at present, blaming one another for what has happened.

Q. You said that there was certain narrowness in the outlook of the Tamil leaders who came before Prabhakaran. What was the reason for this?

A. All our national leaders had certain narrowness in outlook. Leaders in other countries in Asia which have achieved success are different. Take Mahathir Mohomed for example. The people of Malaysia were able to judge his capacity by his first book. He went to jail and was anointed as a leader while in jail. In neighbouring India, all leaders from Mahatma Gandhi to the present President and Prime Minister have written at least one book. Our leaders in contrast have not published any serious work other than collections of their speeches. We have small-time leaders. This smallness was to be seen within the Tamil leadership as well. At the party congress in Vadukkodai, a young leader spoke emotionally about traitors and the need to punish them. S. J. V. Chelvanayagam was also on the stage. At that time, moderate Tamil intellectuals posed the`A0question whether Chelvanayagam did not hear what was being said on stage. (Chelvanayagam had a hearing problem.) Or, was it that a disillusioned Chelvanayagam thought these young men were on the right path? I believe that Chelvanayagam thought they were right. Amirthalingam openly encouraged the northern rebellion. He never thought he would become a victim of that very rebellion. Those Tamil youth were not mature people like Amirthalingam, they were dazzled by the Utopian ideal posited. At that time, they were just a bunch of young men agitating against issues like standardisation. When the separatist demand was announced at the Vaddukkodai conference, Tiruchelvam Senior, (The father of Neelan Tiruchelvam) asked`A0Amirthalingam whether that separatist statement was not dangerous. Amirthalingam told him that it was simply meant to keep the ‘boys’ happy. Those leaders made a big mistake. In the end, they too were killed. This was all due to shortcomings in their thinking.. They did not know where they were going. If they really wanted, there was an alternative way.`A0 Bertrand Russell has said that the characteristics of the great men who contribute to creating a nation automatically become the characteristics of that nation. I believe that to this date. India is running on the fuel pumped in by Mahatma Gandhi. India has a functioning democratic system, a highly respected judiciary, a highly respected bureaucracy, and a highly respected mass media. Nobody gets excited when a Muslim becomes President or a Sikh becomes Prime Minister. That maturity,`A0 was inherited from the struggle led by Mahatma Gandhi.

Q. Various proposals have been put forward to devolve power. We have another such set of proposals. Do you think these proposals serve any purpose, because it originates in Colombo?

There is little or no response to it from the other side. A. When an oppressed nation agitates for their rights, it is the oppressed side that should put forward their`A0proposals, without waiting for the oppressor to do so. This is a major weakness in the Tamil struggle. If Prabhakaran is a real leader, he should present his own set of proposals. Once presented, it can be discussed and debated by all sides.

Q. One might say that Prabhakaran has already put forward his set of proposals - which is the demand for a separatist state`85

A. The demand for a separate state is not a set of proposals. It`A0is a programme that can only lead to the destruction of both them and us. When I went to Jaffna in 1995 at the request of the then President Chandrika Kumaratunga, there was a big dispute about the petroleum ban in the north. The LTTE was bitterly complaining about the ban. I asked Anton Balasingham, “If a separate state is your goal, why is it so important to get petroleum from Colombo? You should be able to survive without help from the south. By your demands I gather that you are unable to survive without Colombo”. The upshot of all this is that a separate state is not feasible. Balasingham did not give me any reply.`A0 If India supports a separate state in the north and east, they will have a line of supply. Without that, this will become a completely meaningless struggle. If their existing goal cannot be achieved, how can we get them to agree to a lesser goal? I think they should engage in a critical self-examination of their goals and their method of struggle. If not, one day, the Tamil people will accuse them of having ruined their lives.`A0 Without moving away from the concept of a separate state, there will never be a solution. It is only when they accept that fact that a basis will emerge for peace talks.

Q. In the absence of a favourable response from the other side, will these new proposals (the majority report) serve any purpose?

A. What I think is that this is a kind of intellectual exercise engaged in by some big people. The Provincial councils were once touted as a solution to the Tamil problem. But the provincial councils function everywhere except in the north and east. These provincial councils are white elephants. India spent a long time formulating a constitution. They debated it vigorously`A0 and ended up with the world’s longest constitution, which has over the years, proved to be very functional and flexible. We in contrast, are too hasty. We try quick-fix solutions. In my view, what should be done first is for both sides to engage in a critical self-examination. We should ask ourselves: How have we wronged them and how have they wronged us? If we start from that point, we will be able to achieve something more meaningful.

Q. If a Tamil person opens his mouth to express a view different to that of the LTTE, he is shot dead. What is the way forward in a culture like that?

A. When a violent struggle is in progress, expressing a dissenting opinion is a risky business. A certain woman I knew carried out an experiment in democracy in Jaffna, borrowing an idea from us - the yellow ribbon campaign for democracy. She was greatly disappointed at the result. She had expected the entire village to hoist yellow flags, because of the esteem in which she was held. But the LTTE had opposed it and only 26 houses had participated. My response was to tell her that she has no cause to be despondent because 26 houses is a big`A0number, given the circumstances. The campaign was not a failure but a success! There is hope even amidst the gloom. Violence cannot hold sway indefinitely. There is a certain despondency spreading within the LTTE - even among the Tamil diaspora living in the west, that the goals of the movement are not realistic. Prabhakaran should have the courage to move away from this false goal. The LTTE captured Elephant Pass. This was a very great military victory. They attacked the Katunayaka Airport, which was also a great victory. If from that point they were unable transform those victories into a solution, then their whole campaign can be deemed to have been unsuccessful. There are no big targets left to attack. If a military campaign goes up to the highest level and then comes down to the level of targeting the cars and jeeps of VIPs, that is a clear indication that their campaign is unsuccessful. They should be able to change tack. They should have the vision to move from the military to the political theatre of action. [island.lk]