Posts filed under 'transCurrents Commentary'
By Mano Ganesan
The victims of human rights violations during the 1989 period are activists, supporters and family members of JVP. It was a well known fact. Mahinda Rajapakse fought on behalf of their plight. That did not make him a member of JVP. He fought for the human rights of the people. JVP attacked sacred Dalada Maligawa. They threw bombs inside the Parliament. They killed Buddhist monks, politicians, police, security forces and their family members. But nobody accused Mahinda of dealing with JVP and supporting JVP’s terrorism against security forces. Today the victims are Tamils and most of them are accused of LTTE affiliation. People who struggle for political solution and stand against war are also condemned as LTTE supporters. If there are LTTE members, they must be dealt according to the law of the land instead of extra legal punishments. That is what Mahinda Rajapakse wanted for JVPers in 1989. Today, there are many innocent people who are punished for being Tamil from north and east. There are Sinhalese who speak against war are also condemned as ‘Sinhala Kotiyas’. Irrespective all these facts my fight is for the protection of human rights of the victims. It is similar to then struggle of Mahinda Rajapakse. Can anybody produce one reasonable difference between my today’s campaign and Mahinda Rajapakse’s campaign of 1989? Can anyone of those government politicians, their extremist allies in JVP and JHU, cronies and members of hardliner private and state media who accuse me of treachery and abating terrorism come up with the answer, challenged Western Peoples Front Leader and Civil Monitoring Commission Convener Mano Ganesan MP during his address to WPF politburo.
Ganesan said further in his deliberation,
Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse as a SLFP Parliamentarian championed human rights during the late 1989 period. He campaigned against extra legal killings, enforced disappearances and arbitrary arrests and detentions. He documented (symbolically or otherwise) incidents of abuses and took the issue to the international community. He traveled to Geneva , as some of our human rights activists travel to Geneva today to make cases at UN human rights council.
Democratic Left Front general secretary and presidential advisor today comrade Vasudeva Nanayakara worked along with Parliamentarian Mahinda Rajapakse in this mission. I am told that Vasudeva accompanied him to Geneva and both of them faced government screening and intimidation at the Katunayake airport.
Notwithstanding this respectful, commendable and exemplary past HE Mahinda Rajapakse today heads a government which is the guilty party and cause to the grave human rights violations occur in this country. There are other actors, LTTE and various Para-groups are also in the scene as offenders. But they are non state actors. HE Mahinda Rajapakse heads the government and the Sri Lankan state. The government is bound by the national and international laws and conventions.
[Mano Ganesan MP]
This government accuses human rights defenders on two counts.
(01) Human Rights defenders are accused of ‘discrediting’ the country by taking the subject matter issues out of Sri Lanka to the international community.
(02) Human Rights defenders are accused of ’supporting and working’ for the LTTE.
This killer campaign has now reached great levels. It is targeting all members of human rights defender community. The human rights defender community in Sri Lanka consist Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, Sri Lankans and foreigners. There are men and women. All of them are targeted. Government politicians, their extremist allies, cronies and hardliner private and state media are doing overtime in this merciless offensive killer campaign.
I am under this willful attack very often. The reasons are there. I am an ethnic Tamilian by birth and I have a political face.
I am accused of bringing ‘discredit’ to the country by ‘complaining’ to the United Nations and other players in the international community or rather keeping this campaign alive. I am accused of ‘telling and talking’ to the international media. I am accused of ‘traitorous disservice’ to my country. I am accused of ‘dealing with and working for LTTE’. I am accused of ’supporting terrorism’.
These are activities; I will never do even in my wildest dreams. But the accusers never wanted to listen and understand.
I am very much confident of the fact that what I am doing now is that Mahinda Rajapakse did in late 80s. Can anybody dispute me? On the strength of my confidence I have very often asked few simple questions inside and outside the parliament.
Can anybody produce one reasonable difference between my today’s campaign and Mahinda Rajapakse’s campaign of 1980s? I challenge anyone of those government politicians, their extremist allies, cronies and members of hardliner private and state media who accuse me of treachery and abating terrorism to come with the answer.
But I have some answers to my own questions. Yes, there are some basic differences.
On the one hand, Mahinda Rajapakse is a Sinhala man by birth. I am Tamil man by birth. He is member of the numerical majority community. I am member of the numerical minority community. On the other hand, those who faced human rights violations in the forms of extra judicial killings, enforced abductions during 1980s are mostly members of the Sinhala community. Most of the victims today are members of the Tamil community.
Are these the differences? You disregard and even approve these abductions, extra judicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detentions, extortions because of the fact that the victims are Tamils and in some cases Muslims?
The victims during the 1989 period are family members, activists and supporters of JVP. It was a well known fact. Mahinda Rajapakse fought on behalf of for their plight. That did not make him a member of JVP. He fought for the human rights of the people. Nobody accused him of dealing with JVP and supporting and JVP terrorism. Today the victims are Tamils and most of the time they are accused of LTTE affiliation. People who struggle for peace and stand against war are also condemned as LTTE supporters. There may be LTTE members. They must be dealt according to the law of the land. There are many innocent people who are punished for members of the Tamil community. Irrespective all these facts my fight is for the protection of human rights the victims. It is similar to the struggle of Mahinda Rajapakse.
Those who did not and cannot put JVP label on Mahinda Rajapakse are today unfairly putting LTTE label on me. This is the sad fact when the defender and the victims happen to members of the Tamil community in this country.
This is yet another typical example of the prevailing ethnic discrimination in this country.
I cannot understand this logic and peculiar reality.
UNP was the ruling party during the 1980s which was accused of state terrorism. UNP today supports our campaign for the protection of human rights. SLFP was the party which championed the human rights. Especially non other than the president headed the campaign. This party is the ruling party today. SLFP led government practices state terrorism against Tamils. This does not end here. There is another dimension. The victims of 1980s are the JVPers. This party supports the military campaign and justifies the human rights violations against Tamils.
March 5th, 2008
By Dr V Ramakrishnan
International Crisis Group’s (ICG) recent report on Sri Lanka is another repeat of a standard interpretation of Third World conflicts as no more than internal tribal war. In Sri Lanka, its to be seen as a contest between Sinhala Buddhist Nationalism and Tamil Nationalism, the former with exclusive claims to a unitary state and the latter for a partition of it. “Hardening nationalism” as the cause and “stymieing peace solution” as effect is the crisis identified.
And worse, the ICG recommends “stronger international efforts” and the need for “international actors” with an agenda for immediate “state reform” and a program for “good governance”.
[King Parakramabahu-pic by Wathsala Vithanage]
Sri Lanka had experienced international (western) intervention way back in the sixteenth century. The Portuguese traders arrived in their ships with guns and canons and had themselves invited to intervene in settling domestic disputes in Kotte and Jaffna. They were followed by Dutch and English traders. All in all it was to be five hundred years of continuous colonial rule and therein lies the roots of the present crisis, The people had no role to play in the shaping of their lives. And yet the ICG sidelines this phase of history to remain focused on internal tribal wars-source of the crisis. Hence the skepticism over its recommendation for “stronger international efforts” and a role for “international actors”. Does “stronger” means more arms twisting of a small country pauperized by five centuries of colonial rule? Does presence of “international actors” amount to armed intervention with guarantee of a further phase of colonial rule-either direct or proxy? The source of the crisis lies in a “stolen history” (The problem in Sri Lanka may also be true of the entire Third World once subjected to centuries of colonial rule).
[Statue of King Sangiliyan in Jaffana-pic by Dushiyanthini Kanagasabapathipillai]
It is in the British period of colonial history the greatest damage was done. And this is spilling over today.
A people living in communities (Kudi Sanam) were governed by custom. Property was held in trust inherited by women (dowry) as head of family to guarantee succession of ownership and culture for generations to come. There were Kings too who administered justice respecting people’s custom. Community level leadership allowed people’s participation in administering their affairs and lead meaningful lives. This was the home grown conception of the state. Participatory democracy was the exemplar of good governance. This method of civil governance suffered a drastic change when the British gained jurisdiction over the whole country.
The Colebrooke Reforms of 1830 sees the Governor appointed by the British Monarch and his team of bureaucrats gaining unbridled power in a centralized system of administration. The districts were to be administered by Government Agents as near chieftains. They in turn appointed chosen natives as Village Headmen thus displacing community level leadership for good.
Military laws introduced in England after the Norman Conquest were soon transformed as Common Law to govern the colonies. So was it to be in Sri Lanka as well. Property as trust was to make way for private property backed by a formidable law enforcing agency.
Vacant lands were seized under the Crown Lands Ordinance, parceled and sold cheap to officials and other British speculators to found tea and rubber estates (This was preceded by an intensive deforestation programmme that was to damage rural agriculture and the country’s food heritage). This along with the needed infra-structure arrangement was to be managed by a powerful mercantile sector glorified in school text-books as the new ‘agricultural export economy’. And the London trained pioneer historian G C Mendis would recommend it as ‘modernization’.
It is this colonial outfit in its entirety that was slipped through to be the core provisions of the Soulbury Constitution on which independence was to be conferred. It gains legitimacy sanctified by the fundamental law of the land. This then becomes the “Unitary State” referred to as the bone of contention between the Sinhala Buddhist Nationalism and Tamil Nationalism and the core of the crisis identified by the ICG. The unitary state would be vacuous of content if the hard core of an unaccountable bureaucracy and the law enforcing agency and the laws it was aimed to enforce were to be removed from it.
It is this colonial outfit vested with centralized exercise of power that was declared overnight as a ‘nation state’ on 4th February 1948. But the colonial loot is yet to continue, now seen as legitimate profit on investment by nationals of the once metropolitan state. And worse, our street stalls are now stacked with applies, oranges, canned fish and a great deal of consumer trash, while Sri Lankans’ only hope is to export its trained and untrained labour and depend on expatriate remittances to afford purchasing imported goods dumped in our markets.
On top of this otherwise vacuous nation state is crowned a parliamentary Westminister style of government to present a facade of democracy to lend legitimacy to what is to go off as a sovereign nation state. And what goes at the surface is what the ICG would identify as the crisis to warrant international intervention.
Whatever vestiges of democracy left’t President. For all intents and purposes he made himself as powerful as the Colonial Governor-winding up Village and Town Councils, strengthening the bureaucracy and the law enforcing agencies, the judiciary became more pliant and parliament ceased to be supreme. This new arrangement was also to go off as the unitary state the ICG refers to.
Perhaps the greatest damage of lasting impact was in the field of education introduced in 1830. This bureaucratic system continues till today. The monks and the pundits as links to the country’s 2000 year long cultural heritage were to be permanently sidelined. The children of a cosmopolitan group given land grants to farm taxes and found mini-dynasties in different parts of the country were to be given a grammar school type English education and other children a sub-standard training in the native languages. And now we have International English Schools guaranteed a firm grip in professional courses at the universities. It is to be the same old syllabus of the colonial ear at our schools and universities and the vast majority of youth are left stranded.
In sum, five hundred years of colonial rule sees a country de-stabilized. Charismatic leaders who attempted to repair the damage done were either sidelined or killed. The country lost a prime minister and president. Almost all elected Tamil leaders were killed. Youths rising in revolt in the South and the North were killed in their thousands.
[Sigiriya Frescoes-Pic HA]
Lacking in effective leadership it becomes easy to steer a destabilized country into protracted war. The apparent diversity and agenda conflicts of the domestic actors seen in its totality would transform it into a neatly orchestrated programme aimed to invite outside intervention.
But then at what cost? It certainly is more than the head count of those killed and maimed, of children orphaned and women widowed, of thousands evicted from their homes in search of food, shelter and safety. Sri Lanka is to join the rest of third world as misery sets in to deprive native peoples of their sense of dignity. All this tragedy is not of their asking. These are people in search of settled lives.
As participant observer and himself a victim and a refugee now far far away from the land of his ancestors one could only ask that this war be stopped. Once stopped, the entire edifice hastily constructed to promote war would collapse like a house of cards.
Stopping the war is easy, if only the big ones selling arms are persuaded to stop it. The world would then be ready with a broader front to fight climate change.
Would the ICG give a helping hand?
[The writer now domiciled in Australia was the Dean, Faculty of Arts and Culture, Eastern University, Sri Lanka and sometimes visiting Professor at the Benares University, India. In his early days he was an active trade unionist and member of the Ceylon Communist Party]
March 3rd, 2008
by MSM Ayub
“The Sri Lanka fighter jets have destroyed a place in Jayapuram in Killinochchi where some senior LTTE leaders had assembled”. “Reports from Killinochchi say that seven civilians have been seriously injured in an attack by the SLAF bombers”. These are two lead sentences of two news items appearing in two newspapers on January 18. But do not misunderstand, these were not two incidents. These news items referred to one and the same incident.
[A Newsstand in Minuwangoda, Sri Lanka, (file Picture) by Dennis S. Hurd, New Westminster, BC, Canada]
One news item appeared in a Sinhala language newspaper and the other in a Tamil paper. With the experience no Sri Lankan will mistake the first news item as one appeared in a Tamil newspaper and also the second to be in a Sinhala paper.
According to the Sinhala newspaper the Air force pilots have been sharpshooters, and they have precisely attacked the LTTE hideout from some thousands feet above the ground. Contrary to that the Tamil paper blames the Air Force for wittingly or unwittingly bombing civilians. Sinhala paper did not see any civilian casualty while in the Tamil paper’s eye it is a bombing raid on civilians and not on LTTE cadres We can not contest both these claims for we were not eyewitnesses of the incident. However, either one or the both claims should be untrue.
Sometimes both could be true- SLAF may have destroyed an LTTE hideout and also civilians may have been hurt- but neither news items provide the complete picture.The incident was seen from two angles not only by these two particular newspapers.
Almost all Sinhala and Tamil newspapers had followed the same lines respectively-Sinhala papers claimed it was a raid on LTTE leaders and for the Tamil papers it was an attack on civilians.
This is how two other Sinhala newspapers reported the incident;”Fighter jets have attacked yesterday a camp in Jayapuram in KIllinochchi where a group of senior LTTE leaders have assembled”. “A fortified position of the LTTE leaders in Killinochchi has been attacked by air”
And the Sudar Oli which is more lenient to the LTTE said that “the SLAF MiG air crafts have “dumped” bombs on Jeyapuram in Killinochchi injuring seven civilians including a mother and a daughter and damaging up to twenty houses.” It also added that the Tigers had claimed that they had chased out the aircraft by firing anti-aircraft guns.
Severe bombing by the SLAF left seven persons injured and nine houses damaged in Kanakapuram in Killinochchi, The thinakkural reported. The bombardment was carried out on the populated area around Kanakapuram Maha Vidyalayam and nine houses have been flattened by the eight bombs dropped. Students who were in the school at the time of the bombardment have screamingly run helter-skelter, the paper added. (Although there is a name change of a place the news item referred to the same incident)
What we have made here is not an unprecedented observation. And also this was not the first time newspapers reported incidents related to the war and the ethnic problem in such a divided manner, and it will not be the last time that we are going to see such divided reporting giving totally diverse pictures. This may have been happening from the first conflict related incident.
On the same day the Kilinochchi bombing occurred it was reported that there was a clash between the security forces and suspected Tamil rebels (LTTE) in the jungles in Buttala area. It is also interesting to note how the news on the incident appeared in Sinhala and Tamil Language papers. “Troops attack the Tigers who escaped to Dambeyaya after blasting a bus at Buttala” said one Sinhala paper.
Another said “troops comb Buttala jungles in search of escaped Tigers” The tone of the Tamil papers was different. Weerakesari said “troops- Tigers clash in Dambeyaya jungles. “Those who searched Monaragala jungles shot at. One STF personnel injured” said Sudar Oli. In this case Tigers are on the run according to Sinhala papers, and in the eyes of Sudar Oli it was the troops who have got the beating.
When six soldiers were killed in Thalladi St. Sebastian Church in Mannar by the LTTE artillery fire on February 12 Sinhala papers reported it as an attack on the church. “Thalladi church damaged by the LTTE attack-6 soldiers killed” one paper said while another’s headline was Thalladi Catholic church destroyed by Tiger artillery attack”.
Another paper said that “Tigers attack the church while preparations for the feast was on”. All three Tamil papers published by the Colombo based private companies ran this story as their page one lead on February 13, but with a different angle. They said that the LTTE attacked the Thalladi army camp and not the church. They also quoted the Defence Ministry at a place down in the news item, as saying that the LTTE has attacked the church.
Some of the Sinhala papers that carried the Defence Ministry version said that the troops were attacked while they were repairing the church, while Sudar Oli in a separate story quoted a prominent Catholic clergy in the area as saying that the church in question is presently abandoned and soldiers have occupied the church premises.
Surprisingly sometimes we can read seemingly contrasting quotes of one and the same source. This is in fact interesting for a student of journalism but unimaginable for an ordinary reader who does not know the length and width of the inner circle of the media industry.
If we are to take an instance from a little distant place in the recent history, one of the pertinent occasions to find confounding quotes of the same person was the visit by Christina B. Rocca, United States Assistant Secretary for South Asia to Sri Lanka on April 19, 2005.
At the end of her visit she met the media in Colombo where she said that “a political solution is the only way to a resolution. We urge the parties to return to peace talks, and to continue the broader process necessary to end the conflict. The government should speak with one voice on the peace process.”
She further said that “Our position on the LTTE has not changed. The U.S. continues to regard the LTTE as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Our listing of it as a Foreign Terrorist Organization will remain in effect until the group renounces terrorism in word and deed. This includes ending the murder of political opponents and the recruitment of children. The LTTE should understand that we would be willing to consider engaging with them once they undertake such a renunciation”.
On April 20 almost all Sinhala papers carried page one news items on this press conference and highlighted what she said about the LTTE proscription in the US. “No lifting of ban on the LTTE until the outfit renounces violence in word and deed- Rocca says” or similar ideas were the headlines of most papers.
Tamil papers subdued this part of her speech and played up what Rocca said about the need of the Government to speak with one voice on the peace process.Those who had read papers in both languages might have been surprised at the first sight as to why this lady was airing so confusing views to papers in two languages spoken by two communities with conflicting interests.
But when you go on reading down the story you would find that journalists from both language streams had covered the same press briefing. Even if we dig farther and farther into the history we will be able to find more and more such fascinating comparisons of Tamil and Sinhala media covering same events.
Sometimes the news items in these two language streams are not only confounding each other but also they are as contrastive as black and white. During the first days of Vinaygamoorthi Muralidharan alias Karuna, the special commander of the LTTE for Ampara and Batticaloa districts splintered from the outfit in March 2004 skirmishes erupted between the two factions on daily basis.
A Sinhala paper once reported that more than hundred LTTEers had been killed by Karuna loyalists. Understandably other Sinhala papers too carried the same news with varying casualty figures on LTTE’s side whereas Tamil papers quoting former LTTE political wing leader Suppaiah Paramu Thamilchelvan said there is no fighting at all in the area referred to by the Sinhala papers.
Here Sinhala papers had attributed their news item to sources in the security forces in sharp contrast to the Tamil papers. The difference between hundred and zero in two language streams here is not mere numbers, but human lives.
A senior Indian journalist, Praveen Swamy of The Hindu/ Frontline who visited recently to the Sri Lanka Press Institute (SLPI) for a mid carrier workshop for the Sri Lankan journalists working in all three languages had an open lecture on ethnic biased reporting in India as a side event at the same venue.
Surprisingly for most of the participants he related the behavioral pattern of the Indian media in respect of various ethnic clashes in India which were very akin to Sri Lankan media demeanour.
And also it was a well known fact that how the western media built a hype on the Saddam Hussein’s ‘Super Gun’ before the first US invasion on Iraq in 1991 and on the ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ (WMD) in preparation to the second invasion in 2003, which were later proved to be an arrant lie created by the western leaders and repeatedly spread by the western media.
Had one collate the western media and the Arab media during those days he would have visualized the picture of the present day Sri Lankan media.Therefore the media’s ethnic bias is not a local but a global phenomenon.
Read Indian and Pakistani papers on Kashmir or some other common issue, you would find an interesting collation. There are so many reasons for this sharply divisive media behaviour. Main among them is the market oriented approach of the media industry which is common around the world and inevitable for its survival.
No media except for papers on which funds are pumped by NGOs, would dare to antagonize readers, and sometimes media take a more than biased attitude towards the audience and tend to appease it. The prejudice of the journalist who is a product of the current society adds flavor to this.
Another vital factor that influences the impartial reporting of ethnic issues is the contacts or the sources that the journalists maintain. Sinhalese journalists maintain contacts mainly with security personnel for war related information who feed the media with information favourable to them and main sources of Tamil journalists are Tamil politicians and LTTE related websites, both biased towards appeasing Tamil minds.
Thus the disparity between Sinhala and Tamil media becomes natural and the slant of one side is not challenged by the other side of the wedge as it is not conspicuous to that side due to the language barrier, thus the disparate reporting goes on unabated.
March 3rd, 2008
by Dayan Jayatilleka
Unfair criticism must be met with fair counter-criticism. If the criticism is private, so too should be the counter-criticism. Insofar as the criticism is public, so too should be the defence, and the counter-criticism. No self respecting state can respond in private, to criticism of it in public.
The British Foreign Secretary David Miliband was gracious enough to issue a statement on Sri Lanka’s 60th anniversary of Independence. He said:
‘The 60th anniversary of Sri Lankan independence is a time to reflect on the health and welfare of the nation and its people as it moves forward in the 21st century. The cycle of violence in Sri Lanka has worsened in recent weeks. Civilian lives have been lost from all communities and regions of Sri Lanka. The end of the formal 2002 cease-fire agreement does not remove the obligation of all parties to the conflict to protect civilian life.
[British Foreign Secretary David Miliband-Photo via Yahoo! News]
‘I wholeheartedly condemn these attacks upon civilians and those responsible. My thoughts and condolences are with the victims of the attacks, and their families. I call for an immediate end to practices which target civilians or put them in peril. I urge all in Sri Lanka to take steps to safeguard the civilian population and find ways to reduce the violence.
‘Violence can never provide an answer to Sri Lanka’s problems. People in Sri Lanka need to find space to realize their many similarities, rather than becoming further polarized by their differences. A sustainable solution to Sri Lanka’s conflict can only emerge through a just political process involving all communities.’
The statement does not congratulate or wish Sri Lanka well on its important Independence Anniversary. It moves straight into a little homily commending reflection, a reminder from the former colonial master on the need for such a practice. While it bewails and bemoans civilian deaths, the three paragraph statement makes no reference to the LTTE, terrorism or separatism. It contains not the slightest hint of solidarity in the struggle against terrorism, from a fellow democracy. It concludes with the unctuous observation that “Violence can never provide an answer to Sri Lanka’s problems.” This leaves one wondering if violence can ever provide an answer to Iraq’s or Afghanistan’s problems, because in both countries British troops are present, engaging in the practice precisely of violence! Neither country is part of Britain. In both countries British troops are invaders. Neither country did any harm to Britain. In the case of one, Britain led the pack in lying to the world and its own people about WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) as a prelude to invading and occupying it.
Sri Lanka is fighting a war that is just by any criteria. It is a war against separation of a small island. It is a war of a democracy against an enemy that is both totalitarian and terrorist.
How well are the Sri Lankan armed forces doing against the LTTE? The evidence is in a professional, four page, diagrammatically illustrated special report in one of the most respected and arguably the best known South Asian magazine, India Today. Check out the latest issue with its frank interview with President Rajapakse and its report on the war and the Sri Lankan armed forces, entitled ‘Getting Prabhakaran’.
It is said that each generation has to re-fight the battles not of their fathers but of their grandfathers. The matter is all rather simple. Sri Lanka is fighting a war to prevent separation, to unite the country, to maintain it as a single territory, to make the writ of the state run from West to East, North to South of our little island. This is a struggle undertaken by many societies at an earlier stage of their history. It is part of what is known as the bourgeois democratic revolution, i.e. those tasks undertaken or completed by the rising bourgeois class of those nations. In the global South, this task of national unification often comes up against the opposition of the Western powers (as it did in China). This seems to be the case in present day Sri Lanka too. In such historical situations, the tasks of national unification combine with the struggle to win or defend national independence and sovereignty.
The task of national-territorial unification intertwine with the left over or reactivated task of defending national independence against Western intervention, hegemonism and diktat, or in a word-old fashioned but accurate-imperialism. It is a term that David Miliband’s highly (and deservedly) respected father, Marxist political theorist Ralph Miliband, was not afraid to use. In these twin tasks, the national capitalist leaderships of the East play a role, sometimes a leading role, unlike those in the West. This is what led Lenin to speak paradoxically of an “Advanced Asia and Backward Europe”. Even more striking was the development of this idea by Stalin, who concluded in the 1920s, that inasmuch as he stands up against Western imperialism for his nation, despite his ideological backwardness, “the Emir of Afghanistan is more progressive than the British Labor Party”. This is certainly true of many a Third World and Eurasian leader including those of Sri Lanka, in relation to the British (New) Labor Party!
Sometimes the task of national unification takes a particularly enlightened multilingual, multi-religious character, but in many, even most cases, the struggle requires the mobilization of the peasantry and the nationalist intelligentsia and therefore takes a majoritarian nationalist, even religio-nationalist, character. The Year 1848 which witnessed radical democratic revolutions throughout Europe was called the Springtime of Nations and that season spilled over into a conflict of nationalisms. Uneven development dictated different ratios of Reason and Romanticism, of secularism and religiosity, of forward looking and backward looking elements in each democratic upheaval or nationalist movement. While the American Revolution of 1776 was exemplarily enlightened, an earlier experience of enormous progressive import in English-and Western-history, the Cromwellian Revolution, had a religious charge and a dark downside in Ireland.
British Foreign Secretary Miliband’s advice to Sri Lanka, which reeks of retro-chic in that it seems to forget that it is sixty years since Britain ruled us, must be matched against some excellent advice he received recently from the Foreign Minister of Russia, Sergei Lavrov, probably the most impressive Foreign Minister in service today (whose twin lectures at the UN in Geneva I greatly look forward to attending this week). Incidentally his early years as a diplomat were spent in Sri Lanka, beginning in 1972. When the British Ambassador to Moscow dug in his heels over the presence of the British Council in St Petersburg and said something to the world’s media to the effect that (as the old protest song went) “we shall not be moved”, the British found that in fact they were, the very next day. Commenting on the episode, Russia’s Foreign Minister said that Britain had not obtained Russia’s permission to set up these British Council offices. More importantly he made an observation of the statements emanating from the British Foreign Secretary and the UK govt, remarking that “this is not the language with which to speak to Russia, some people have not got over their colonial frame of mind and are still nostalgic for their colonial past.”
If any country takes a stand that is tilted against us or is ambivalent in this most fundamental of struggles, then we must recognize that there exists an incompatibility of interests between those countries and ours. Such states are not firm friends or staunch allies. It should be made clear to them that their stand today directly influences the role they will or will not have in influencing the post-war, post-conflict order in Sri Lanka. Those who stand against us, who threaten or attempt to intimidate us; those who vacillate and temporize during this war, have forfeited the chance to play a role in the peace. They must be limited to a strictly diplomatic presence. There are on the other hand, states that have uncritically supported us during this war, or have voiced their misgivings and advice in private. They are the ones with whom we have a basic identity of interests. These are our friends, allies and partners. They are the extended family to which we truly belong.
Some choices are easy. The Sri Lankan people are politically among the most sophisticated in the Third World and even the newly emergent democracies of the Second World, given not only our levels of literacy but also the exercise of universal franchise from 1931. A recent Nielsen poll conducted in cooperation with the Sunday Times contained some important judgments by a representative sample of the Sri Lankan people. They rated the greatest leaders of Independent Sri Lanka in the following order: (Founding Father) DS Senanayake, President Ranasinghe Premadasa and incumbent President Mahinda Rajapakse. (I am proud to have supported and worked with two of the three).The people unerringly discern synchronicity where the pseudo-intelligentsia does not. The poll also placed President Rajapakse way ahead of his current competitors, with former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe (economic neoliberal, peacenik and darling of the West) and former President Chandrika Kumaratunga (darling of the Tamil liberals) scoring a truly pathetic 1% each! Set these figures along the results of recent polls which show figures of a massive majority ( 85%) identifying separatist terrorism as the most important issue and supporting the military efforts of the incumbent, and you get the overall picture of where the Sri Lankan people stand, and just how isolated the Colombo “comprador” critics are.
What we must do is renew our commitment to and reactivate “really existing devolution”, that is provincial level devolution as contained in the 13th amendment. The issue is not whether such devolution is intrinsically desirable. The issue is that we cannot afford not to do so. If we do not want a replay in some form or the other of the bitter experience of 1987, when the advancing Sri Lankan Army under General Gerry de Silva and more famously Brigadiers Kobbekaduwa and Wimalaratne, were stopped in theirs tracks by external intervention, we must devolve. Tamil Nadu, the DMK factor, the coalitional character of governments in Delhi, and elections in India this year or next, are facts that we cannot ignore. We cannot afford South India becoming once again a safe haven or rear base for the LTTE. We can still less afford anti-aircraft rocketry being smuggled in through South India to the LTTE. We need India to play a more active role in cooperating with us to put down Prabhakaran who has cost both our countries so much. The lowest price we have to pay is the full and immediate implementation of the 13th amendment.
February 13th, 2008
by Lionel Bopage
In the history of the left both internationally and locally, a critical appraisal of organisations and their leaders are rare occurrences. For many of the comrades on the left there are no grey areas in politics. Like mathematics it has to be black or white. However, the stark reality is that in politics like the legal sphere, there are so many shades of grey (and also grey matter sometimes). It was over these shades of grey that left has made it into an art form, with the left continually fragmenting into various factions and denominations. This holds true from the old to the young. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that all left wing and progressive sections of the working people in Sri Lanka will with enthusiasm positively appraise the tremendous and significant role played by the Ceylon Mercantile Union (CMU – The Ceylon Mercantile, Industrial and General Workers Union formed in 1928) and its leader comrade Bala Tampoe in the national political history of Sri Lanka and its people. Comrade Bala is in his eightieth year and the CMU in its sixtieth. Both the man and the organisation are synonymous. As Bala had been general secretary of the CMU for the past sixty years!
Since 1948 Bala has been general secretary of the CMU, a strong trade union in the mercantile sector initially affiliated with the Lanka Sama Samaja Party (LSSP). In the sixties as a student wing member of the Communist Party, I was told that all Trotskyite movements were backed by the CIA including comrade Bala! This line was continued in the JVP but later on repudiated. Regardless of these rumours, we young people had a high regard for the militant struggles led by the LSSP and the CP, and the role the CMU and its leader comrade Bala played in the struggle for socialism and the rights of the working class. The CMU led strikes in the sixties despite the repression of the state which was inspiring to us of the left.
However, with the marriage of the left leadership with bourgeois parties, there were new tendencies that came into being. Comrade Bala broke away and formed the Lanka Sama Samaja Party (Revolutionary)1 and the comrades who had closer associations with the Communist parties went onto strengthen the ‘movement’, a breakaway group from the Maoist currents, which later was identified as the ‘Che Guevara movement’ and afterwards became the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP). Comrade Bala became the leader of the political group recognised by the United Secretariat of the Fourth International.
The JVP’s first encounter with more radical Sama Samajists was when the comrades of the Lanka Sama Samaja Party (LSSP) Ananada Premasinghe and Marshal Perera appeared on behalf of comrade Rohana Wijeweera when he was incarcerated by the state in 1970. Though we had Stalinist and Maoist political affiliations and they had Trotskyite political affiliations, those differences did not matter when it came to opposing state repression. We had something in common the real danger to our democratic rights of freedom to political expression from the ruling elite. It was the same situation in 1971 and 1972. In fact his brilliant knowledge and understanding of Marxism brought another dimension to the whole CJC trial in that a holistic class perspective of the April 1971 insurrection could be presented. While the state represented in the unholy alliance of the SLFP, the LSSP and the CP were scurrilously trying to portray the JVP as a bunch of murderous terrorists. With the assistance of Bala and his team we could fight these allegations vigorously.
The RMP, the CMU and comrade Bala continued to protest against the illegal and continued detention of cadres and leaders of the JVP. They defended the democratic rights of the JVP to publicize their political views by appearing in the courts on behalf of some of the JVP activists. The CMU protested against the arrest and detention of nearly four thousand JVP activists, many who had been tortured by the security forces. They also opposed the declaration of a state of emergency in March 1971 which empowered the security forces to dispose dead bodies without post mortem examinations. Comrades Prins Rajasooriya, Sylvester Jayakody and other members of the CMU were also held in detention for some time. They also published interviews with JVP leaders including comrade Rohana thus providing an international audience to the JVP point of view.
At the main trial of the Criminal Justice Commission (CJC) I had the occasion to meet with, talk to and familiarise myself with comrade Bala Tampoe and the fabulous work done by the CMU on behalf of the working class. A plethora of legal counsels with different views on how to proceed in facing the CJC trial represented the 32 defendants that were in custody. There were two views: the majority felt that the CJC had no legal jurisdiction to hold the trial and that the CJC Act had no force in Law. They wished to raise this issue at the commencement of the trail and failing to succeed to walk out of the CJC. Comrade Bala and his team comprising Comrades R Saravanabhagawan, P Rajanayagam and H A Seneviratne and several other legal representatives went beyond this. Not only they wanted to challenge the legality of the CJC Act and the trial but also to continue to stay behind and defend the suspects even if the legal challenge failed, thus exposing the political farce of the trial. When the CJC came to the view that the Act was valid in law, comrades Edmund Samarakkody, his team, Prins Gunesekera and several other counsels walked out of the trial.
The RMP, the CMU and comrade Bala did not have any doubt that the JVP in the seventies was a genuine youth movement seeking redress to the socio-economic issues that affected them. For most of us in the JVP, it was our first encounter with the law and we were convinced that comrade Bala and his team were correct in their position because the CJC trial was not just a legal matter but predominantly a political matter. It was on a decision made by the CMU that Comrade Bala and the team appeared on behalf us of or advised us, the accused of the main trial. Thereafter, throughout the main trial, comrades Rohana Wijeweera, Uyangoda, Kelly Senanayake and myself regularly met with comrade Bala and his team. Most of the trial was full of political sparks with the state prosecutors2 and the judges on one side and us and our counsel on the other side of the fence. Comrade Bala and his team demonstrated not only their brilliant legal skills but also their astute political skills in uncompromisingly exposing the acts of class betrayal by the government of the day and their supporters. The trial also exposed fault lines in the JVP. It exposed us as being politically immature, romantic and adventurist in our methods of struggle. Some in the JVP changed their political stripes while others left the political fray for personal reasons.
During the long political discussions we had in the seventies, comrade Bala often talked about the need of the deadwood in the left giving way to new shoots who from his perspective were not being nourished. I believe this analysis is still valid. The metaphor was apt for me, at the time, because the crisis in the JVP had ensured that the deadwood had drifted away to allow new shoots to flourish. The political collaboration between the JVP and the CMU became visible when the JVP took part in a United Red May Day rally in 1977 with the CMU. When the JVP leadership was released from prison in November 1977, we had only one shelter to go to and that was the CMU office in Colpetty. On that happy day we met many CMU comrades, held our first press conference at the CMU headquarters and embarked on a political campaign that gave rise to post-1977 JVP. It was at this press conference we appealed for a party office, which was later established at Weerasinghe Saw Mills in Bloemendhal Road, Colombo.
I recollect comrade Bala teasingly calling us ‘Little Lenins’, implying that we knew only a little of Lenin. We continued to have friendly political arguments with him despite this. We raised issues like the Trotskyite movement not carrying out political activities among the peasantry. Comrade Bala countered this and tried to convince us that this was not the case anymore citing the example of comrade Hugo Blanco, an insurgent leader of a peasant uprising in Peru. The CMU and its comrades did not brand us as terrorists just because we reacted offensively to the political and military repression of the state. Comrade Bala also displayed an extremely good understanding of religions. He was born a Christian, I do not know of what faith. He respected all religious leaders in saying that they were all human beings looking for responses to human issues and cited many examples from Dhamma and the Bible.
Comrade Bala also used to narrate his life story to us. He thought that it was his personal nature and commitment to fairness and justice that brought him along the path of the working class struggle. It was Comrade Bala’s exclusion based on his nationality to a famous English school in India that had probably impacted his life making him to strongly support the anti-colonial struggle of the day.3 He had become a Marxist in his university days and got involved in the anti-war campaign. His first foray into politics was when he made his first public speech at a general strike in 1947. His active support to the general strike and the working class struggle led to his dismissal from the public service. From that point onwards without any reservation he dedicated his life to the struggle of the working people.
We continued to maintain good working political relationships with the CMU and its leadership. There were strike campaigns and political and agitational campaigns we launched together. I particularly recollect in the early eighties a collective campaign based on a minimum set of demands relating to the working class, students and the working people carried out by a broad left platform of the JVP, the CMU, the LSSP and the CP. While the campaign launch was successful, internal resistance within the JVP against this campaign was building up as the JVP cadres found it hard to collaborate with the LSSP and the CP who were at the other end of the political spectrum in the seventies. Some leaders of the Socialist Workers Union, the trade union wing of the JVP, had planned to cheer comrade Rohana Wijeweera when he stepped on to the stage. Many of us in the JVP leadership did not know about this. When he walked on to the stage, the JVP cadres who made up the bulk of the audience cheered. At the time comrade Bala was addressing the crowd. It was a sheer coincidence. Naturally, comrade Bala was annoyed and said few things about the incident. In turn comrade Rohana went onto respond to him during his speech. This marked a decline of support for the collective campaign within the JVP. Though we continued to have a couple of meetings afterwards, the JVP rank and file was less than enthusiastic in making these meetings successful. Common sense and a proper class approach would have helped in ameliorating the situation but sadly that was not the nature of politics of the day.
Comrade Bala is not only a revolutionary politician and a radical trade unionist, he was and still continues to be a charismatic national political leader. He is an active participant in social, economic and human rights issues affecting the country and its people. Whenever the human and/or democratic rights of the people were under threat or violated, comrade Bala was at the forefront making the masses aware of the situation and challenging the state and demanding with passion an end to such violations. In the seventies while we were behind bars, comrades Bala and Prins Gunesekera got together to form a human and democratic rights organisation and campaigned for our release. The CMU and comrade Bala has been consistent in not supporting anyone of the presidential candidates as all the presidential elections were held under the 1978 constitution. The CMU has continuously resisted efforts to weaken labour laws or to prevent May Day events from taking place. It has endeavoured to unify public and private sector workers in the island. This was also evident with comrade Bala’s participation in the campaign against phosphate mining in Eppawala and his personal representation at major international forums and tribunals.
Comrade Bala and the CMU have been consistent champions of all the working people and the oppressed irrespective of their racial, linguistic or religious backgrounds. During the tsunami disaster, the CMU requested the LTTE to give prominence to the needs of tsunami victims in the north and east and work in consultation with the government, while requesting the government to administer relief and rehabilitation work with the cooperation of the LTTE which had military and administrative control over large parts of tsunami affected areas. He insisted the relief effort should be planned and equitable to all the effected provinces. The RMP, the CMU and comrade Bala opposed the government policy of inequitable treatment of people on the grounds of race, language and religion and advocated regional autonomy for Tamil speaking people as a just solution to the national question. The JVP lest we forget also advocated regional autonomy till 1984. The CMU and comrade Bala have continued to condemn the killings by all sides to the current conflict and are at pains to emphasise that even if the LTTE gained control of the North and the East, a separate state could not be formed without the consent of the international community including India. At the same time they have pointed out how the anti-terror laws of the island have contributed to the steady growth of rebellions, anti-government activities and national disunity.
I was pleased to report from my recent conversations with comrade Bala that he has not changed his political views one bit. He maintains his red credentials despite many of his erstwhile colleagues joining the ranks or supporting the ruling elite. He is the driving force influencing the CMU to take just and fair stands with regard to many national political issues. As a revolutionary at heart I appreciate it that he has never wavered from his uncompromising class positions. Yet, with capitalism in its globalisation phase adopting neo-liberal strategies and tactics for its global domination, it is necessary that organisations like the CMU and leaders like comrade Bala to take a long and hard look regarding the practice, organisation and delegation of work.
In any organisation succession is vital for its vitality. Young cadres need to take over leadership roles. Comrade Bala can play a vital role in this. Given his sixty years of experience at the helm, he can impart his skills experience and radical political fidelity to the younger generation while the younger cadres can inject new blood, vigour and new ideas and thus prepare the CMU for the challenges of the 21st century globalised market economy. At its sixtieth anniversary the CMU needs to take a hard look at itself while adopting a positive and constructive approach and needs to ask the question wherein lies the future of the CMU.
The CMU fought for the autonomy of unions and organised workers to fight against any attempt to submit them the whims of the bourgeoisie. They also fought for the workers’ control of the working-class movement. The CMU was and is independent and able to fearlessly express its views and take action on human and democratic rights violations. The strength of the CMU will continue to depend on its membership and the quality of their leadership.
Thus it is vital for the CMU to build a new generation of trade unionists not only to support the rights of the workers but also be a centre for the advocation of social justice. This discussion and transition is vital. It will be a debate about how to rebuild the CMU and will raise many questions which need to be discussed openly, publicly, and with complete honesty. The CMU has to produce leaders who could succeed in their day to day struggles while adhering to the democratic and legitimate traditions it has upheld since its inception.
Comrade Bala at eighty is still young at heart; the fire brand radical; uncompromising with the bourgeoisie; and still conducting negotiations on behalf of the workers and the working class. In 1983, after the defeats in the presidential election and the referendum comrade Bala said this: “I see history as waves. So far we have been in a receding wave. But even in the gloomy oppressive atmosphere of Jayewardene’s rule, I can see an advancing wave that will soon shatter all tyrannical forces ahead of it.” I believe this stands very true in the current social, economic and political context.
When we were released from prisons in November 1977, Comrade Rohana Wijeweera and I personally and publicly thanked comrades Bala Tampoe, P Rajanayagam and H A Seneviratne and the CMU for their continued and determined assistance when we most needed it while we were behind bars. And I would like to take this opportunity to express our fraternal gratitude and heartfelt thanks to the CMU and its comrades for the genuine class assistance extended to the JVP in the seventies.
I conclude by personally thanking Comrade Bala and the members of the CMU for their positive role they have jointly played in the post war history of the island. It would be remiss of me not to mention the late comrade May Wickremasooriya who was personally committed to defending the JVP youth. She firmly supported her husband comrade Bala in his more than full time work in doing this.
Your services to the working people will never be forgotten. Your dedication, loyalty and devotion to the cause of the working class and the people will remain in our hearts forever and provide us with inspiration to continue on the path you have set through your exemplary life.
I have no doubt that those who were in the JVP in the seventies and early eighties will join me in congratulating and extending our warmest fraternal greetings to comrade Bala, the CMU and its membership. Whatever happened in terms of political and trade union history, you have shown by example, the significance of a working class that remains cohesive and united despite divisive norms and rules imposed from without.
I also take this great occasion to wish longevity to comrade Bala Tampoe and the CMU in their determined and continued effort to bring justice, fairness and equity to the people in Sri Lanka.
With fraternal greetings
Lionel Bopage
Former General Secretary of the JVP
01 February 2008
1 In the seventies, the Lanka Sama Samaja Party (Revolutionary) changed its name to Revolutionary Marxist Party (RMP).
2 Messrs Percy Collin Thome, Sarath N Silva and Thilak Marapone
3 This epiphany was similar to Comrade Rohana. He was profoundly moved by the physical assault on his father which made his father a cripple. He was bed-ridden for the rest of his life.
February 12th, 2008
by Mano Ganesan
A brief response to Dayan Jayatilake’s ‘Fighting Absolute Enemy‘:
[Ambassador Dayan Jayatilleka]
Mr. Dayan Jayatilake lectures on fascism. He has taken great efforts to identify the enemy. And tirelessly describes this enemy as the enemy of Sinhalese, Tamils and all the peoples of Lanka.
The issue arises when he begins and ends his write restricted only to LTTE and Tamil fascism. It is that he ignores two more prime actors/acts in this whole issue. One, the Tamil people and the other is Sinhala Buddhist hegemony and state terrorism.
He fails to understand that it is the Tamil people and only the Tamil people who can by means convince the LTTE and change Tamil fascism into Tamil democracy. He fails to understand that Tamil people should be won over by the acceptance of their national rights in the first place.
He fails to understand this basic truth. But he cannot be blamed singularly as the sole thinker on these lines. Many others in the Sinhala establishment do fail at same length. This line up includes Indian policy makers and many players in the int’l community too.
[Mano Ganesan MP]
He begins the story from 1983-from the birth of LTTE-and selectively forgets the pre 1983 period from 1940s which fathered the Tamil extremism and terrorism.
In his hastiness he again forgets that Stalin’s Russia versus Nazi Germany war has absolutely no comparison in Lankan context. Sri Lankan UN Ambassador fails to open his eyes to the visible people’s forum opened up by the Tamils within and outside who still believe in living together in a United Lanka. He like his bosses in Colombo wants this forum to be suspended indefinitely until the completion of his ‘beginning of the end’ and/or ‘end of the end’ nonsense.
This forum, the last opportunity amidst the history of missed opportunities’ discusses subjects from confessions to reconciliations to federalism to confederation to everything.
He draws lines and rules. He provides radiuses like 13th amendment, Provincial councils, Quasi Federalism, No merger etc. He preaches on the great invention by Indian scholar Prof. Urmila Phadnis on Indian multi-polar ethnicity and Lankan is bi-polar ethnicity. Yes, indeed but so what? Who are these people to put conditions to a Nationality based on their ‘inventions’? These pundits virtually kill the urge and movement for an undivided Lanka.
And the other act, he rather conveniently ignores is the Sinhala Buddhist hegemony and state terrorism. I use the word ‘convenient’ with all it’s meaning. This ignorance suits his mission (in Geneva !). He expects the whole world to believe his version that the state prevailing in the south is not fascist, not racist, not terrorist and not totalitarian and not tyranny.
Under these ‘arranged’ circumstances he invites nationalists, liberalists, Patriots and even Proletariats, Marxists, Leninists and even Tamilists, Islamists to team up with his Sinhala Buddhist state in the war. To support his one eyed campaign he is bringing comparison and droppings between and from Stalin era to Putin’s Russia, War against Nazism, Cue from FBI, Punjab’s Gill, Mao, Lenin, US invaders and Afghan war lords.
One of the vice presidents of the HR council within UN, he shamelessly proposes war but war. Mind it, in Sri Lankan context it means extra judicial killings, assassinations, abductions, enforced disappearances, extortions, sexual abuses, torture, forced mass evictions, arbitrary mass arrests, child soldiers, indiscriminate bombardments, culture of impunity. And also the failed disgraced Human Rights institutions, Commissions and Committees, barefaced refusals to strengthen the UN Human Rights Commissioner’s office in Colombo and the establishment of International Independent Human Rights Mission.
Once I witnessed Dayan Jayatilake from a distance in a drama at Borella Kanatte. He has grown through the mill. From Varadaraja Perumal to Mahinda; Trincomalee to Geneva , I respect him for the very hard work. I vaguely remember meeting Dayan personally somewhere at park road near Shalika and having a brief discussion. He spoke about Lenin and Marx to me. It’s a pity, now he does not recognize the fact that Leninist-Marxist policy on National question begins with the principle of Self Determination. And those nationalisms of oppressive and of the oppressed are not same and equal. I cannot hold discussions based on these principles with Mahinda and Ranil or with Ven. Athuraliye Ratna Hamaduruwo. It is because they never identify themselves as Marxist-Leninists.
[Mano Ganesan MP, leader of the Western People's Front]
February 4th, 2008
by Mano Ganesan
I bet my head if Gotabaya Rajapakse proves any of his ‘LTTE link’ allegations against me. He has got his facts, if any mixed-up and he is in the state of confusion. It is because he is speaking out of vengeance. The Vengeance is over our Civil Monitoring Commission’s human rights campaign against abductions, extortions and extra-judicial killings and also reflection of the government’s anger that I did not follow the ’silence for perk’ paths of ministers Thondaman and Chandrasekaran
Gotabaya’s random accusations lack clarity and credibility. I totally deny all his sick references to me as falsehood, sinister and defamatory. Gotabaya is not a member of parliament. He never comes to the parliament and not heard or seen me in the house. I tell him to check up with his own ministers before pinning me of with LTTE label. I am confident many SLFP ministers will vouch for me.
The parliament of Sri Lanka knows that I am not an LTTEer. I don’t have the necessity or the right to speak or act for the LTTE. I do not have to shy away from the fact of my meeting with LTTE. I have met LTTE political department activists during the CFA period in open. Many other Tamil, Muslim, Sinhala politicians too have met LTTE for discussions at that time. Some of them are now in the Mahinda Rajapakse government as cabinet ministers and senior officials. LTTE is terrorizing the Lankan society. So is the Mahinda Rajapakse regime. But LTTE being the symbol of Tamil national struggle and violent responder to the decades old Sri Lankan state terrorist oppression are undeniable facts. I am not a lone rider but equiped with my party. My party is not subordinate to any block. I have my agreements and disagreements with LTTE as I have with many southern parties. So I may not need character certificates from anybody.
My prime issues with the government are the blunt abuses human rights and culture of impunity. I am at the forefront in taking the human rights issues to the international community and UN. Gotabaya should understand that I got the clue for this from his brother president HE Mahinda Rajapakse. What I am doing today was what Mahinda R did in 1989. I stand against both LTTE terrorism and state terrorism.
I stand for a United Lanka within which the numerically smaller nationalities and minorities have their rightful sovereign share. I stand for genuine devolution of political power. Is it terrorism to call upon the elected government to behave as the government of the day for all the peoples? Is it terrorism to identify unresolved ETHNIC ISSUE as the supreme root cause for the ruthless war and terrorism, human rights violations, impunity, political assassinations, media slaughter, international isolation, failing state syndrome, inflation, CoL and all?
Is it terrorism to struggle democratically for genuine political power division to avoid the division of the country? Is it terrorism to seek share and stake in the soverreignty and ruling right to the Tamil speaking peoples? Is it terrorism to demand the government to address the ethnic issue without any further delay? Is it terrorism to expose the ‘false dawn’ in the name of latest APRC report on 13th amendment?
Let Gotabaya, a state employee claim superior powers over the cabinet of ministers. That is for the cabinet to worry about. I do not care and declare no issue with that. But I am a member of parliament for Colombo district elected by the superior people of Sri Lanka in a democratic election. My presence in the parliament of Sri Lanka is protected by the Honorable Speaker who is the superior institutional custodian of the most supreme legislature in the country. I am also leader of a political party recognized by the institution of the commissioner of elections.
The honorable learned judges of the court of appeal have told the IGP ‘to protect member of parliament who is already elected before considering protecting candidates standing for election in the east’. If there is a disagreement, the AG can go to the Superior Court. I and millions of Lankans today believe that it is the Judiciary which is keeping this failing state from falling apart when the Executive is autocrat, Legislature is weak and Media is under killer intimidation. All above institutions derive authority from the constitution of Sri Lanka . I believe nobody has superiority over the constitution.
Gotabaya refuses to protect me on false imagination. On one hand he says I am linked to LTTE. And immediately he contradicts himself and says I am targeted by LTTE. What is this ‘LTTE link’ story? His own government has been accused of this ‘LTTE link’ by the right hand and left hand of the Mahinda Rajapakse presidential campaign. That is Mangala and Sripathi. It is accused that after this government assumed power large sum of state money was transferred to some suspected LTTE company.
Immediately before the presidential elections, Gota’s other brother Basil and minister Jeyaraj met me and requested me to arrange a link with LTTE and offered favors to me if Mahinda is elected. But I refused to do that because I have no such link with LTTE. What should be noted is that I did not go to Rajapakse house but they came to my place. Minister Jeyaraj has accepted this visit on record. But I am not telling that they made contact with LTTE or transferred money. I know there was an attempt. I do not speak wildly without credible information.
Gotabaya accuses late Maheswaran now. He says that he dealt with LTTE and earned their wrath. I don’t want to talk about a dead man. It is not an honorable thing to do. But the fact of Maheswaran running ships between Colombo and Jaffna is a well known fact. He himself has said that and had referred to Rajapakses as his good friends. It is in the hansard.
All the opportunities and contracts in this government are given only to henchmen. Nepotism and Favoritism are order of the state. Under these circumstances how come an opposition TAMIL MP permitted to run a business venture that is also very security wise strategically crucial? Who in the defense establishment authorized this? Who else are the partners in this venture?
Who else are the profiteers? What is the volume of the business in figures? Assuming If LTTE received commissions who are the other bigwigs received commissions and side kicks? What are the amounts of commissions? Why the innocent poor people of Jaffna are made to pay prices 300 to 500% higher than Colombo? Is it linked to the closure of A9? Is it a military decision or business decision?
What happened to those alleged findings of ‘aircraft parts’ in those ships? Why that Gotabaya, the defense secretary waited this ship business to go without any hindrances for over one year? Does he want the people to believe that he came to know this ‘LTTE deal’ only after the killing of Maheswaran?
The nation needs answers to these questions. These will also help to find who killed Maheswaran. The people of Sri Lanka and opposition legislatures are not so naive and fool to believe that Maheswaran did everything on his own. The logical conclusion is that poor Maheswaran has been used by high-ups in the government. Maheswaran may be an UNPer. But UNP did not run the ship business. It is very unfair to put all the blame on Maheswaran, a dead man now and call him a traitor.
Mano Ganesan is not Maheswaran. Maheswaran had his friends inside the government and may be in the LTTE. It is very unfair and cruel to put me in the same lot and set stage for my kill. I am not a member of the government. My party is aligned with opposition UNP. United National Party is the single biggest party in the country. I believe in the alliance leadership of Ranil Wickramasinghe. As at today he is the only national leader who is recognized by all sections of the Sri Lankan society. With him now me, Rauf and Mangala are standing together. There are more to come. This is democracy. I will not trade in my principles for the provision of security and perks. I am seeking security because I am a stake holder in the state of Sri Lanka although not part of the government. Gotabaya should understand the differences between the terms and conditions of the state and the government.
Gotabaya says they have to protect Douglas and Anandasankaree. Yes, it is correct. I endorse that point. Let them be given the maximum security. Anandasankaree is not a parliamentarian. There are many more non parliamentarians are given state security. Media has listed those names. No matter, let police give security to them. I have no issue on that. But government cannot reduce and refuse state security to opposition politicians who are also under threat. As parliamentarians we risk our lives and we have priority over others. Gotabaya cannot lecture that Ranil Wickramasinghe cannot seek state security while criticizing the government. Ranil W is the Leader of Opposition in the parliament of Sri Lanka. He is privileged to receive all state patronage under the constitution. Gotabaya should understand the sprit of parliamentary democracy. (ENDS)
This is an open response by Mano Ganesan to Defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse who stated in a recent media interview that the WPF leader was linked to the LTTE and therefore needed no state security.
February 4th, 2008
by Dayan Jayatilleka
“The only question therefore is this: is there an absolute enemy and who is it in concreto?”-Carl Schmitt
[The Old Parliament Building the near the Galle Face Green, now the Presidential Secretariat]
Sri Lanka turns sixty this Monday, February 4th. It has been in a single stage (albeit with many phases) of history from the year it turned 35, in 1983. For the past quarter century its destiny has been determined by the secessionist war. Now at sixty, the long war approaches its decisive peak, a highest stage of intensity which therefore also marks its last stage. The war has been a protracted one; a war of attrition. What is expected to be short by comparison, is its last stage. We have arrived, in the words of Winston Churchill, not at “the end of the end” but at “the beginning of the end”. It is the beginning of the end of Prabhakaran and the LTTE as a rival army, but between the ‘beginning of the end’ and the ‘end of the end’ there will be heavy going. Sri Lanka can derive some grim and modest satisfaction in that its armed forces have arrived at the commencement-or have actually commenced-the third and last stage of this sort of war, that of the strategic offensive, or more accurately, the strategic counteroffensive.
There will be those who contest my definition of the war as the decisive challenge and task facing the country as it turns sixty, and will argue that it is the National or Nationalities Question (also known as the Ethnic issue) that constitutes and has always constituted the main challenge. This translates itself into a perspective which holds that either Sinhala or Tamil nationalism/chauvinism is the main problem. It was Kurt Julius Goldstein, the head of the World Federation of anti Fascist Resistance fighters, who, in Moscow in the summer of ‘85 educated me out of such reductionism at the World Festival of Youth and Students. As I reported at the time in the Lanka Guardian and The Island, this veteran anti-Nazi fighter told me that the biggest error the Left made was to confuse nationalism, chauvinism and fascism: ‘we should have united with nationalism, even chauvinism, to fight fascism; instead of which we treated them as all the same’.
Doubtless Sinhala and Tamil nationalism or chauvinism caused the war to take place. However, when a phenomenon reaches a certain stage of development and intensity, it has to be dealt with as an autonomous factor, irrespective of the chain of causation. That is why those who oppose the Mahinda Rajapakse administration on the grounds of its Sinhala nationalism, or the ultra-nationalism, even chauvinism of its smaller allies, are as mistaken as those who oppose the APRC proposals for the full implementation of the 13th amendment as an unwarranted and ill-timed concession to “peaceful Tamil nationalism”. The lesson of history is that Sri Lanka must bring together Sinhala and Tamil nationalism in the war against Tamil fascism, Tamil neo-Nazism, incarnated in the LTTE and led by Prabhakaran.
This may offend the sensibilities of some, and that has been the case throughout history. Purists pilloried Stalin’s Russia when, in the face of the Nazi invasion, socialist appeals were fused with Russian nationalism and the partial revival of Russian Orthodox Christianity in the Great Patriotic War. At the beginning of 1949, the Times of Ceylon carried the text of a YMCA lecture by the LSSP theoretician Dr Colvin R de Silva giving all the reasons why the Chinese Revolution would not and could not triumph, given its rural, petty bourgeois, narrow nationalist character. On October 1st that year Mao ze Dong was victoriously proclaiming that “The Chinese people have stood up”! The dogmatic Communists decried Fidel Castro’s Moncada assault because it did not fit their checklist of characteristics for the stamp of approval. Today, many governments and leaders who are playing a major anti-imperialist and progressive role, such as Vladimir Putin, Hugo Chavez and the ANC’s Jacob Zuma, are being opposed by a strange coalition of pro-western liberals, and ex-ultra-leftists. (The role played in Venezuela by Douglas Bravo and Teodoro Petkoff is a stark case in point.)
Thus it is not the Ethno National Question, but its issue, the war, that is our main challenge and test today. How can it be otherwise when we are faced with an enemy recently described by the FBI as “one of the most dangerous extremists groups in the world”, which according to its report, pioneered the suicide belt and the woman suicide bomber, and is the only group in the world responsible for the killing of political leaders of two countries? How can it be otherwise when we face an enemy described by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist John Burns of the New York Times, as the Pol Pot of South Asia, and a movement described by renowned authority on Nazism, Prof Walter Laqueur as being paralleled in its fanaticism and ruthlessness only by the European fascist movement of the 1920s and 1930s? How can it conceivably be otherwise when we are facing Prabhakaran, the man described in the Millennium issue of The Times (London) on the theme of Death, as the man personally responsible for the most number of violent deaths on the planet? A great many countries are plagued by ethno national conflicts but few are faced with enemies of this magnitude of dangerousness. How then can anyone argue that any other issue could be more important, should have greater priority or constitute more of a yardstick?
Having lost a number of outstanding leaders, the country has not been decapitated, or reduced to those who would capitulate before the enemy. The country is lucky in that its leadership has grasped “the key link….which guarantees its possessor control of the chain”, as Lenin put it. That “key link” is the need to defeat Prabhakaran and the LTTE. Sir Isaiah Berlin quoted Archilocus to classify thinkers into two main categories: foxes and hedgehogs. Foxes, Sir Isaiah reminded us, know many things, but a hedgehog knows one big thing. This administration may or may not know many things but it does know “one big thing”–the war and the need to win it. When that one big thing is, also that which Lenin defined as the key link, then the country is fortunate. This does not mean that the Rajapakse leadership should be exempt from criticism. What it does mean is that all sincerely patriotic criticism would be from within a strategy of critical (even savagely critical) support; which Mao referred to as “unity and struggle”.
APRC & the 13th Amendment
The raucous response to the APRC’s recommendations is, paradoxically, the best evidence of the constructive character of the proposals. There are those who criticise them as not enough, as too little too late, and those others who damn them as too much too soon. In a monograph co-published by the US Institute of Peace (USIP) and the International Centre of Ethnic Studies (ICES) in 1998, I argued, as a former Minister of the North Eastern Provincial Council, that the failure of the experiment was not because of the insufficiency of the quantum of devolution, but because of the LTTE’s war against the Council and a plethora of political errors on the part of the key political players, not least the EPRLF. The 13th Amendment has never been give a chance to work, and it should. To those who say that it is a formula which is twenty years old, my reply is that federalism is over fifty years old as a slogan in the Sri Lankan debate! As for the Indian model, that will work by definition, in India, not Sri Lanka. Here I am not being facetious. India has a huge landmass and more importantly, an ethnically multi-polar situation, while Sri Lanka is a small island with an ethnically bipolar situation, as was first observed by that pioneering Indian scholar of Sri Lankan politics, the late Prof Urmila Phadnis of the JNU. The 13th amendment is the product of the impact of the Indian model (in the person of the Indian negotiators and 70, 000 Indian troops) upon the Sri Lankan reality, and is the resultant of the interaction. It is the closest approximation of the Indian model that is acceptable to Sri Lanka.
One of Sri Lanka’s legendary educators and teachers of history, L.H. Horace Perera is a long time resident of Geneva. A man with decades in the UN system, and a liberal Catholic by belief, he is by no means a “Sinhala Buddhist hardliner”, still less a JVP or JHU sympathiser. I asked him what type of system he would recommend for the island as a historian and one who has watched independent Sri Lanka make so many mistakes. He readily answered that “given its geographic location and history, it requires a strong centre. That strong centre must permit some autonomy at the periphery, but whenever the island had a weak centre, it was defeated, and civilisations collapsed.”
Sri Lankan extremists must recognise two realities. A strong centre is imperative, which means that there can be no devolution of power beyond that of provincial autonomy or a quasi-federal system. Full federalism would be imprudent, which is something the majority of people instinctively know and therefore have consistently rejected. The other extreme must know that a strong centre cannot mean an over-centralised system. Strength lies in flexibility, not brittleness.
Critics of the APRC proposals seem to suffer from a touch of amnesia. Surely President Rajapakse’s response is far more constructive than that of President Jayewardene who disowned Annexure C and the APC of 1984? Surely this present outcome is better than the sincere exercise of President Premadasa’s APC in 1990, which was however, so devoid of success that it had to be shunted into a Parliamentary Select Committee? Surely it is better to attempt the full implementation of the 13th amendment than have a devolution proposal which suffers the fate of the Mangala Moonesinghe proposals, and Chandrika’s ‘union of regions’ package(s) of 1995 and 1997? Surely a practicable proposal is better than one which suffers the same fate in the legislature as President Kumaratunga’s August 2000 draft Constitution?
The proposals accepted by President Rajapakse remind me of nothing so much as the mid 1986 agreement arrived at the Political Parties Conference (PPC), the voluminous document of which is still available in print. That conference was summoned by President Jayewardene at the written insistence of Vijaya Kumaratunga who had returned from discussions with the Tamil militants in Jaffna and India. The entirety of the democratic Left was represented and did the running at the Conference, and produced a political platform which made for full Provincial autonomy, with no merger. Though he later supported the Indo-Lanka Accord as Sri Lanka’s last best chance for peace, Vijaya was himself staunchly opposed to the merger.
Petraeus & Putin
Given the war, the APRC recommendations translate in the immediate context, into an Interim or Transitional Political Authority (council) for the North, and Provincial elections for the East. Those outsiders who say that an election in the East will somehow lack legitimacy because of the presence of so-called paramilitaries, should be reminded of the far more violent conditions under which elections were held in Iraq and Afghanistan after invasion! As for paramilitaries, the US would not have initially (temporarily?) won the Afghan campaign without the support of the Northern Alliance warlords, and today, the limited success of the so-called surge and the COIN (counterinsurgency) doctrine of the cerebral General David Petraeus, is made possible precisely because of the active participation of “paramilitaries” from among the Sunni community, who have formed neighbourhood Vigilance Committees against al Qaeda. If the Anbar model is good enough for the US in Iraq, it sure is good enough for Sri Lanka in its own Eastern province! Let us not even go into the issue of Shia militia who are operating within the folds of the Army and law enforcement bodies (the pun is intended) put together by the US led coalition.’
For those at the opposite end of the Sri Lankan spectrum who oppose a Northern Interim administration with Police powers, a reminder is needed that without such an intermediate structure, the picture will be one of a Sinhala army fighting Tamil insurgents. The matter was different in the Punjab and Kashmir where the Indian Army was and is able to field a multiethnic, multireligious force, including Sikh generals. We must recall that in the Punjab, the job was finally done by a Sikh Police chief, the legendary KPS Gill, and also because the Punjab had its own Chief Minister and administration. There will have to be a sufficiently heavy Sri Lankan armed forces presence in the North and East for the foreseeable future. However, our armed forces must be relieved of the burden of the policing functions they now discharge. This will free up more Security Forces for frontline fighting. Secondly, no one can ‘police’ ethnic neighbourhoods as efficiently as those who speak the same language and come from the same community. Thirdly, the Sri Lankan armed forces after victory must not become an army of Occupation, as Israel disastrously did after the brilliantly won Six Day War. A Tamil run Provincial Council with Police powers, under an ally and partner of the Sri Lankan state (the Ramzan Kadyrov factor of the successful Chechen campaign by Russia) will help us avoid this calamity.
Sri Lanka at sixty must learn a lesson from Putin’s Russia. It succeeded in the Chechen war not because it had oil, unlike Sri Lanka. Russia had oil even under Yeltsin! Had the Chechen war gone on, Russia would have still been bleeding and would never have re-merged as a great power as it has under President Putin. It is President Putin’s resolve in defeating the Chechen secessionist terrorist army (which even blew up apartment blocks in Moscow and took hostages in a Moscow theatre), that put Russia back on the road to recovery and greatness as a state. Russia’s victory was two pronged: one was the unleashing of the full might of its military, including electronics, Spetnaz Special forces, armour, artillery and airpower; the other was the political installation of its ally and former Chechen “warlord”, youthful Ramzan Kadyrov as the President of Chechnya. Today Russia and Chechnya are peaceful and prosperous.
Absolute Enemy, Absolute Enmity
As we reach sixty then, what is the fundamental lesson to grasp? There are some thinkers who are so incisive that their work earns respect across ideological boundaries. So it was with Carl Schmitt, whose early 1960s essay (actually the product of two lectures) “The Theory of the Partisan: A Commentary/Remark on the Concept of the Political” is not only prophetic but is also the most rigorously intellectual work on the subject. In this work, in which Schmitt reaches beyond Clausewitz and ends with Fidel Castro (he names the ‘giants’-Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Fidel Castro, Ho Chi Minh and Che Guevara; but significantly, no Trotsky) the core idea relevant to Sri Lanka today is that of “the Absolute Enemy”. Schmitt identifies the superiority of Lenin as precisely in grasping the concept of the absolute enemy and absolute enmity.
“What Lenin learned from Clausewitz, and he learned it well, was not just the famous formula of war as the continuation of politics. It involved the larger recognition that in the age of revolution the distinction between friend and enemy is the primary distinction, decisive for war as for politics. The only question therefore is this: is there an absolute enemy and who is it in concreto? For Lenin the answer was unequivocal, and his superiority among all other socialists and Marxists consisted in his seriousness about absolute enmity. The knowledge of the enemy was the secret of Lenin’s enormous strike power.” (Carl Schmitt, 1962:35)
At sixty Sri Lanka must not allow itself to defined by others; it must be true to its authentic self, its own spirit. It must stand up for itself, because if it does so, others will join in support but if it does not, no one else will. It must not cringe, beg or be blackmailed; it must be resolute. It must remember its true friends and its role in the world. It must not expect much from others who have interests at variance with its own. If it does not stand by and speak up for its friends, there will be no one to stand by or speak up for it. Sri Lanka must also, crucially, remember this: The LTTE–not the Tamils, not Tamil nationalism, not Sinhala nationalism-is The Absolute Enemy. It poses no less than an existential threat to us Sri Lankans. We cannot coexist with it. It must be fought and defeated. We must support, however critically, our political and military leadership, because it recognises this reality. What is the wellspring of this recognition? The people, the overwhelming majority of our people, the Sri Lankan people, who recognise through their experience of the last quarter century, that the LTTE is the Absolute Enemy.
Related: What Dayan Jayatilake fails to understand…., by Mano Ganesan
January 30th, 2008
by Dr. Baptist Croos F.S.C.
A nation’s history is embellished by the names of its illustrious sons and daughters ‘its ingenious inventors, chivalrous discoverers, statesmen, painters, scholars, entrepreneurs, patriots, artistes, sportsmen and the whole gamut of professionals.. The latest addition to this impressive galaxy is none other than Muttaiah Muralitharan, the spin-wizard or just ‘Murali’, as he is popularly called, who has made Mother Lanka proud by breaking the world-record for the number of wickets, previously held by the flamboyant Shane Warne of Australia. By any standard, Murali’s record is a remarkable achievement indeed!
It is said, “Success must go to your heart and not to your head.” Murali accepted his enormous success with a spirit of true sportsmanship. Simple, modest and unassuming, with his ever green and contagious smile, Murali’s photos and pictures, most particularly the giant posters of his charming family have been adorning the picturesque landscape of Sri Lanka; the tabloids, dailies and weeklies the world over. There is magic in his smile that evinces the noble character Murali possesses. His personality trait would be the envy of so many future cricketing aspirants, who would like to emulate his exemplary and impeccable professional career.
[Muttaiah Muralitharan-Pic:BBC]
Humility, the exalted virtue.
One of the virtues that would propel any man or woman to heights of glory and grandeur, is humility which is based on sacrifice and self-denial. Humility is the hallmark of eminent personalities who shot into prominence and reached the pinnacle of their profession by sheer honest and hard work. There is no substitute for that. Forbearance and tolerance are sine qua non in this pivotal matter. Time and again I have read this jewel of a sentence in our dailies, “Be humble in victory, but determined in defeat.” Perhaps this adage would have stirred Murali to reach significant milestones in his cricketing career. On a number of occasions Murali was humiliated, jeered and booed by boorish and un-sportive partisan spectators; denigrated and willfully challenged, adding insult to injury, which made Murali to skip a couple of overseas tours. But with profound humility and indomitable courage Murali swallowed those bitter pills. Submitting himself voluntarily to various complicated tests and correctional measures to meet the requirements of the ICC that he did not breach the 15 degree flexion rule while attempting his ‘doosra’, he came forth triumphant; a legend in his own life time!
Unblemished character.
The sterling quality of integrity places a person far above all the others, in any field of activity. It augments a person’s character and class. Murali, apart from breaking world records, is a cricketer of distinction, a lovable companion and an indispensable team-mate. His winsome and infectious smile disarms any adversary. With poise and dignity Murali has been successfully handling all types of crisis, controversies, dubious aspirations cast on him and adverse comments about his avowedly awkward but natural bowling action. Of course gold has to necessarily go through a frightful fiery furnace before it emerges purified and brilliant.
Murali, the philanthropist.
Unnoticed, for many years Murali has been doing great charitable work. In December 2004, when the monstrous Tsunami ravaged and engulfed some coastal areas of Sri Lanka , Murali with his friend Shane Warne, rallied round the lucky survivors and the most affected people helping them financially to tide over their urgent and immediate needs. Seeing Shane Warne and Murali in action, coming forward generously to offer their services, was really heart-warming. Such selfless humanitarian ventures need our admiration and praise!
The family dimension
As I mentioned earlier, the fascinating portraits of his loving family that are displayed at every nook and corner of the city and its environs, speak volumes of his well-balanced personality. Name, fame and fortune have not made him proud and ambitious, on the contrary, they have helped him to be mature, responsible and bring up an exceptionally happy family. That is his inalienable and ever-present moral support. The members of his family are his most ardent fans and intimate friends and Murali was thrilled that he broke the world-record in their encouraging and appreciative presence. How delighted they must have been!
Generally he is unruffled by certain umpires’ cock-eyed attitudes and erroneous decisions or sloppy fielding of slovenly players. Occasionally he fumes and frets, but his magnanimity and graciousness come to the fore and the whole nasty episode vanishes into thin air. At the end of it all, he can go back to his adorable family to seek solace and consolation. It is true, “A happy home, is an earlier heaven!”
Murali, the Maestro!
Loyal to his Alma Mater, St. Anthony’s College, Kandy, and staunchly faithful to his loving family and friends, Murali has become the cynosure of all eyes because of his bowling prowess. 61 times he has taken five or more wickets in an innings. That’s incredible! He went on a tour of England with the Sri Lanka ‘A’ team in 1991 and made his Test debut against Australia in Colombo in 1992. He was a part of the Sri Lankan Cricket Team that won the prestigious World Cup in 1996 under the dashing captain Arjuna Ranatunge. In 1997 he claimed his 100th Test wicket. In 1998 Murali took the first ten wicket haul ‘12 for 117′-against Zimbabwe in the first Test in Kandy. In the same year he took 9 for 65 in the second innings of one off Test against England at the Oval in August, which enabled Sri Lanka post its first Test victory in England. His match figures ‘16 for 220′ still stand as the best by a Sri Lankan. In 2006, playing his 101st Test, he claimed his 600th wicket. In 2007 in his 113th Test he took his 700th wicket and in the same year on 3rd December he bowled Paul Collingwood, an accomplished batsman from England, to break ShaneWarne’s world record.
It was a fantastic feat!
Murali, the Magician
This poem was written in 2000
Twenty-six wickets in just three Test matches,
Incredible but true, Murali really bewitches,
A hero for Sri Lanka, a tormentor to his opponents,
Enough material for years, for cricket correspondents.
He gallantly warms up, to cast his magic spell,
The batsman is puzzled, from his face you can tell,
Murali simply glances, he side-steps, he advances,
The wicket is taken and the bowler gleefully dances.
It’s a rare delight to watch him, run up and bowl,
To bamboozle and capture wickets, is his only goal,
Against him the opposition, at the wicket fears to stand,
Because of the magic balls, that he spins from his hand.
He ties up the batsmen, in a spell-binding spin,
His captain has told him, get them out to win,
Some dare and whack him, for an almighty six,
But at the next ball, they are in a terrible fix.
Like a graceful gazelle, he’s agile in the field,
His acrobatic fielding and accurate throws, results yield,
Though sometimes he misses, and is full of blushes,
But he soon makes amends, with his classy catches.
Murali strides to the wicket, padded up to the teeth,
He draws his heavy bat, like a sword from its sheath,
Whether it is a six, or four or even a lousy duck,
Murali simply smiles, over his good or bad luck,
He charms and mesmerizes, Murali, our magician,
Our ambassador of good will, our master tactician,
Hats off to our hero, and three hearty cheers,
He knows how to laugh, amid failures and tears
January 27th, 2008
by Dr.Vickramabahu Karunaratne
The Government hastily removed the ill-fated health services department circular. It appeared like a bomb blast, disturbing the entire worker population and it disappeared before one could say ‘why?’
It was undoubtedly a threat posed to organised workers in general, as it challenged the right to strike and protest. It clearly amounted to a violation of rights guaranteed under labour regulations and several international agreements signed by respective governments.
But after the budget victory, the Government thought it was in a position to dictate such terms to the Left oriented working-class movement. Also, it was considered to be very necessary.
However, it was not taken seriously by the JVP-oriented trade union leaders. Maybe, as long as the Government is fully committed to the war in the North, the JVP is not bothered about the rights of the workers.
Now the situation has quickly changed and the Government has decided not to confront the workers’ movement. The doctors’ strike must also have been an eye-opener for the Government. The GMOA totally ignored the circular and the President himself came out for a discussion with the union, and settled the immediate issue. He does not want to sever his connections with reformist trade union leaders. At least, not yet.
Suffering masses
However, President Mahinda Rajapaksa cannot cover up the greedy Mudalali class that gets fatter and fatter at the expense of the suffering masses. Deshapremi speakers scream from tree tops that everyone should sacrifice for the patriotic war.
People are asked to tighten their belts and give every penny to the war. Reformist trade union leaders are frightened into silence. But the southern national bourgeoisie is not making any sacrifices.
On the contrary, they are grabbing every penny from the suffering masses. We are told that increase in food prices means a better life for the farmer, fisher and the peasantry.
But poverty has increased in village society while new palaces grow up in close by cities. Obviously, the middle men are making millions under the cover of the war and the rising oil prices.
This southern national bourgeoisie Mudalali is for the war as it has created for him a background to plunder. Of course, he will give generously to the disabled soldiers’ fund, but his patriotism will stop there; beyond that he has nothing to sacrifice but only to bleed on the suffering masses. He is for Americans, for Indians, and for MNCs, provided they help to continue his patriotic war against LTTE terrorism.
Though there is protest and anger among the poor masses, in cities as well as in villages, the national bourgeoisie Mudalali network acts as a shield for the Government. In turn, this class of people survive with the help of the power of the regime.
Genuine sacrifices
Actually it is the petty bourgeoisie layer that follows the JVP that is making genuine sacrifices for this so-called patriotic war. They hold on to their misery and suffering, for the sake of the war that they believe is conducted against an alien and powerful enemy.
President Mahinda Rajapaksa promised to defeat this alien force and to an extent he is committed to this task-his regime has to be protected. This is what their leaders say, and this is what they really believe in. If the Government turns back in any way, they will do something very serious. Their sacrifice cannot go to waste in vain.
When the JVP leaders say that they will take the war forward, if and when the Mahinda regime retracts its promise, it is the voice of a class of people, made to believe in their destiny that speaks. So, the matter is serious.
In 1971, the JVP did not have a substantial mass base when they first made their attempt for power. They were more organised and powerful in 1989, with a certain following in the armed forces, when they made the second attempt. But today, they are a parliamentary power, have a strong following in the armed forces, and have a strong loyal section in the state bureaucracy that looks upto them.
If there is going to be a third uprising of the JVP in the near future, it is going to be a very important event in the history of the country. Neither the workers movement nor the Left movement is prepared at present, to face such a situation. But there is still time for them, to open their eyes and look at the reality, in order to take up the challenge.
January 27th, 2008
Next Posts
Previous Posts