Colombo humbles Delhi over its ‘13 Plus amendment to redress the SL Tamil trauma.
Colombo humbles Delhi over its ‘13 Plus amendment to redress the SL Tamil trauma.
Victor Ivan whose alias is Majuwana Kankanamage an avowed pan Buddhist Sinhala activist had an outlandish piece ’13 Plus, could it be the Best solution’ in which he makes an audacious ‘...claim that the Northern and Eastern Provinces are Tamil homelands is based on a conceptual myth’. This preposterous claim recreates SL history as taught to all; Sinhalese, Tamils and other minorities. This re-aligns SL history in line with the genocide agenda of the Rajapakses. Sinhala regimes committed to this ideology in varying degrees implemented genocide policies for nearly seven decades; the final phase being the most gruesome that included the May 2009 massacres and war crime killings of the white flag carrying rebel surrendees. A shocked world reacted with steps to bring the Rajapakses to account for the crimes. The Rajapakses’ successful subterfuges that misled the international community initially in demonising the Eelam Tamils resistance as terrorists are now exposed. Delhi was a party to it. The outrageous conduct of the war on the Eelam Tamils led the international community to seek accountability for the crimes Rajapakse committed under the guise of fighting terrorism.
The Rajapakses demonised the Tamil insurgency to annihilate the Eelam Tamils; over a couple of millions killed or massacred, displaced, starved, deprived of livelihood and driven out of SL as refugees. The refugees today form the Tamil diaspora whose endeavours exposed to the world the excesses of the SL genocide with the world opinion changing into supporting the Eelam Tamil cause which is basically about saving Tamil lives and the community.
To the genocide Sinhalas, safeguards written into the SL constitution at independence were scantily treates. SL disenfranchised over a million upcountry Tamils and expelled them from SL within one year of SL’s independence in 1947. Thus began the political dimension of the SL genocide. The world failed to notice SL’s callous disregard of the letter and spirit of the unitary Westminster constitution under which the British entrusted the lives and future of all the communities, especially the minorities that inhabited the island. The world awoke late when SL produced in the Rajapakses the likes of Idi Amins who ruthlessly rid Uganda of Indians living there minus the massacres. Britain when granting independence to SL Britain had not diagnosed accurately the narrow tribal malady afflicting the Buddhist/Sinhalas that even a federal constitution that Britain prescribed for India would not have saved Eelam Tamils from the tribulations they were put through since the British left Ceylon in 1947.
Though a federal constitution is a model for linguistic and culturally diverse countries, unlike SL, India observed minority rights and norms for minority safeguards sensibly and sensitively. The Westminster unitary model also works successfully in most multicultural countries without harming the minorities under regimes that are humane, politically mature and observing democratic norms honestly. Where tribal mindset predominates constitutions (federal or unitary) fail as they did in many African and Asian countries. SL’s violence prone addiction explains the risk for minorities of being strangled in a widely believed multi-cultural SL. The pre-independence Muslim 1915 massacres were strong symptoms of risk to their lives the minorities overlooked.
The SL regimes eschewed multiculturalism to create a pan Buddhist/Sinhala SL. The Muslims scattered in pockets in different parts of the country were massacred during the 1915 riots by Sinhala mobs. The presence of the neutral British forces could not prevent the massacre of Muslims on that scale. The recent May 2012 attack on the Muslim shrines in Nalanda confirms that the Muslims should not rule out repeats of the 1915 massacres in SL in the future as well. The be-friending gestures of strong moral, financial and diplomatic support of most Muslims countries that voted en bloc for SL at every UNHRC sessions did not deter SL from its maniac violent attacks on minorities. India is cautioned over talking up its SL friendship seriously. After crushing the Eelam Tamils resistance the temptation for SL to clean up the Muslims as well to imprint the stamp of Buddhist/Sinhala identity supported with planted archaeological remains to confirm its Buddhist heritage for all times is strong. The ethnic cleansing of the Rajapakses/Ivan that has already progressed far enough for them to boldly assert that the concept of Tamil homelands in a myth. The British provided protection for the Muslims in 1915; the Tamils enjoyed the protection of its insurgency until May 2009. SL/Delhi South Block demonised them as ‘terrorists’. The campaign to build Buddhist temples over demolished Muslim/Hindu/Christian places of worship is gathering momentum in total disregard for minority rights. Christian/Hindu places of worship are rampaged on a scale never seen before in the Tamil homelands in the North/East. Though SL is supposedly a multi-cultural country the Rajapakses/Ivan believe that ethnic diversity is incongruous with its pan Buddhist/Sinhala country ideology.
Earlier SL regimes recognised India as regional power; this restrained its anti-Tamil oppression. Over time the Delhi bureaucracy came under the spell of the close knit anti-Tamil sectarians, the South Block, explaining Delhi’s indifference to SL’s oppression of the Tamils. Except for a brief period under Indira Gandhi, Delhi caved in to most of the anti-Tamil/anti-Indian acts of SL. After Indira, Delhi’s support for SL’s anti-Tamil policies brought about the current servile state for the Eelam Tamils.
Thankfully in recompense the redress for the Eelam Tamils now comes from the civilised West. Except during the period of Bush’s doctrinaire post twin tower anti-terrorism war when SL enjoyed piggy back rides using the anti-terrorism wagon eventually defeated the Eelam Tamil insurgency in May 2009 though it was fighting a brutal state sponsored genocide. The consequence, Eelam Tamils lost the protective umbrella of the Tamil insurgency. The Rajapakses shut out to the world the Rajapakses' brutal massacres of the Eelam Tamil civilians in tens of thousands and waging a wanton scotched earth destruction of homes, hospitals, schools, livelihood and homelands. As these crimes unravelled the civilised world reacted with horror on learning how more brutal the Rajapakses were compared to the ‘terrorism’ of the Eelam Tamil insurgency they claimed to be fighting against. Had the media provided the images of horror of the Rajapakses’ counter-terrorism war that the Channel 4’s classic documentary presented to the world, the West would have reacted faster as it does to the Syrian horrors today?
Rajapakse invited Victor Ivan along with his band of contracted South Block apologists to belittle the SL horrors desperately to fore-stall the international community’s genocide and war crimes initiatives against SL. On Rajapakse realising that readers were wearied enough with the recycled stories presented by the South Block apologists Rajapakse sought to bring in brighter brains; hence a Castroite ex-comrade Victor Ivan as apologist with his foreign name was brought in to appeal to readers. Ivan is an alias of a true blood Buddhist Sinhala bigot. This cheap deceptive tactic to re-gain readers’ credibility for the pan Sinhala policies apparently is also not working with an international community that is convinced enough that SL’s genocide is a more menacing evil disturbing peace in the region and undermining the West’s own counter-terrorism campaigns. The glamour days of the Rajapakses’ contracted South Block apologists (notably Hindu Ram, B Raman, SAAG Hariharan and recently “Cons of India’s UNHRC vote’ fame Shastri Ramachandra) had passed their use-by date and not making any impact in Delhi and the Indian readership; SL’s fake policy wares were not selling.
To Rajapakse, Ivan’s (ex JVP terrorist leader tried in 1971 for insurrection) Cuban Castroite connection is more useful (compared to the much paraded Tamara Kulanayagam) for presenting SL’s pan Buddhist Sinhala supremacy crusade. Rajapakses believed that Castroite Ivan’s strong anti-American credentials will deliver SL the Latin votes at the UNHRC in March 2012. This failed.
When his pan Sinhala crusade ran amok and committed crimes of inhuman proportions and the world reacted appropriately, all his contracted mercenary journalists (Hindu Ram, B Raman, Hariharan, Shastri Ramachandran- ‘cons of India’s vote at the UNHRC’, reokaced by an Ivan) still persevered to cash in on the human misery caused by the Buddhist/Sinhala genocide/crusade and still blatantly lying that the on-going genocide oppression on the Eelam Tamils. Ivan labours hard on convincing the UNHRC members that the Tamil homelands (and Tamil Kingdoms) are a conceptual myth and hence devolution for political reconciliation lacks relevance. Would the Buddhist/Sinhalas accept Ivan’s revised history that omits the glorified greatness of a Dutugemunu for defeating Elara the Tamil king centuries back is also a myth? SL regimes spent vast resources to publicise the devolution negotiations/pacts the regimes signed with the Tamil parties beginning with the 1956 BC Pact plus numerous others and the talks with TNA that India and the international community are pushing hard for. Though the Rajapakses would not admit, the 13th Amendment is about devolution; and much to the annoyance of Delhi; Mahinda hoodwinked Delhi time and again retracting his promises to implement it.
The hints on the ‘home grown’ package of the Rajapakses’ as alternative to the 13 amendment are in Ivan’s paper. These expose that ‘home grown’ political package is total fraud. Once Ivan/Rajapakses start with the premise that the ‘Tamil homelands’ concept is a myth they simply dump the 13 Amendment devolution on which Delhi and the West invested a lot of faith in, out of the SL debate. Ironically Ivan’s unit of devolution begins with the yester-years much ridiculed village councils that had powers no wider than to issue dog licenses. Under the Ivan/Rajapakse model the elected village councils may combine into district councils and district councils into regional councils if the electors wanted. How much more complex and how many layers of governance will there be under the ‘home grown’ model and how different are the ‘home-grown’ village councils from the provincial councils proposed in the 13 plus Amendment. To suggest such a complex structure in place of the Provincial Councils serves only one purpose, buy time for the Rajapakses to evade the crime initiatives of the international community.
Will attempts to convince the international community including the UNHRC that the Rajapakses are striving to deliver on its promises to the UNHRC on implementing the LLRC recommendations as described by Ivan be acceptable? SL plans to take the international community and the UNHRC for another wild ride with meaningless proposals to abort the pending war/genocide crimes. Would the international community now much better informed on the ways the Rajapakse conducts diplomacy go along with Ivan?
Once the Rajapakses view the Tamil issue as essentially a narrow ethnic conflict not deserving a political/devolution solution, Delhi’s negotiations on the 13 plus Amendment is a wasteful endeavour. Ivan for the Rajapakse Buddhist/Sinhala chauvinism to convert a multi-cultural Ceylon into Sinhala country this ‘home grown’ solution is a non-starter though Delhi, the international community especially the US and the UN mandated bodies like the UNHRC and ICC prefer to act to protect the lives of Eelam Tamils, Tamil homelands, end the conflict and bring peace to the afflicted country. Accordingly to Ivan/Rajapakses the 13 plus Amendment is not the solution to the conflict when in fact it hinders the agenda to convert the multicultural Ceylon into a Buddhist/Sinhala land.
To the Eelam Tamils who faced the savagery of the decade’s long SL genocide the 13 plus amendment is also not the best solution unless it is underwritten by Delhi and/or UN mandated bodies. Prabhaharan before defeat , using the Eelam Tamils insurgency fighters had the strength to fight SL genocide and save Tamil Eelam lives, their livelihood, homes, homelands and identity in Ceylon (Sri Lanka) for all times. Despite the savage genocide record of Sinhala regimes since the British left in 1947 Victor Ivan’s contorted logic is only acceptable to the Rajapakses, the South Block and perhaps the Sinhala masses not the victims, the Eelam Tamils, and the international community. A pre-requisite for the Tamils is SL recognising that SL is a multi-cultural country and has entrenched provisions for meaningful delegation and international guarantees for that delegation to ensure that the Rajapakses are not given the space to play truancy with the constituition and the lives of innocent civilians Tamils.
Tags: Rajapakse An Idi Amin Of , Tamil Homelands Myth , SL Genocide A More Menaci
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.