Saturday, 20th September 2014
Friday, January 3, 2014 (All day)
Features

The destroyers of peace

Indo-Lanka Accord

Cdn-2013-tag--Point-of-view_0.jpgAs we said last week peace was won after about thirty years in May 2009. To win peace it was a necessary condition that the LTTE should be defeated by the armed forces. Even India in 1987 thought so as Rajiv Gandhi sent the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) at the "invitation" of J R Jayewardane, the then President of Sri Lanka who signed the infamous Indo-Lanka Agreement with the former under duress. However, what India wanted was peace under Indian hegemony, and was interested in having a subordinate President in the country with the Indian high commissioner acting as the Viceroy.

The notorious Dixit played this role for a while, but what India did not realize was that even in the past no dynastic kingdom in Bharat had not been able to rule Sri Lanka or even part of it for more than a short period. Even Ashoka who had a different formula of Dharamavijaya could not succeed and the Sinhala Kingdom (Sinhale) that was not dynastic, even after the Western colonialists came, had an independent existence at least in Udarata that was called Sinhale until the Sinhala leaders by the Sinhala English Pact of 1815 handed over the reins of the country to the English.

Academic circles

However, the English being gentlemen forgot that they were given only the reins and not the rules as the pact clearly stated that the country (not only Udarata) should be ruled according to the Sinhala Law and that Buddhism should be protected. India having realized that they could not have a viceroy in Sri Lanka changed their strategy and went back to the policy of supporting the LTTE.

The Sri Lankan armed forces under the political leadership of the President and direction of the Secretary of Defence were able to defeat the LTTE that had the support of England led West and India. It has to be mentioned that the Sri Lankan armed forces did not fight a war with the LTTE but only conducted operations against an armed terrorist group that was threatening the sovereignty of the nation and the territorial integrity of the country.

z_p08-The1.jpg
Lakshman Kadirgamar

There was no civil war as such by any stretch of imagination of the word, and there was no Tamil nation fighting a war with a so called Sinhala government. The Tamils living in and outside of Northern Province including Wigneshwaran, the present Chief Minister of the Northern Province were only subject to the terror of the LTTE like the Sinhalas, Muslims and others living in the country.

It is fortunate that Wigneshwaran who presumably was living outside Jaffna during most of the period, and Sampanthan, Sumanthiran and others were not killed by the LTTE contrary to the case of Amirthalingam, Kadirgamar and Neelan Thiruchelvam nor were the victims of a bomb explosion. Defeating the LTTE was not only a necessary condition but a sufficient condition as well for peace in the country.

The peace that was won in 2009 continues but there are parties with vested interests who want to destroy it and establish an Eelam in the Northern and the Eastern Provinces, forgetting that the Eastern Province is now enjoying their own Provincial Council that cannot be amalgamated with the Northern Province as there is no provision under any Act of Parliament. The Indo Lanka Accord is now defunct and in any event the Parliamentary Acts of Sri Lanka were never controlled by this wicked Accord.

z_p08-The2.jpg
Neelan Thiruchelvam

Those who claim that peace has not been won though the "war" was won are very often those who did not want the armed forces to defeat the LTTE. The slogan that the war was won but peace was not won is the biggest lie uttered not only in political platforms but in the academic circles as well. The tactic of the peacemakers or piece makers (separatists) was to claim that (i) the "war" could not be won by either party, (ii) Prabhakaran was one of the greatest warriors that the world has seen, (iii) the Tamils have been discriminated by the "Sinhala governments" (iv) the Tamils should be given the power to rule their so called traditional homeland (historical habitats) (v) power should be devolved to the Northern and Eastern Provinces, which are the traditional homeland of the Tamils, (vi) the so called ethnic problem could be solved only by discussions, (vii) the peace talks are essential in the process, (viii) an international facilitator has to engaged, (ix) the peace talks should be based on the Indo-Lanka Accord and the thirteenth amendment, (x) the LTTE is the sole representative of the Tamils.

Peace talks

The England led west often represented by Norway and Sweden, India, the NGOs, INGOs, Peace Vendors, some clergy of some Christian and Catholic Churches, the present leaders of the TNA, the leaders of the leftover left parties", and some "enlightened" Sinhala Buddhists as well were all against the "war" and were for peace talks.

There were threats from some of these elements to the government of Sri Lanka to the effect that economic sanctions would be applied, and in fact quotas were cut in the apparel industry. However, the Sinhala opinion was such that the government and the nationalist forces joined hands to continue with the operations by the armed forces. It was clear that all the parties mentioned above were anti Sinhala Buddhist in one sense or the other.

What would have happened if the Sri Lankan Government succumbed under pressure to the above parties and did not continue with the operations or allowed Prabhakaran and his cohorts to escape in that ship Nambiar was trying to organize with the help of England led West? In the former case by this time Prabhakaran would have established an Eelam in the Northern Province and declared war to annex the Eastern Province.

z_p08-The3.jpg
IPKF soldiers.  File photo 

In the latter case he would have established an Eelam in exile. Having failed to achieve either, the West together with the displaced Tamils in their countries, NGOs, some clergy in certain denominations, TNA, leftover leftists some of whom are Cabinet ministers having become MPs through the national list as they cannot think of polling enough preferential votes, have begun a campaign to destroy the peace that has been achieved.

The first step in their campaign is to claim that peace has not been won as they want to project the image that there is no peace in the country so that they would not be accused of destroying peace. The moment one says that there is no peace it is clear that there cannot be any destroyers of peace.

The claims of these groups are the familiar set of "reasons" that has been stated above in connection with so called peace talks. However, they have added one more to the set after the defeat of the LTTE. That is the violation of the so called human rights of the innocent Tamils during the last two weeks of the humanitarian operations.

Those who claim that the national anthem should be sung in Tamil as well, belong to "the discrimination against the Tamils" group. Similarly those who complain that there are no police officers in the Northern Province to take down a complaint in Tamil when the situation is the opposite, or those who go back to the talk of habitats of the Tamils, among others, are trying to destroy peace.

Anti Sri Lankan lobby

Channel 4, Cameron with his phony claims, Rathika Sitsabaiesan the Canadian MP of Sri Lankan origin who under the pretext of visiting her former home, trying to get political mileage with somebody claiming that she is under house arrest, the TNA MPs who invite Tamil racists from Tamil Nadu to take photographs to construct spurious stories are all destroyers of peace. It is said that this particular Canadian MP left Sri Lanka as a child with her parents in order to escape from the IPKF. If it is true she should start a campaign against India for making her parents leave Sri Lanka, unless of course she loves the visits to Niagara Falls now and then.

The destroyers of peace will go on making news to give ammunition to England and the rest of anti Sri Lankan lobby so that the latter could claim human rights violation against the Tamils, and to pave the way for an Eelam. They may claim that they are against separation but often act contrary to their assertions. The Chief Minister who has no authority over the armed forces and the camps visiting a high security zone is a case in point.

The learned former judge should first read the constitution and the relevant Acts of Parliament before trying to disrupt peace in the country. By their acts - the destroyers of peace are only prolonging the presence of armed forces in the streets. The armed forces could be confined to the barracks only if the destroyers of peace corporate with government and the armed forces to maintain peace that has been won.