• Repeating one’s mistakes
• Former Canadian HC in Colombo appalled by ‘Tigers’
• Whither university education in Sri Lanka?

An educationist of repute in a bygone era here wanted to impress upon his students the adage, that only a fool waited to learn from his own mistakes. No student was known to have had the temerity to ask what he thought of anyone who repeated their own mistakes. The point of this little reminiscence will become clear as I proceed.

The mere fact of the overnight visit here last weekend by Indian External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh would seem to suggest that, however belated, the President and her Foreign Minister have sought to engage India in serious dialogue focussed on our internal crisis. India has an undeniably legitimate concern with its resolution. It is of course too early yet to gauge, either the seriousness and sincerity of the President’s and her Minister’s purpose, or the prospect of this being a second attempt at an Indo-Sri Lankan joint venture in conflict resolution here. The portents are, however, not good, even allowing for predictable official reticence due to the sensitivity of matters arising.

The joint statement emerging from the visit refers to Indian support for a settlement which meets the aspirations of all communities. India would surely be cognizant of the over 70% Sinhalese majority amongst those communities. Yet, media reports of the visiting Minister’s programme, which tell of his talks with President and Foreign Minister, Opposition Leader, and sundry unnamed leaders of Tamil parties, make no mention of his having met with anyone representing a Sinhalese viewpoint separate from, let alone at variance with, President and Opposition Leader.

That joint statement also refers to the President apprising the visiting Minister of her consultations with other political parties. It is public knowledge that the only Sinhalese politicians with whom she has talked on this matter are those of the UNP. Certainly, there have been no media reports of her consulting with, say, the Sihala Urumaya, the National Joint Committee or the JVP.

The portent of this would become clear when one recalls the fate of the first attempt to float an Indo-Sri Lankan joint venture to this same end. It will be recalled that the deal was negotiated from 1984-86, the public sector joint venture company was floated in mid-1987 under the ‘Accord’ label, and it was handed over to the official liquidator, President Premadasa in early 1989. An understanding of the reasons for that failure may be helped by the following enumeration of some of the salient features of the Company Prospectus — the Accord.

It was drafted by India, expressly to address so-called Tamil aspirations to the neglect, if not disregard of Sinhalese concerns. The following anecdote will indicate that India was not uninformed about those Sinhalese concerns. In September-October 1983, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi sent Ambassador G. Parthasarathy here as her Special Envoy, for two rounds of talks to forge a settlement. Ignoring official advice to the contrary, President Jayewardene allowed ‘GP’ to talk separately and at length with various Cabinet Ministers, some of whom were well known to hold views in the matter at considerable variance from those of the President. Of course there was method in the seeming madness: he wanted the Indians to learn at first hand how great a problem he faced, in terms of delivering up a settlement which matched their expectations.

The second fundamental flaw was the assumption by India, that a Sri Lankan signatory to an agreement could deliver acceptance here without there having been prior an transparant canvassing of issues with all strands of Sinhalese opinion. For there can be little argument with the proposition, that the opposition to Accord manifested by SLFP and JVP was significantly enhanced by dissenting, anti-Accord UNP-ers who wielded influence within the party. This too, in respect of the Jayewardene-led UNP — the best example since Independence of a monolithic party, with a seemingly unassailable leadership beyond challenge, at that time.

The current Indo-Sri Lankan assumption appears to be that this flaw will ipso facto be circumvented by consensus between President and Opposition Leader. Such an assumption presupposes that President and Opposition Leader can both confidently apply to themselves, an apocryphal story told of Baroness Thatcher, when she was Prime Minister. For the uninitiated, that story goes thus: Prime Minister Thatcher is dining with her Cabinet colleagues. The maitre d’hotel approaches, and asks: Prime Minister, how would you like your steak done? She answers well done, please. The maitre further say Certainly, Prime Minister and the vegetables? She answers: Oh, they’ll have the same.

These are early days yet, if indeed India, President and Opposition Leader are contemplating another joint venture company floatation. There seems to be time for course corrections. And, those corrections would need to address other matters as well. Leaving aside here, the matter of the LTTE’s position, what of the position of the Tamils per se? What standing is to be accorded, as interlocutors, to the TULF on the one hand, and the plethora of other so-called Tamil parties who share the letter ‘E’ in their respective identification acronyms? What is to be made of that very large number (around 50% initiative) of Tamils who have lived and continue to do so, in areas outside the northern and eastern provinces, who have singularly failed to stand up and be counted, in this regard?

India’s legitimate concern with the resolution of internal conflict here is undeniable. The President’s belated initiative to engage India in serious dialogue to that end is unreservedly to be welcomed. But repeating one’s own past mistakes: what is one to make of that?

Former Canadian HC in Colombo appalled by ‘Tigers’

The following is the text of a letter sent by former Canadian High Commissioner in Sri Lanka, Martin Collacott to the National Post of Canada

Support from Canadian sources has been a major factor in nurturing the vicious and bloody campaign of terrorism being waged by the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. What is surprising and disturbing is that some Canadian leaders still refuse to admit that by cultivating the Federation of Associations of Canadian Tamils — a key front organization for the Tigers in Canada — they continue to encourage funding that has in large measure made possible the insurgency and acts of terror that have killed tens of thousands of Sri Lankans.

When I served as Canadian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka from 1982 to 1986, the period in which civil war began in earnest, I urged the Sri Lankan government to redress Tamil grievances and worked actively to ensure that Canadian aid (and particularly our large-scale involvement in irrigation programs) was used to benefit the Tamils as well as the other races. I visited the Tamil heartland in Jaffna immediately after the anti-Tamil riots in 1983 and again in 1986 at a time when no other high commissioners or ambassadors went there to demonstrate their concern for the Tamil population.

Having said this, I now must say I am appalled by the way in which the Tamil Tigers and their supporters have abused and exploited Canadian hospitality. Few recent terrorist movements have matched the brutality and ruthlessness of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Their bombs, which have killed hundreds of innocent civilians, have been designed to sow terror among the population as well as try to precipitate a violent reaction against Tamils in order to give substance to allegations that they are being persecuted by the Sri Lankan government (a claim which, inter alia, has enabled large numbers of Tiger members and supporters to claim refugee status in Canada). A particular trademark of the Tigers, and one that reveals their true character, has been their systematic murder of moderate Tamil leaders in an effort to ensure that the Tigers and their extremist supporters enjoy total dominance and control over the community.

While the Tigers have not committed outright acts of terrorism in Canada, they and their accomplices have been involved in a wide range of criminal activities in this country in addition to the extortion of huge payments from Tamils here. These include drug trafficking, migrant smuggling, passport forgery and fraud. They have also been a major factor in the spawning of Tamil street gangs in Toronto, which have accounted for 40 shootings in the past three years and five unsolved homicides.

A particularly sad irony of this situation is that, while the Tigers have been successful in getting many of their supporters into Canada, most members of the Sri Lankan Tamil community came here to seek peaceful lives and to benefit from our traditions of democracy, human rights and rule of law. Instead, we have permitted them to be intimidated and exploited by a group whose principal interest in Canada is to use it as a base for launching insurgency and terror on the other side of the globe. A telling indication of just how thoroughly the Tigers have been able to coerce and intimidate the Sri Lankan Tamil community in Canada is the fact that those who demonstrated last week to express their opposition to Tiger dominance had to do so in New York — not in Canada, where far more live but where there is no freedom of speech when it comes to challenging the Tigers. Our failure in this regard arises in large measure from a misguided interpretation of multi-culturalism that seems to holds that, if we are to show full respect for our newcomers, we must be prepared to tolerate any and all views they may bring with them, which may include bitter animosities and plans for the resolving of differences in their former homelands by violent means. Surely we can find a way of receiving and, indeed, rejoicing in the richness and diversity that newcomers bring to this country without having to accept views that are fundamentally in conflict with Canadian values and that suggest they have little interest in Canada except as a convenient place from which to settle vendettas in other parts of the world.

An even greater failure on the part of Canada, however, is that we have allowed ourselves at the political level to be manipulated and exploited by organizations such as the Tigers. While it is encouraging to hear from Lloyd Axworthy, the Foreign Affairs Minister, that Canada has signed an international agreement outlawing terrorist funding, Finance Minister Paul Martin insists it is "anti-Canadian" to criticize his attendance at a dinner organized by the Federation of Associations of Canadian Tamils. Clearly government leaders are prepared to overlook such well-documented terrorist connections for the prospect of securing a few votes at the next election.

We owe it to the Canadian public and the many Tamil Canadians who came here to escape violence and intimidation to put an end to the activities and influence of the Tigers and their supporters in Canada.

Martin Collacott was the Canadian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka and also served as ambassador to Syria, Lebanon and Cambodia.

Whither university education in Sri Lanka?

Text of an address delivered by Professor J. N. Oleap Fernando, Chartered Chemist to a joint meeting of the British Scholars Association of Sri Lanka and the Imperial College Alumni Association of Sri Lanka at the British Council Auditorium recently

Continued from yesterday

We have, in this connection, also take note that with liberalisation and the opening of the economy over the past 2 decades, various bodies and individuals, outside the state sector, have come forward to open up, at least in certain fields, educational institutions that are today granting degrees even from foreign universities. Whether we like it or not, these developments will continue for various reasons, the profit motive may be the dominant feature in many of these endeavours but so long as there is a demand, it will not be possible to curb their progress.

Even two decades ago there were outdated dogmas and theories put forward why such developments should not be allowed and to some extent they succeeded as in the classic and unfortunate case of the Colombo North Medical College, which should have been the flagbearer and precursor for a very vigorous higher educational expansion outside the state sector. Unfortunately, the NCMC ended up as the sixth medical faculty of the state sponsored non-fee levying system. Today we have to take cognisance of hard realities: students’ thirst for higher education has to be satisfied on a fee levying basis or otherwise. The government has a primary regulatory role to play in order to prevent haphazard development, ensure quality assurance and safeguard the public from mercenary and profit oriented entrepeneurs. However there should be no arbitary restrictions on the fields that may be offered and all courses including Medicine should be made available so long as there are adequate technical controls and there are sufficient students prepared to follow such courses. Courses in Medicine should no longer be treated as sacred cows whose numbers must be regulated since Sri Lanka needs much more medical personnel than at present, irrespective of whether the state sector could employ them or not.

Outside the strictly private sector we also have recognized professional organisations that have come forward, without profit motives, to offer high quality professional programmes within their respective professions. These professionally oriented endeavours should be very actively fostered by the government since their objectives are more in keeping with that of the latter and it is a duty of such professional bodies to provide good quality education at minimal cost to a wider clientele; they could often meet the running costs from the fees levied but some government assistance towards capital costs and providing bursaries for needy students would be much welcome. I therefore look forward to the state playing the secondary role of catalyst in addition to the primary regulatory role I referred to earlier.

Speaking of my own experience, I am happy to refer the successful Certificate/Diploma programme in Laboratory Technology and the ever popular and increasingly important Graduateship Programmes in Chemistry that have been conducted by the Institute of Chemistry ,Ceylon, over the past three decades .These were pioneering ventures planned and executed in a fairly hostile and dogmatic environment ,even before the opening up of Sri Lanka’s economy, when even the very concept of levying a fee for education was still considered capitalistic. These programmes have grown in stature and size in a manner that we did not even day-dream of two decades ago.

They have today become extremely popular, much appreciated and an integral part of the tertiary educational scenario in Sri Lanka. What is particularly relevant and interesting to note is that the graduateship programmes in chemistry have been conducted with top academic quality at a cost very much cheaper than that of a conventional state university. The government should therefore consider giving professional organisations specific financial grants or at least low interest ADB type loans for capital expenditure since from a national point of view it would amount to optimum utilization of minimum resources to produce man power badly needed for numerous development efforts. Our Institute of Chemistry, Ceylon has proved how even without any buildings or permanent academic staff, tertiary level programmes of high quality can be run with the help and support of dedicated and visionary members without politicisation of education.

3) Use of distance education techniques through the Open University of Sri Lanka

It is unfortunate to note that despite all the pious sentiments expressed from time to time in the usual manner by our political masters, the Open University of Sri Lanka has not been able to get adequate recognition for its pioneering efforts from the self-same political masters. The OUSL Degree programme in Nursing commenced planning in the early nineties and 3 batches of nursing graduates have passed out from 1997 to date. However, it is sad to note that the Minister of Education has on several occasions ignored the existence of this programme: he is still talking about a proposed commencement of a " first ever " Sri Lankan nursing degree programme at the University of Sri Jayawardenapura. If the Minister cannot be adequately advised re the existence of such degree programmes, where do we stand?

When an Engineering Faculty was formally inaugurated in Galle last year, it was referred to as Sri Lanka’s third Engineering Faculty whereas the Open University commenced the third Engineering Faculty almost two decades ago. The inability and/or reluctance of the political authorities to give even such a nominal recognition to a state university which has about 40% of students amongst all Sri Lankan Universities put together is psychologically depressing. So the merry-go-round goes on and even what the Open University has achieved is not highlighted or apparently given adequate recognition.

UNESCO recommended a few years ago that each University should become an Open University and thereby gave at least a psychological boost to the modern concept of offering life- long reaming opportunities through open learning and distance teaching. World-wide experience in distance education throughout the world has shown that a judicious multi-media mix can broaden the options on offer at a lower cost for large numbers. Distance Education has today developed a momentum of unprecedented dimensions and has become an integral part of the mainstream of educational provision.

As a mediated form of instruction, it can reach people in circumstances that block access in conventional education. Development costs are very high but can be spread out over many more future years. An Open University is indeed an institution that is open to people, open to places, open to methods and open to ideas. Distance Education therefore is one of the most effective tools for increasing quantity enhancing equity and achieving quality in education. Distance Education also enables students of all ages, including school leavers to continue in work while learning.

Given this background, Distance Education should have become a much sought after mechanism by politicians and our political masters. However, in actual reality the Open University of Sri Lanka hardly appears in the focus of our political authorities. If this were not so, how can one explain that, leave alone the Science and Technology academic building of the Open University which was in the original master-plan since our inauguration in the early eighties, the Open University has been singularly unfortunate not to receive capital funding to commence a single big building over the past 6 years while all conventional universities have been very much more fortunate; the so called war has not been an easy political excuse to prevent the capital development of Universities, new and old, other than that of the Open University of Sri Lanka. The last major building from Government funds for the Open University was that allocated for the Press in the early nineties and which building was completed three years ago, The biggest building project that the OUSL has got since 1994 was a mere 18 million rupees for the Galle Study Centre. Meanwhile, even though space is available, the Open University is being prevented for the past 21/2 years from continuing to offer much needed temporary residence facilities to its students, who are compelled to come from far to attend compulsory face to face sessions such as practical classes for very short periods of time. This is seriously affecting students from far-off and rural areas while those in and around Colombo, Kandy and Matara are much less affected. The extent to which the autonomy of our University has been eroded can be gauged from the fact that a provision in the OUSL Ordinance that specifically required the University to provide accommodation to its students was removed and gazetted by the UGC without even the OUSL Vice-Chancellor being aware of same. The inability of the OUSL, due to political interference, to once again open the temporary residence (dormitory) facilities it already has at Nawala, Kandy and Matara to its students travelling particularly from far off rural areas for compulsory practical classes, vividly portrays the extent of academic freedom and autonomy that a Sri Lankan University has.

During the early nineties the Open University was able to obtain UGC? funding for recurrent expenditure on the basis of an agreed formula that took into account various relevant factors. However this was not continued for more than a couple of years due to lack of funds, and consequently funding for the OUSL has thereafter been on a sporadic and unplanned basis with great financial inconvenience from a planning point of view.

The conventional universities do not suffer much in this respect since once first degree courses commence after UGC approval, all the running costs are met by the UGC while in the case of the OUSL, since tuition fees form part of its income, the UGC expects it to get a bigger share from tuition fees than it can. A funding formula put up by the Open University after many months of work about three years ago has been put on hold until the UGC works out a funding formula for the conventional Universities as well. What an encouragement for an institution that is able to use the philosophy of Open Learning and the methodology of Distance Education to enhance educational opportunities to a large section of persons particularly among the disadvantaged and those resident in Igeographically far-off areas.?

While top priority should therefore have been given to develop Distance Education through the Open University of Sri Lanka, the opposite seems to be happening: OUSL plans, a few years ago were to increase numbers to about 25000 by 2000.; in actual fact, numbers have decreased from about 19,500 in 1994 to 17,260 in 1999:

(4) Improvement of the competency in English of Sri Lankan graduates

It is very important that we give up our earlier half-baked ideas that even a Science degree can be done in the vernacular languages. I firmly hold the view that not even an Arts degree can be properly done in the interests of the students except in English; once again the Open University has led the way in this respect, since its BA degree programme is conducted only in the English medium.

We cannot fool our younger generation any more. Modern communication and other technologies have expanded so much and we live in an era of globalisation that makes it imperative that the standard of English must be improved amongst all graduates of all faculties including and especially the Arts faculty.

While English proficiency of some type is desirable even before admission to University, this would be difficult and unfair immediately on account of our neglect of English over 5 decades in our desire to be ultra nationalists. At least as a first step therefore, some agreed level of competency must be insisted upon at least prior to graduation. The Science Faculty of the Open University has once again led the way in this respect by providing an English course and insisting that students pass in the relevant examination before graduation.

Sri Lankan culture demands that unless something; is made compulsory it will never be taken seriously by most persons. We know how much more useful it would be for a graduate in any field if he were to acquire a competency in English; it is therefore our responsibility to ensure that our graduates obtain the necessary competency before they pass out as graduates and if they do not so, they do not get the degree certificate until they obtain the necessary competency.

Concluded