Terrorists bashing US envoy

In response to a reply by the US ambassador in Colombo, Ashley Wills, the Tamil Guardian (TG) lambastes him for having dismissed the idea of creating a separate state for Tamils in Sri Lanka. Taking him on for not subscribing to the LTTE’s pipe dream, Eelam, the TG (March 21) says: "The primary issue has been your summary reduction of the Tamils, who constitute themselves a distinct nation of people, to that of a mere ethnic minority in a Sinhala-Buddhist country. Most importantly, you challenged the Tamil people’s claim on their traditional homeland, dismissing the notion as ethnic supremacy or chauvinism."

What Mr. Wills has said of Eelam is no ipse dixit. He has only reiterated the position of the world leaders on Sri Lanka’s question. The UK, for example, advocates that a solution to the conflict will have to be within the framework of a unitary Sri Lanka.

It defies logic that TG faults Mr. Wills for having called Tamils an ethnic minority. What else are they? The Sinhalese are called ‘the majority community’. So, why can’t the LTTE spin doctors stomach the term, ‘ethnic minority’. This kind of hysterical reaction is perhaps something to be expected from the bogus irredentist lobby, for the sustenance of their macabre cause derives from the myth of being a nation. They are obviously trying to project themselves as a nation fighting for Lebensraum to justify their rejection of all safeguards short of separation, to guarantee ‘minority rights,’ that cannot be used to perpetuate their murderous campaign for dividing the country.

One is intrigued by the skewed logic of the LTTE propagandists. TG says to Mr. Wills, "If, as you say, you ‘understand that the discrimination against Tamils in Sri Lanka has frustrated and angered them and made them even more acutely aware of their ethnicity,’ you ought to be prepared to support their goal of self governance, free of such discrimination." What does this mean? Does it mean that the only way to stamp out discrimination is to grant self-governance (read separation) to the aggrieved community? What if this theory is applied to neighbouring India? How many separate states will have to be created there to satisfy ethnic minorities who claim to be ‘nations’ sans states?

Reflected in the strong position taken up by the LTTE and its apologists is the reason why a political solution to Sri Lanka’s problem has not thus far been possible. At the beginning what was demanded by way of a solution to the ‘Tamil problem’ was redressing grievances. After the emergence of the LTTE as a strong factor in Tamil politics, grievances gave way to aspirations. Now it is an aspiration problem. Evolving a solution to satisfy aspirations of an ethnic community – be it Tamil or Sinhala or Muslim – is next to impossible because for aspirations the sky is the limit. Trying to meet aspiration of a particular community is far from practicable in that aspirations of one community impinge on those of other communities. This we can see from the reaction (opposition) of the Muslim community to the merger of the northern and the eastern provinces as demanded by the LTTE, and that of the Sinhala community to whatever solution that envisages a federal set up or confederation that will pave the way for a separate state.

Thus it could be seen that LTTE aspirations and attendant intransigence have stood in the way of a political solution. According to the aspiration of the LTTE and its fellow travellers who have no qualms about gruesome crimes by terrorists against humanity, separation or any other arrangement leaving room for it is the only solution. But is this viable? Creation of a terrorist state is feared by the civilised world. Proliferation of such states is a threat to global peace and is in no way a solution to the problems of ethnic groups. Locally, it is not possible because of the ground reality. More than one half of the Tamil community live outside their perceived homeland. Most of them are in the south where there is a dominant presence of the Sinhalese. One dreads to think of a partition that the solution as demanded by the LTTE will entail. The partition of India from which rivers of blood flowed is too horrifying an experience for a neighbouring country to adopt. On the other hand according to the peace lobby, Sri Lanka is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious country and therefore there is no need for carving out an exclusive Tamil enclave.

Most of all, the LTTE demand for a homeland is based on a heap of myths which have all been exploded by historians. It is to deny other communities their inalienable right to live in all parts of Sri Lanka for the government to give into terrorism and give up the north and east.

It is time the LTTE and its propagandists came to terms with reality and gave up terrorism. It is no use bashing the US ambassador, who has stated his country’s position on Sri Lanka’s conflict, which is acceptable to all other nations. Mr. Wills deserves commendation from the discerning public for the forthright views he has expressed in Jaffna however hurtful they may be to the terrorists.

Your comments to the Editor