The LSSP and CP has commended President Chandrika Kumaratunga’s decision to go ahead with the introduction of the proposed new Constitution to Parliament in view of the LTTE’s refusal to come for unconditional talks.

The following is the full text of the joint statement issued by the two constituent parties of the PA.

The LSSP and CPSL commend the decision of the President to go ahead with the introduction of the proposed new Constitution to Parliament. In the face of the intransigence of the LTTE with regard to peace talks this is the only course open to the Government. A common bipartism approach by the PA and the UNP at this time would generate further pressure on the LTTE to soften its position. It would negate the oft quoted stand of the LTTE that talks with one party when in power is fruitless as the other party can disown any responsibility for implementing any agreement reached when it comes into power. Further it would prevent the LTTE from exploiting the differences between the two major parties to its own advantage. We call upon the UNP to act with a sense of historical responsibility, considering that the war was started when it was in power, and reach a consensus with the PA placing the common interest of the country before the gaining of petty political advantage.

The LSSP and CP demands that the LTTE should keep to its word and come into unconditional talks with the government. The sudden imposition of three conditions - a ceasefire, the lifting of restrictions on goods reaching the LTTE controlled areas and the lifting of the ban on the LTTE is not essential for the commencement of talks. These are all matters that could be resolved in the course of the talks themselves. We agree with the government decision to accommodate the LTTE on the first two conditions and also to refuse to give in on the third. As is well known in similar disputes elsewhere eg. Northern Ireland, Middle-East, Northern India, Bangladesh etc. the militant group has had talks with the respective government while the ban was on. To claim a unique position for the LTTE on the grounds that it is in control of an extent of territory and that it has a regular army does not hold water as these conditions also applied in the case of the Palestinians in the Middle East. In fact the LTTE is unable to provide the needs, like food, of the people in the territory that it controls so that what is unique is that the Sri Lankan government, unlike governments elsewhere that have lost territory to a militant group, continues to supply the people with their daily necessities. This weakens the LTTE argument further.

The ban on the LTTE was declared under emergency regulations soon after the attack on the Dalada Maligawa, an act of terrorism that shocked the world, not only the Buddhists. Thereafter the LTTE has continued with its terrorist activities which has included the killing of leaders of the Tamil community like Neelan Thiruchelvam and the attempted assassination of the duly elected president of Sri Lanka, Chandrika Kumaratunga and a PLOTE leader this May. In a situation where the LTTE has been proscribed or otherwise restricted in countries like the USA and the UK and several others it is not open to the Sri Lankan government to lift the proscription of the LTTE without any positive evidence of this organization’s readiness to enter into political discussions on a determined agenda. The pressure resulting from the ban is one of the factors that has led to the LTTE agreeing to having peace talks facilitated by Norway. It is clear that the request for the lifting of the ban in Sri Lanka is directed towards undermining similar moves abroad. The Sri Lankan Government should not for the sake of talks give in on this issue. The ban on the LTTE was lifted by the UNP government in 1988 by legislation in Parliament, a far more difficult process than what is required today, but this did not lead to any fruitful talks with the LTTE. The same is likely to occur here and the government would loose the advantage it has generated internationally while also playing into the hands of its exteremist critics in the South.

The LSSP and the CPSL are appreciative of the efforts made by the government to relieve the Tamil people in the LTTE controlled areas too of the hardships they have been subjected to. There is no doubt that these efforts can be broadened with the cooperation of the LTTE as would happen if they opened the Vanni-Jaffna road for the government’s non-military traffic. It may be added that when parties sit down to talks, the extent of the military confrontation too would be de-escalated. In a like manner the LSSP and CPSL are of the view that where the LTTE shows its readiness to sit down to talks on an accepted agenda, the position regarding the lifting of the proscription of the LTTE as a matter very significant to the normalization process could also be addressed.