Readers Paramanathan from Australia and W. Batuwangala had expressed reservations in this column on 3rd. April on The Island’s recent editorial comments on MOU, which, in their opinion, tends to upset the peace apple cart. Like the proverbial crabs that danced inside the boiling pot until the water became really hot, these gentlemen seemingly desire to go into a deep slumber to awake in a peaceful Sri Lanka.

We can understand the writer from Australia who is either ignorant of the ground situation in our country or is a believer in LTTE ideology, considering the fact that, LTTE collect sizable amount of funds from that country for its arms smuggling and other nefarious activities, now that this terrorist outfit is banned in USA, UK and Canada, These writers have proved the dictum quoted by one of them, ‘some people can be fooled all the time’.

Reader Batuwangala is of the opinion that the LTTE would not resume war after Sept. 11 disaster in the US. Has the LTTE given him a private assurance to that effect?. How can we forget the two previous occasions of betrayal by LTTE so easily, when they broke ceasefire accords with the government? In 1990, during President Premadasa’s regime, 700 policemen in N/E were rounded up and brutally massacred after they surrendered to LTTE. They were shot through their heads at close range. This carnage carried out on such a large number of non-combatant personnel, has no parallel in its history. It is said that the LTTE extracted blood from these surrendered policemen to be used on wounded LTTE cadre before killing them. Again, in 1995, two naval gunships were sunk while berthed in Trinco harbour when the LTTE broke ceasefire, dishonouring the undertaking that a 72 hours notice should be given in the event of annulling the ceasefire. On both occasions it was the LTTE that broke the ceasefire and the Sri Lankan government that had to pay the immediate price for trying to negotiate peace with LTTE.

These events prove that ceasefire with LTTE undoubtedly is fraught with risks. US ambassador Ashley Wills had expressed doubts about the LTTE’s bona fide in on-going peace process ‘(5th April The Island)’ The government of Sri Lanka led by the prime minister and the president were honest in their desire to end the conflict’ but he had cast doubts about LTTE’s intentions.

Is it not proper to discuss the pros and cons of the MOU before committing ourselves to a full-fledged peace deal, decisions of which will be far reaching and irrevocable? The desire of the majority of Sri Lankans is a solution within a unitary Sri Lanka. But LTTE has not deviated from the Tamil homeland concept. MP R. Sampanthan of TNA that has put forward the LTTE as the ‘sole representatives of the Tamils’ has declared recently in Parliament that their goal is the Tamil homeland and they would fight on until this demand is met. In recent LTTE’s Pongu Thamil rallies, posters depicting the Tamil homeland had been widely displayed.

Even though Tamil parties were made to surrender their weapons, LTTE is allowed to keep their arsenal, leading to serious misgivings. The existence of two armies will be a serious impediment to the security of Sri Lanka. In the past LTTE killed hundreds - of civilians in boarder villages to expand their Tiger domain. What assurance is there that LTTE would not resort to such brutal acts in future when once the overall control in N/E is given to them?

On April 4 ‘The Island’ front paged a news item that a middle aged man in Kokkadicholai had committed suicide when he was ordered by the LTTE to hand over his son to the terrorist group. Earlier too, there were similar incidents reported in the Media. ‘The situation would worsen after opening the Kandy-Jaffna highway when 500,000 people living in Jaffna would be exposed to such forced conscription by the LTTE’, EPRLF former N/E chief minister Vartharaja Perumal had warned.

If LTTE’s commitment to peace is genuine, why do they require to recruit more and more children as Tiger cadre and smuggle more and more weapons? LTTE has pushed back democratically elected political leaders to come to the forefront as the ‘sole representatives of the Tamils’. In the past they have eliminated hundreds of political leaders and even world acclaimed peace makers like Neelan Thiruchelvam to make room for Prabhakaran to be a fascist dictator. These are clear indications that the LTTE would not ‘tolerate’ democracy in region that it intends to dominate.

Every citizen in this country aspires for long lasting peace. But, it should not turn out to be a deceptive illusion at the hands of a terrorist group that has yet to prove its commitment to non-violence. The new-look Prabhakaran with a smile on his face as shown in media may please one’s but daily occurrences of ceasefire violations by LTTE indicate that no apparent change had taken place in the fascist mind-set of LTTE.

When legislation was enacted in British Parliament last year to proscribe LTTE under British Terrorist Act 2000, LTTE theoretician Anton Balasingham, mastermind behind LTTE brutality, had reportedly said that, ‘the Britishers will know the true meaning of terrorism if LTTE is banned in UK’. If the LTTE could threaten a powerful nation in this fashion, what amount of intimidation could it exert on a tiny nation like Sri Lanka to achieve its objectives?

Stanley Weerasinghe,
Nugegoda.