I wish to comment on the subject of your editorial, Christie Lankatilleke’s article on the 26th and Chandra Wickremasinghe’s letter in your paper of the 27th on Ambassador Blake’s visit to the Elections Commissioner and attendant matters.

Chris Lankathileka has raised issues of interest. According to him, it does appear to be that there is a problem of cultural incompatibility and that the Western heads of missions in Colombo, whatever maybe their stated commitment to democracy, have a problem relating to this government. It is being implied that they would much rather deal with the UNP than the ‘native government’ which we the people have elected to office. The government appears to have played into their hands on the Human Rights front by seeking to do a cover-up, particularly two incidents, which it neither ordered or orchestrated. I shall refer to that later in this article.

For the present permit me to ‘discuss’ the perception of what is the West’s attitude towards this government. Their sympathy for the perceived underdog in the present conflict and the minorities in general has much to do with their attitude. They, perhaps, do not know the genesis of the problem, namely, that the Sinhalese Buddhists were discriminated against from the 16th Century onwards by the Portuguese, next by the Dutch and then by the British; that the ethnic and religious groups may have been minorities in numerical terms but they were economically and culturally dominant and hence politically influential and domineering throughout the colonial period. This, in fact, explains the election result of 1956 which was in effect a political and cultural revolution through the ballot box, which brought the Sinhala Buddhist majority into power. Ever since then, the two major political parties have competed for the Sinhala Buddhist vote and minority interests became merely an afterthought. Minorities claim ever since, whether rightly or wrongly, that the state represents Sinhala hegemony.

The attitude of the Western bloc is, in a sense, understandable for they do not know our history or understand the feelings of the so-called hardliners among the Sinhalese, drenched in prejudice and hate because of indignities the majority community suffered in colonial times. This attitude of the hardliners has not made things any easier in arriving at a settlement of the dispute. They have, together with whatever party in the ‘Opposition’, over the years blocked any concessions to the Tamil minority; they did this in 1958, in 1966, in 1995, 1997, in 2000 August and in 2002 (the Mangala Moonasinghe Parliamentary Select Committee report). The Government of 1972, which comprised Trotskyites, whose war cry was "Two languages one nation, one language two nations" passed up on a golden opportunity to reach out to the minorities and solve the ethnic problem.

The Marxists also made a major contribution to the mismanagement of the economy with their well-meaning but ill-conceived and misguided socialist policies (seeking to achieve social justice through state control of the production and distribution), which bankrupted the country and created such disgust with the government that the people gave a five-sixth majority to the UNP at the general election of 1977, (that was the last time when we held free and fair elections without observers). The new government only made matters worse by ruining, nay destroying, the only significant achievement of the previous government, namely, the close relationship this country had cultivated with India, and with it began the destabilisation of this country by India through the arming, training and funding of the insurgency in Sri Lanka. The Government of 1977 brought forth a Constitution which has enthroned a constitutional dictatorship, which is unaccountable to Parliament or the people and ended democracy as we knew it in this country.

Regarding the attitude of the ‘West’, it must also be conceded here that this government has been equally clumsy and ham-handed in managing this country’s relations with the ‘West’. These western countries cannot be wholly blamed for their sympathy for the perceived ‘underdog,’ but they should understand the limits within which they should operate and the need to respect the sovereignty of this country.

Our vulnerability in this globalized world would not leave us with too many options. Furthermore, our dependence both for aid and, more importantly, for trade will give them the weapons needed to pressurise the government.

Whilst there is no doubt that you Mr. Editor, in your editorial, and the two correspondents referred to in my opening paragraph, sought to expose the double standards being practised by those they thought were seeking to bully us, let us also concede the fact that their concern for violations of Human Rights is justified. I need here to recall the reference of your correspondent Lankatilleke, in the article referred to earlier, regarding the killing of the five boys and the employees of the French NGO: "All we had to do, which our Police didn’t, was to arrest the men who shot the boys in broad daylight and had been identified, and in the second incident take the Muslim homeguards, who are said to have committed the crime. (There has been deep hatred between the Muslims living in Muttur and the Tamils who were working for the French NGO and this is common knowledge in Muttur); Please see the report of the respected University Teachers for Human Rights of Jaffna on these two incidents. The stupid act of trying to cover-up these two crimes, three hundred thousand jobs and a million livelihoods in jeopardy. For, it was said this EU may discontinue this GSP+concession. We bring upon ourselves foreign interference by our own actions and then we react unnecessarily incurring the enmity of the international community.

Today there are dark clouds gathering once again on the Human Rights front with thousands being naturally displaced because of the military operations in Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu. The Gareth Evans and the Rama Manis of this world would be girding their loins to have R2P invoked claiming that there is a human rights catastrophe occurring in this country. I do hope that the government would handle this most delicate situation with appropriate sensitivity, for the LTTE and its diaspora would no doubt launch a huge campaign to stop operations. This is indeed a situation that must be handled with great care for we could even lose it all, if we do not do so.

There is also another matter which the government should give consideration to on an urgent basis. If this phase of the conflict ends in the decimation of the LTTE, the international community and India in particular would expect the government to table credible constitutional proposals to ensure that the minorities are also involved in the governance of our country. The government will run out of excuses for not addressing the issue of minority rights when, as stated earlier, the present phase of the war ends. India would demand that the government comes up with proposals which would meet the situation. It should be remembered that India has the capacity to destabilise this country at will; the oft-repeated position of India on our conflict is as follows: supports the process of seeking a negotiated settlement acceptable to all sections of Sri Lankan society within the framework of a united Sri Lanka and consistent with democracy, pluralism and respect for individual rights… India maintains an abiding interest in the security of Sri Lanka and remains committed to its unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity". This is not a statement that can be ignored, when India states that it "supports the process of seeking a negotiated settlement acceptable to all sections of Sri Lanka society within the framework of a united Sri Lanka". What more could we ask, for she does not support any attempt to divide this country and to create a separate ethnic state.

India also wants us to recognise that ours is a plural society which means that all minorities must also enjoy equal rights and have equal opportunities. The Sinhala hardliners need to accept this and the government must understand that as long as India has the capacity to destabilise this country, we cannot afford to antagonise India. This fact was recognised by President CBK, in her own words: "India is our immediate neighbour, with whom we have been inextricably linked by ties, the origins of which have long been lost in the mists of time. We have with India the broadest and deepest interaction that we as a nation could have with another state. India therefore possesses the capacity, given her vastly disparate strength and influence, to help or hinder to a great extent. In a word, the India factor is crucial to the existence of our nation. Forging and sustaining a mutually trusting and supportive friendship with India must therefore be for us, not just a not just a conscious and soundly judged policy, it is a natural and vital ingredient for our national well being".

Too many of our leaders have failed us. May the Government of President Rajapaksa heal the wounds that have been inflicted on our society over the years, restore hope and earn the trust of the people. The government should not become hostage to the hardliners or the so-called ‘Sinhala chauvinists’. The government must come up with constitutional proposals that would end the curse of confrontational politics that has plagued this country for the past 60 years, recognise that this country belongs to all of us, whether we be Sinhalese Buddhist or Christian, Govi, Karawe, Durawe, Salagama or Bathgama or of any other caste or Tamil Hindu or Christian, Vellala or Karawe or Koviar or any other caste or Tamils of recent Indian origin or Muslims and Moors. Yes, this country does belong to all of us to live in harmony.

An opportunity has presented itself for President Mahinda Rajapaksa to go into history as the first and only statesman this country has produced. He could be remembered as a president who rose above party politics and had the vision to unite this strife-torn country, end confrontational politics and transform Sri Lanka into a modern state.

Let us hope that President Rajapaksa is equal to the challenge and will usher in a new dawn when the present phase of the conflict is over. Let us pray that he, as the father of three sons, will think in terms of the next generation and not only of the next election.