File Photo: Black July 1983

Undoubtedly, the communal riots of 1983 are a blot on the Sinhala race. That ignominy is cast on them, despite the innocence of the vast majority, some of whom even risked their lives to save Tamils under attack. The real culprits have been exposed in retrospect. They were the power drunk political leaders who chose violence as a weapon of reconciliation.

The riots were supposed to be reprisals for the murder of a few Sinhala soldiers in the North. Thousands of soldiers have been killed since. Thousands of innocent Sinhala civilians have been blown to pieces all over the island. But there was never a mass retaliation. A shocked and grieved Sinhala people suffered the bereavements stoically, with resignation. That was the true hallmark of a people nurtured in a tradition of kindness (Karuna), friendship (Metta), softness (Mudita) and equanimity (Upekkha) for over two thousand five hundred years.

Recent reports from abroad make one wonder whether the role imposed on the Sinhalese in 1983 has been voluntarily assumed by their Tamil compatriot expatriates. I refer to the reported acts of violence by them in London, Paris, Toronto, The Hague, Melbourne etc. Two types of harm have been reported, one to the institutions and infrastructure of the countries concerned and the other to persons of the Sinhala community and their property, private and collective.

The first is political protest against a perceived failure of the governments concerned to protect the protestants’ interests, a legitimate democratic weapon. But the way in which the weapon is used is relevant as it would reflect on the culture of the participants and cast light on the methods of those whom they are trying to support. Hence the remark of Ontario Premier, Dalton McGuinty, "I understand the passions here, but having said that, there is a right way and a wrong way to protest." (The Island, 13th May)

Personal attacks on members and institutions of the Sinhala community are naked revenge, a la 1983. They are uncharacteristic of the Tamils who are inheritors of a culture and tradition as noble and ancient as those of the Sinhalese. No reports are available so far of retaliation by the victims but reprisals are bound to follow, if the present trend of violence is allowed to continue unchecked. The ensuing confrontation would be detrimental to both communities.

The possibility of intervention by the countries concerned is a far cry in the face of Article 2(7) of the Charter of the United Nations unless the present situation in Sri Lanka is proved to be a threat to international peace, to the satisfaction of the Security Council, under Chapter VII of the Charter. That is a very tall order so far satisfied only in a few rare cases of extreme urgency. The better bet is for the Tamil Diaspora to get involved directly at home to work out an equitable solution by consensus. Escalation of hostilities among those living in foreign countries will compromise the respect and dignity of the resident Sri Lankan population, creating the impression that they are the scum of the earth.

Such loss of face in a foreign clime would naturally affect the economic and social prospects of both sides. That is a deterioration to be avoided and leaders of both communities should intervene immediately to prevent such a calamity. Now that the proclaimed leadership of the Tamils is under challenge, the mantle of peace maker should fall on the elite of the Tamil Diaspora who are undoubtedly possessed of the stature and competence to handle the situation. Failure to do so would affect their own standing in due course.

Let leaders on both sides of the Diaspora get together promptly to prevent the developing ‘lose, lose’ situation before the vendetta results in the fate of the two proverbial cats which fought on until only their tails were left.