Preserve the Core and Stimulate Progress
by Arvalan
“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity.
The optimist sees opportunity in every difficulty” - Winston Churchill
In the book titled Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies, James Collins and Jerry Porras have examined eighteen exceptional and long lasting companies and compared each with one of its closest, but less successful competitors, in order to discover just what has given the edge over its rivals. The comparison includes Hewlett-Packard vs. Texas Instruments, Boeing vs. McDonnell Douglas, Ford vs. GM and 3M vs. Norton.
The book offers some invaluable insights into the current impasse in the negotiations between the Tamil and the Sinhalese Nations. These insights, if used effectively, may drive the parties concerned to an amicable settlement to bring prosperity to the people of the island.
Throughout the book, the authors use the yin/yang symbol from the Chinese dualistic philosophy. Preserve the Core and Stimulate Progress is the theme which runs throughout the book to distinguish visionary companies from their competitors. Collins and Porras assert that “We’ve consciously selected the yin/yang symbol to represent a key aspect of highly visionary companies: They do not oppress themselves with what we call the 'Tyranny of the OR' – a rational view that cannot easily accept paradox that cannot live with two seemingly contradictory forces at the same time."
The “Tyranny of the OR”, the authors state, pushes people to believe that things must be either A OR B, but cannot be both. It makes such proclamations as “You have change OR stability”. Instead of being oppressed by the “Tyranny of the OR,” highly visionary companies liberate themselves with the “Genius of the AND”- the ability to embrace both extremes of a number of dimensions at the same time. Instead of choosing between A OR B, they figure out a way to have both A AND B.
The above logic and thinking pattern offers the Sinhalese and the Tamil Nations alike a platform to offer an innovative solution to the long running ethnic crisis in Sri Lanka.
Tamil Nation’s Core Ideology
Tamil Nations has articulated its core ideology clearly in more than one occasion and it has been endorsed by the people of Tamil nation many elections in the last 30 years. The ideology is based on the three principles of Self-determination, Tamil Homeland and Tamil Nationality.
LTTE’s supremo, Velupiillai Prabakaran, articulates the core ideology of the liberation struggle in his 2002 Heroes day message. He says, “Tamils constitute themselves as a people, or rather as a national formation, since they possess a distinct language, culture and history with a clearly defined homeland and a consciousness of their ethnic identity. As a distinct people, they are entitled to the right to self-determination.”
Tamil Nation’s ideology has transcended time and individuals. These principles called the Thimpu Principles formed the basis of negotiations by all Tamil Liberation movements in 1986, including the LTTE. The Thimpu Principles are as follows:
That the Sri Lankan Tamils be recognised as a distinct nationality;
That an identified Tamil homeland and the guarantee of its territorial integrity be recognised;
That the right of the Sri Lankan Tamils to self-determination be acknowledged.
Prabakaran’s definitions fit well with that of the experts in the field. A Nation is a group of people with a strong cultural and political identity that is both self-defined and acknowledged by others. Nations are defined as those groups who have exercised political control over their destinies at some point in the past and still see such control as a possible future strategy (J N Clay: 1989).
LTTE has stuck to its positions right throughout the peace negotiations at Thimpu, the Indo-Lanka Accord, talks with Premadasa, Chandrika, Ranil and Mahinda governments. Tamil Nation’s clear consciousness about its core ideology provides it with adequate advantage to make compromises and make progress in negotiations. This is contrary to the view many people hold, who believes that the LTTE is not flexible.
During the 3rd round of Peace talks in Oslo in November 2005, the Government and the LTTE agreed to “explore” a federal model within the unitary framework of Sri Lanka as a final solution to the ethnic problem. The decision was described as a major breakthrough in the negotiations. The global media portrayed this as a major concession made by the LTTE, which have been fighting for a separate country. The Sri Lankan government was able to gloat about this decision, which was welcomed by the US, the UK, Japan and Norway, all but India. However, they failed to take note that the LTTE was able to “Stimulate Progress” AND “Preserve the Core” at the same time. Other examples of LTTE’s attempts to stimulate progress include the SIHRN proposals and P-TOMS agreements both of which were later declared null and void by the Sinhalese nation.
Another important feature of this core ideology is that the Tamil people have endorsed this ideology in three elections in the last 26 years. The 1977 General election victory of the TULF is the endorsement for a separate Tamil Eelam. The two recent election victories of the TNA, whose election manifesto explicitly stated that they endorse the LTTE as the sole representative of the Tamil Nation, is also a public endorsement of this core ideology.
It is tragic that the International community, which is so vociferous about warning and demanding the LTTE renounce violence and join mainstream democratic politics has conveniently, ignored these three election mandates delivered by the people of North-East.
It is therefore evident that the LTTE has adopted the “Genius of the AND” approach to negotiations in Stimulating Progress at the negotiations, whilst Preserving its Core ideologies. This is a demonstration of the organisation’s commitment to the peace negotiations and its willingness to find a solution by non-violent means.
Sinhalese Nation and Ideology
The Sinhalese Nation never had an ideological movement with a core ideology, in the sense of a unified framework which is offered as a solution to the National Question. The election manifestos of the two parties which have ruled Sri Lanka in the past 56 years is not the best place to find the core ideology as they have failed to transcend time and people. Therefore, I have sought asylum in the proposals offered by the Sinhalese nation to the consideration of the Tamil Nation over the last 50 years to find whether there was any traces of a core ideology.
1957 Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam Pact for Regional Councils
In July 1957, the Bandaranaike - Chelvanayakam Pact made provision for direct election to Regional Councils and also provided that the subjects covered by Regional Councils shall include agriculture, cooperatives, lands and land development, colonization and education. The Pact however did not survive the opposition of sections of the Sinhalese community led by Buddhist priests and which included the opposition Sinhalese United National Party led by J.R.Jayawardene
1965 Dudley Senanayake-Chelvanayakam Agreement for District Councils
Following upon the 1965 Dudley Senanayake-Chelvanayakam Agreement, the UNP government declared that it would give 'earnest consideration' to the establishment of District Councils. In 1968, a Draft Bill approved by the Dudley Senanayake Cabinet was presented as a White Paper and this Bill provided for the establishment of District Councils. This time round, the opposition to the Bill was spearheaded by the Sri Lanka Freedom Party which professed to follow the policies of the late S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike who himself had in 1940, 1947 and again in 1957, supported the establishment of Provincial/Regional Councils. Because of strong opposition, the Dudley Senanayake government withdrew the District Councils Bill in July 1968 and the Federal Party then withdrew from the government
1979 Presidential Commission for District Development Councils
In August 1979, Sri Lanka President J.R.Jayawardene appointed a Presidential Commission to inquire and report on the creation of District Development Councils. The Commission included Mr.Neelan Thiruchelvam and Professor Alfred Jeyaratnam Wilson who both had the support of the Tamil United Liberation Front. However, though the Presidential Commission had been touted as a body which would address the issues arising from the ethnic conflict, in the event the Commission concluded that the scheme that they had envisaged "would be applicable to all of the 24 districts in the Island irrespective of their ethnic composition" and was "not intended to provide a different political or administrative structure for any particular part of the country." The proposals were not implemented.
1983 Annexure C Proposals
The Jayewardene Government presented proposals in the form of a draft 10th Amendment to the Constitution and a draft District and Provincial Councils Development Bill. The Sri Lanka proposals merely extended the scheme of decentralization at District level to the Provincial level with limited co-ordination. The TULF rejected these proposals and the All Party Conference collapsed.
1985 Thimpu Talks
At the Thimpu Talks, the Sri Lankan Government presented proposals, which were in substance, a repetition of the proposals by the Government to the aborted All Party Conference in Colombo in December 1984. These proposals had been rejected by the TULF and the action of the Sri Lankan government in placing similar proposals once again at the Thimpu talks called in question the good faith of the Government and its commitment to seek a just solution at these talks. The intent of the proposals that were presented by Sri Lanka at Thimpu was clear.
1987 Indo Sri Lanka Peace Agreement
In August 1987, the Sri Lankan Parliament passed the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and the ancillary Provincial Councils Act and claimed that the enactment of these laws fulfilled the promises made in the 1987 Indo Sri Lanka Accord, to 'devolve power' on the Tamil people.
One of the key provisions of these proposals was the merger of the North and East provinces. This provision has been reneged by the current Rajapakse regime last year.
1995 Devolution Package
On 3 August 1995, Sri Lanka President Kumaratunga released a 'Devolution' package with the stated objective of ending the ethnic conflict in the island. At the same time, she reaffirmed her intention to wage war against the LTTE and launched a genocide attack on the Tamil homeland in the north of the island of Sri Lanka. The 'Devolution Package' appeared to be no more than a peace mask to Sri Lanka's war face.
The 'new' proposals once again, refused to recognize the existence of the Tamil homeland, rejected an asymmetric approach, continued to treat all the provinces in the same way and insisted on a unitary state
2005 P-TOMS Agreement
Post-Tsunami Operational Management Structure (P-TOMS) agreement signed between the government and the LTTE suffered the same fate as the above agreements.
A 'golden thread' runs through every single set of proposals from the 1957 Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam Agreement to the 2005 P-TOMS agreements. It is the Sinhalese Nation’s rejection of an asymmetric approach and the insistence that whatever 'devolution' or 'decentralization' that was on offer was equally available to the Sinhalese provinces (which had never struggled or demanded 'devolution' or 'decentralization') and to the Tamil areas in the North and East of the island.
The record of broken pacts, dishonoured agreements and evasive proposals reveals the Sinhalese Nation’s consistent refusal to recognize the existence of the Tamil people as a "people" with an historic homeland and the right to freely determine their political status - the right to freely determine the terms on which the Sinhalese people and the Tamil people may associate with each other in equality and in freedom.
Successive Sinhalese governments have sought to divide the Tamil people into smaller units and so eventually assimilate and 'integrate' them into a homogeneous Sinhalese nation - an assimilating path which had led to confrontation and which had culminated in the armed struggle of the Tamil people against that which they rightly regarded as genocide. This is evidenced by the recent provincial elections in the East and the appointment of Pillayan as the Chief Minister of the province.
This leads me to conclude, in the absence of any published documents, which specifically state the Core Ideology of the Sinhalese Nation, that following is the Core Ideology of the Sinhalese Nation
Refusal to recognize the existence of the Tamil people as a “people” with an historic homeland,
Refusal to recognize the right for Self Determination for the Tamil people, and a symmetrical approach to the devolution of power, which encapsulates the whole nation and
A commitment to divide the Tamil people into smaller units and integrate them into a homogenous Sinhalese Nation.
It is these Core Ideologies of the Sinhalese Nation which is causing major roadblocks to peace and prosperity. The Sinhalese Nation is struck with the ‘Tyranny of the OR”. The Sinhalese Nation’s thinking is in the line of “The whole Island is Our Homeland OR the Tamil Peoples'” and “If you give them the North and east, they will then capture the South as well”. They have been bogged down with over cautiousness to Preserve their Core Ideology resulting in less room to be flexible and make concessions at the negotiations.
The Sinhalese nation and its government have oppressed themselves by their addiction to their Core Ideology. This addiction has denied them an opportunity to take a rational view of the ground situation and the legitimate concerns of the Tamil people.
Stimulate Progress: Onus on the International Community
Therefore, it is clear that the Core Ideologies of both the Tamil Nation and the Singhalese Nation are at loggerheads. However, it is only the Tamil Nation, which has made it Core Ideology public and is endeavouring to adhere to it. The Singhalese nation has an implied Core Ideology, which is negative in outlook and is not acceptable in today’s civilized world.
The International Community had made it a habit to pressurize the LTTE to be flexible. Jayadeva Uyangoda, one of the negotiators in the 1995 Peace Talks, in his recent analysis called “Sri Lanka's peace process: from crisis to paradigm shift?” recalls the three concessions or acts of flexibility offered by the LTTE in the most recent negotiations with the Sri Lankan government.
Firstly, they signed a ceasefire agreement at a time when the Government had no resources to fund the war, due to economic bankruptcy. Secondly, they unilaterally announced, at the second round of negotiations, that they were seeking a settlement on the principle of internal self-determination. Thirdly, they entered into the 'Oslo Consensus' with the UNF Government committing them to explore a federalist framework within which to find a political settlement.
If the International Community is serious about solving the ethnic problem, they need to pressurize the Sinhalese nation to abandon their negative thinking; destructive Core Ideology and positively embrace the Tamil Nation’s Core Ideology. The result will be rapid progress both at the negotiation table and at the ground level as well. That will also pave the way for an innovative interim administrative structure for the North East and a final solution within reach in the near future.
The International NGO’s need to conduct Peace workshops not in Jaffna and Batticola, but in Hambantota and Kandy to change the attitude of the Sinhalese Nation’s grassroots to adopt a positive looking core ideology in the following lines; which will then enable a progressive political party in the next general election to gain a two third majority (of course with the help of the Tamil and Muslim parties) and change the current constitution for prosperity
1. Tamil People are “a people’ with a distinct language, culture and history with a clearly defined homeland
2. Tamil People’s right to Self-determination is acknowledged.
3. The North East Provinces of the country is acknowledged as the Traditional homeland of the Tamil People.
“Do not dwell in the past, do not dwell in the future, concentrate the mind on the present moment” – Lord Buddha
7 Comments
Just to add an Indian perspective - This idea of Tamil nation is precisely what India (read north-India) does not like. It wants the Tamil nation that is found within present-day India to dissolve itself into the sanskrit/hindi nation and not assert its identity. This is the factor that influences India to support the sinhalese at the cost of fairness and justice to Ealam Tamils.
Arvalan had a lot to say about "Tamil Nation and ideology" but not very much about the Sinhala side of things. He has little to say about the Sinhalese most probably because like most LTTE supporters, he does not know anything about the Sinhalese except what he reads on pro-LTTE websites.
Arvalan writes, "The Sinhalese Nation never had an ideological movement with a core ideology, in the sense of a unified framework which is offered as a solution to the National Question." He does not see the Sinhala point of view that there isn't and hasn't been such a thing as a "National Question" more or less something called "Sinhala Nation" (a term invented by Tamil nationalists as a symbol for what they hate I think). He is trying to explain the Sinhala perspective through a Tamil nationalist lens and that is where he makes no sense to a Sinhala.
Most Sinhalese believe that the answer to the current question is to wipe out the LTTE. They believe that there will never be peace in SL as long as there is an LTTE that will continue to recruit child soldiers and kill people whether or not there is a ceasefire with grinning Scandinavian monitors. The Sinhalese look at the Eastern Province where despite big talk by patriotic Tamil expatriates, the eastern Tamils are not rising up to fight for "Tamil Nation." Perhaps the Sinhala view is naive and simplistic but it is clear that the eastern Tamils are not as bloodthirsty as some in the diaspora would like them to be.
As a Sinhalese I do not know what is "Tamil Nation." I have a notion of "Tamil civilization" which I would describe as the sum achievements of Tamil people throughout history (contributions to literature, art, philosophy etc.) but that is not the same as "Tamil nation." If Tamil nation implies a geographic space (Arvalan suggests it is N-E provinces) but that does not seem to capture the diversity of these regions. As recent events demonstrated, there are some differences between Batticaloa and Northern Tamils (there are differences between Kandyan and Southern Sinhalese which may explain why I have a hard time picturing "Sinhala nation").
Is "Tamil nation" semantics an attempt to wash over these differences out of fear of "Sinhala nation?"
wijayapala above has made a reasonable point. I too agree that there is such a thing a as the Tamil culture/civilisation and a Sinhala culture, but "nationhood" is less clear.
However, nations emerge out of cultures as a people who identify with it in some way or the other. The Sinhala nation that began emerging as a reaction to colonialism identifies with Sinhala culture but is also underpinned by the construct of Sinhala-Buddhism as it chief motivator and rallying-flag against colonialism and any other/foreigner-to-Sinhala-Buddhism: the Sinhala nation it would seem wishes to determine itself and its future along those lines. The Tamil nation is an emergent response from within the Tamil culture: a response to the Sinhala nation that wishes to determine its future along the above other excluding lines.
As far as the geography goes (since peoples and nations must be somewhere) they coincide with the areas whose populations have traditionally identified with the Sinhalese or Tamil cultures/languages. And had the British not conquered Kandy perhaps the Kandyan 'Sinhalese' would now be calling themselves Kandyan Tamil owing to the dominance of Tamil culture/language in Kandy at that time.
I believe there is a need in the interest of all sections of the community to take a more positive and proactive view of the situation and look for a solution that would satisfy the basic needs and aspirations of both minorities and and majority.
In this regard, what appears to have been ignored is the immense sacrifice, suffering and persecution of a large section of the population, especially in the north and east as a result of an open ended war for close to three decades.
So, the first priority is to end the war by negotiating a peace settlement on unconditional terms, which would involve a sacrifice for the LTTE. If they are unwilling to do so, the military option has to be pursued to a conclusion.
A peace settlement should invlove the following:-
1) LTTE undertaking to lay down arms (not surrender)
2) Amnesty granted by government to LTTE from prosecution with safe passage away to any destination.
3) Firm commitment by government backed by United Nations & World Bank/ ADB for development of north and east.
4) Commitment by government to establish a north and east free trade zone based in Trincomalee.
5) Fully implement 13th amendment to Constitution as a first step to devolution and constitutional change, subject to a national referendum within a specified time frame, say two years.
6) Fully implement recognition of Tamil as a national language, including mandatory requirements for all public servants.
7)Take immediate steps to restore English education.
8) Commitment to have elections and functioning legislatures in north and east within one year.
If foregoing can be accepted by all concerned, it can pave the way for peace,restoration of democracy, aleviation of poverty and end to the massive refugee problem in the war zone and eventually prosperity of all people, especially in the north and east.
While talk of federalism and devolution is feasible in the long term, it does not make sense for the forseeable future without ending the war. Also LTTE needs to look for an honourable way to exit from power and control of areas held under their control.
Government in turn needs to make firm commitments to implement development plans and restoration of democracy and devolution.
Seeing the situation in Sri Lanka through the prism of race tamil/sinhala which is the it has been conditioned from early age by the tamil nationalist propaganda machine.
As long as the separatists continue to push their agenda for a separate Tamil nation and as long as the nationalists continue to push their agenda for a Sinhalese-Buddhist nation, this conflict will go on and on and on.
True, there should be a positive looking core ideology that must be adopted - but not the retrogressive ideas of separation that the author is promoting, rather, an ideology that would bring all of the nations communities, Sinhalese, Tamils, and Muslims together.
The aurthor lists 3 bullets, all of them grossly misleading.
1. Tamil People are “a people’ with a distinct language, culture and history.
The background of Tamils of Sri Lanka is no different to the background of the Mexicans in the US. Mexican Americans also have a distinct language, culture and history inheritted from their background in Mexico. By the author's logic, Mexican Americans also have right to claim a Spanish Homeland in California or Texas! And all minority groups in all nations have a right to lay claim to part of the land and declare separate nations!
1. Tamil People (have a) clearly defined homeland
There has never been any demarcated ethnic boundaries on the island of Sri Lanka. While it is acknowledged that Tamils must have lived on the island as long as the Sinhalese, there has nevere been historical boundaries along ethnic lines. Tamil and Sinhalese have migrated and lived throughout the island over over 2,500 years. As an example, the last king of Kandy (now considered a Sinhala area) was a Tamil.
2. Tamil People’s right to Self-determination is acknowledged.
Not only Tamils, but all world people's right to self-determination is enshrined in many charters including UN charters. Every individual has this right to self-determination - certainly including Tamil persons.
3. The North East Provinces of the country is acknowledged as the Traditional homeland of the Tamil People
Again, acknowledged only by those who promote a separate Tamil Eelam.
While it is acknowledged that at the turn of the 20th century, there were large numbers of Tamils living in the Northern and Eastern areas of the island, the populations were centered in few big towns and small hamlets - not as th author portrays in the entire Northern and Eastern provinces. Most of the areas were uninhabitted jungles and the actual geographical areas physically populated were just a fraction. Most of it was not occupied by tigers or the lions, but by herds of tens of tousands of wild elephants! That's about is the extent of the Tamil homeland, it was more like an Elephant Homeland.
Tamils have a choice: either join-in with the Sinhalese to create a single modern Sri Lankan nation with significant political changes that will accommodate all her people as one people under one nation - that will provide the space for individual expression within a single Lankan national identity
OR
Continue to dream that a possible future President Barack Obama will take-out a Sri Lanka map, a thick black pen, and color the NE provinces as Tamil Eelam!
Get Real! or let's continue to suffer - together!
I don't think you are thinking in the right direction. At the same time you are saying don't dwell in the past or future and be in the present you are still telling them to stick to the three principles.
If India is still helping the freedom fighting then you can say we have to stick the three principles. Since the time Pirabaharan started fighting against the TELO what actually he doing is helping Sinhalese to fullfil their 2500 years dream. He helped them to clear the Tamils from Tamil areas and colonize with Sinhalese.
After 1983 the Sinhalese were telling that Pirabaharan must have been an incanation of Ellalan but now they must be telling he must have been the incarnation of Thutagamunu. Except self detamination other two principles are wrong. When you say "Tamil people of northeast" you include Tamil speaking Muslims too, but while muslims say that they are different community and they need a separate homeland.
Because they say they need a separate province, we don't have a clearly difind homeland too. They too have self detemination. So first of all we have to talk with them to identify the Tamil and Muslim areas. Also we have to talk to them about what to do with the colonized Sinhalese, whether to negotiate to remove the colonies like Palastinians do or finding a solution keeping them inside.
The International communities say in the East the situation is different because all three communities live there. In the negotiation if Pirabaharan would have started talking about removing the colonies the international communities would have come to know that it is a made up situation. You say Northeast is the clearly identified Tamils homeland but LTTE has put the Puttlam district too in their flag and doing a anti Tamil propaganda through out the world making them to think that we are asking too much. But in Puttlam district there are pockets of Tamil and Muslim areas. That is why Mr.Hakeem says we have to have a Pondicheri like solution.
That would be the acceptable solution to the international community too. But before that the Sinhalese colonies made in the Tamil villages after 1977 after driving out the Tamils has to be removed. You are complaining that the international community is pressing only Tigers but not the Sri Lanka Government. UK went to the extent of inviting Tamilchelvan to their Parliment. Even after Tamilchelvan's death England and Germany was prepairing to give pressure to the government but to stop that Pirabaharan started killing the Athlets, two ministers and the bus passengers and those two countries too shut their mouths and Canada and Italy banned the WTO too.
Is Pirabaharan work for Tamils or against the Tamils. Definitely he is an incarnation of a Sinhalese.