“Military thinking” of govt. cannot help resolve problem

February 1st, 2008

“Thirteenth amendment-no interim or final solution to ethnic conflict “Military thinking” of govt. cannot help resolve problem”-TNA leader R. Sampanthan

by Lynn Ockersz

So, the 13th amendment never came up in the APRC. The 13th amendment was something President Rajapaksa clung to as a last straw because he was not able to come up with a set of political proposals, which the international community was insisting he must do. Therefore, the 13th amendment is no interim or final solution to the Tamil question and can never be acceptable.

[R. Sampanthan MP, at a press meeting on Dec 10th, 2007 at the Galle Face Hotel]

Even when it was passed way back in 1987, the 13th amendment was not seen by the “authentic and original TULF” as an answer to the ethnic conflict on account of its deficiencies. The 13th amendment never came up in the APRC and is now clung on to by the government as a last straw because it was not able to come up with a set of credible political proposals, as insisted on by the international community.

“Therefore, the 13th amendment is no interim or final solution to the Tamil question and can never be acceptable,” TNA leader and veteran Tamil politician R. Sampanthan (MP), told ‘The Island’ in a wide-ranging interview. He also said that even if the LTTE is defeated militarily, it would not be a solution to the Tamil question which came into existence decades before the LTTE came into being.

Excerpts of the interview:

Q: What is your reaction to the government’s proposals to end the conflict, based on the 13th amendment to the constitution? Are they a sufficient answer to the country’s ethnic conflict?

A: Well, the answer to your question is pretty obvious. The 13th amendment to the constitution was passed by President J. R. Jayewardene in 1987. Even then it was not an answer to the conflict as it existed then. One thing that came about under the 13th amendment was the recognition of the Northern and Eastern provinces as one, single, indivisible linguistic region, which was the historical habitation of the Tamil-speaking people-the Tamils and the Muslims. This was a significant achievement under the 13th amendment.

And this achievement blurred the several other divisions which existed in the 13th amendment. We, the authentic, original TULF, did not contest the Provincial Council elections held in 1988. For the simple reason that we felt the 13th amendment was inadequate. We explained the position to the Indian government. We told them that in our view the 13th amendment was not workable. In regard to even matters, such as agrarian services and provincial transport, which were peripheral areas and which come under the control of a provincial and regional government, the Provincial Councils were not able to function independently. We communicated our views in regard to the deficiencies of the 13th amendment to President Jayewardene in September 1987, no sooner he placed the 13th amendment before the Cabinet. We communicated our views in writing in regard to the same matters to then Indian Premier Rajiv Gandhi in October 1987 before the 13th amendment was enacted. In fact, President J. R. Jayewardene on his return from what I believe was a SAARC summit conference in Kathmandu, was requested to stop over in Delhi in November 1987. Mr. Amirthalingam, Mr. Sivasithamparam and I were also requested to be present in Delhi at that time. A discussion took place between the Indian government and President Jayewardene with regard to the proposed 13th amendment. I am aware that President Jayewardene made a definite commitment to make improvements in several areas in the 13th amendment.

Not many people are aware of the evolution of the 13th amendment. The amendment came out of extensive discussions between the Jayewardene government and the TULF in July and August 1986. I was a member of the TULF delegation which took part in the discussions. So the 13th amendment is no solution at all to the conflict.

After that, the truth being realised, several Presidents and governments have carried on negotiations with the Tamil parties, sometimes the LTTE, to evolve an acceptable solution. President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s proposals went far beyond the 13th amendment, the majority report of the Experts’ Committee appointed to assist the present APRC went far beyond the 13th amendment. And when the latter report was not acted upon, Professor Tissa Vitharana himself prepared a report to the APRC based upon the various Experts’ Committee reports-even that report went beyond the 13th amendment.

So, the 13th amendment never came up in the APRC. The 13th amendment was something President Rajapaksa clung to as a last straw because he was not able to come up with a set of political proposals, which the international community was insisting he must do. Therefore, the 13th amendment is no interim or final solution to the Tamil question and can never be acceptable.

Q: Would the TNA be serving in the interim administration proposed for the North?

A: We cannot serve on the proposed body. Since the 13th amendment is no interim or final solution to the conflict, I don’t see how we can serve in the interim administration.

Q: Do you see the government going for a military solution, now that the LTTE is seen to be weakening?

A: Well, the government has been endeavouring to achieve a military solution for quite some time now. In my view the government, very unfortunately, seems to think that the Tamil problem could be resolved militarily. The Tamil question is not a military question. It is the political struggle by the Tamil people to achieve their legitimate status in the Lankan polity. There must be a political solution to that conflict. It is a conflict which existed long before the birth of the LTTE. The LTTE surfaced because there was no political solution to the ethnic conflict. The military thinking of the government can in no way help to resolve the Tamil question.

Even if the government defeats the LTTE militarily, that would not be a solution to the Tamil question.

And as long as the Tamil question is not resolved, I do not believe the government could achieve a meaningful victory in any field.

Q: Why isn’t the TNA participating in the up-coming, Eastern local government elections?

A: We will be making a statement with regard to this matter. A military environment prevails in the Batticaloa district. When the local government elections took place in Batticaloa and Amparai, somewhere in 2006, we took part in the elections and we were overwhelmingly victorious in the Tamil areas just as much as the SLMC did well in the Muslim areas. But the present military environment prevalent in the Batticaloa district with the TMVP being heavily armed and being able to flagrantly brandish their weapons and the law enforcement authorities in the Batticaloa district not being prepared to enforce the law against the members of the TMVP, it seems the TMVP is having the licence to do whatever they wish. It should be remembered that our members were not able to vote at the second reading of the budget and they also could not vote at the third reading because their near relations were abducted and were held in custody under the threat of death if our members voted against the budget. Joseph Pararajasingham was murdered in a church on Christmas eve. Several of our local authority members in the Eastern Province have been killed. Professor Raveendranath of the Eastern University was abducted by the TMVP and he is now presumed to be dead.

So with this military environment prevailing in the Batticaloa district, we don’t think a free and fair election could be held in the East. After careful consideration of this situation we decided not to expose our supporters to further harm and decided that we will not contest the elections.

Q: Given this ground situation in the East, could the government launch a viable development programme there?

A: I think it is a farce. They have declared a High Security Zone in some parts of the Eastern Province and people are not being able to settle in those areas. People are not being involved in the development process. The Members of Parliament who have been elected by the people of those areas have not been involved in any development process. There are Ministers and officials who go on trips from Colombo and return but we don’t believe any meaningful development process is possible in this situation.

The government does not have a mandate from the people of the Eastern Province to engage in development in the Eastern Province. On the contrary, all reports indicate that these development programmes have sinister purposes. The SLMC pulled out of the government complaining that the Muslim people were being unfairly treated. I don’t think the government is honestly engaged in trying to develop the Eastern Province, for the benefit of the people who live there.

Q: In the hypothetical case of the TNA participating in a negotiatory process to bring a political solution, what is it likely to propose?

A: We have never been opposed to bringing a political solution, from the beginning of our political history. From the days of Mr. S. J. V. Chelvanayakam, and the Federal Party (FP), for more than six decades, we have demanded substantial autonomy in the areas of our historical habitation; substantial self-rule in the areas of our historical habitation which have the Northern and Eastern Provinces.

In our 1970 election manifesto the FP called upon the people to reject any candidate who advocated separation. The Oslo communique of December 2002 contemplated, based on the principle of internal self-determination, in the areas of historical habitation of the Tamil-speaking people, a federal solution within a united Sri Lanka.

When Prabhakaran delivered his Martyrs’ Day speech after Mahinda Rajapaksa was elected President, he said Mahinda Rajapaksa was looked upon as a “pragmatic person,” and asked him to come up with a set of proposals which would meet the aspirations of the Tamil people. No such proposal has yet been placed on the table.

So if there is a set of proposals which will meet the aspirations of the Tamil people and will give them substantial autonomy, substantial self-rule in the areas of their historical habitation, where they could live with self-respect and security, to took after their socioeconomic concerns, I think the problem could be resolved within a united country. The vast majority of Tamil people would overwhelmingly support such a solution. [island.lk]

Entry Filed under: Federalidea