Archive for Uncategorized

Mounting Civilian Casualties as Conflict Persists

[Public Statement by Amnesty International]

Amnesty International condemns the suicide bomb attack of 6 April 2008 in Gampaha district, Weliveriya, near Colombo. The bomb blast killed at least 12 people, including Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, a senior government minister, and injured over 90 people including children. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has been blamed for the bomb attack that targeted a local sports event. Amnesty International reiterates that attacks targeting civilians and indiscriminate attacks violate international humanitarian law which binds all sides to the conflict and constitute war crimes. All such attacks must cease immediately and unconditionally, and perpetrators must be brought to justice.

The organisation is alarmed that since the abrogation of the ceasefire agreement in Sri Lanka on 16 January 2008, the conflict continues to involve the intentional targeting of civilians and indiscriminate attacks. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), 180 civilians died in the first six weeks of 2008, and nearly 270 more were injured in a series of attacks on civilian buses, railway stations and individuals in Colombo, Dambulla, Kebhitigollewa, Madhu, Okkampitiya and Welli Oya. The ICRC has expressed concern that “since the start of the year civilian casualties had gone up as the number of indiscriminate attacks had grown in the north, east and south of the country.”

Since 2006, the conflict in Sri Lanka between government forces, the LTTE and other armed groups has escalated and has continued to be marked by widespread human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law. These have included unlawful killings; torture and other ill-treatment; recruitment of child soldiers; abductions and enforced disappearances. There are reports of both sides bombing and shelling schools and hospitals5. Hundreds of civilians have been killed; hundreds others injured and more than 200,000 people have been displaced.

Abuses by the LTTE

The LTTE has attracted increasing criticism since the 1980s for its use of child soldiers, targeting of civilians and indiscriminate attacks, including using suicide bombers. During the conflict the LTTE has also endangered civilians by sheltering among them and by launching attacks from civilian areas. Its members have also abducted and killed civilians. With the abrogation of the CFA the mission responsible for monitoring its implementation, the Sri Lankan Monitoring Mission (SLMM) has terminated.

Recommendations

To the LTTE and other armed groups

· To stop immediately any direct or indiscriminate attacks on civilians, condemn all such
acts publicly and state that they would not be tolerated;

· To immediately suspend any persons suspected of participating in (including ordering)
violations of international law from any position or placement in which they may commit
additional violations;

· To ensure that their forces take special care to avoid damage to cultural property,
including buildings dedicated to religion.

To the Sri Lankan government

· To ensure that all security force personnel respect obligations under international human
rights humanitarian law

· To ensure that its armed forces take special care to avoid damage to cultural property,
including buildings dedicated to religion;

To allow the establishment of an independent, international human rights monitoring presence on
the ground without delay.

Comments (1)

The Beleaguered People

by Tisaranee Gunasekara

“If you are Tamil in Sri Lanka your trust has been spoiled. You fear rebels and you fear the government too”.

An unnamed 19 year old Tamil waiter (Washington Post–1.4.2008)

Everywhere in Sri Lanka the people are helpless, victimised by entities beyond their control and forces beyond their comprehension. Sinhalese and Muslims have to contend with Tiger terrorism and a mounting economic crisis. The fate of a Sri Lankan Tamil is infinitely worse, caught between an intolerant, anti-civilisational LTTE and a regime predisposed to regard most Tamils as Tigers. For an absolute majority of Sri Lankans life is an uphill, at times deadly dangerous, struggle. An age old proverb best describes the present Sri Lankan condition–between the devil and the deep blue sea.

‘Step Up Savannah’ is an innovative programme inaugurated in Savannah, a town in the state of Georgia, USA; its aim is to give policy makers first hand knowledge of what it is like to be poor. There should be a similar programme in Sri Lanka so that the President, his ministers and his Central Bank Governor can experience, even minutely, the debilitating and despairing struggle to make ends meet that is the lot of most Sri Lankans. In the absence of such an experience the regime will continue to impose burdens on the people until the South reaches the boiling point.

Sri Lankan leaders would do well to take heed of the unfolding US economic crisis and learn its lessons. American economic woes demonstrate the dangers of deficit financing. There are no free lunches; or free wars. The bill has to be paid sooner or later. There is a direct correlation between America’s $3 trillion Iraq war and its economic devastation, a correlation President Bush persists in ignoring. As Nobel Price winner Joseph Stiglitz and his co-author Linda Blimes point out in their new book, “Deficit spending gives the illusion that the laws of economics can be repealed, that we can have both guns and butter. But of course the laws are not repealed. The costs of war are real” (The Three Trillion Dollar War). If financial/economic impunity is an illusion for the most powerful country in the world it is certainly so for Sri Lanka.

Indubitably the war against the LTTE must be prosecuted and paid for. However it must be done in accordance with Sri Lankan and international laws and the basic laws of economics. We have consistently violated all three, in the conduct of the war in particular and in the conduct of the government in general. Sky rocketing prices, mountainous debts and the international opprobrium are the results of this blind and ignorant politico-economic-military extremism. Impunity is a mirage that will destroy us if we continue to pursue it heedlessly, as we have done in the past two years.

Mutur Aid Workers Massacre

In its profoundly disturbing report on the aid workers massacre in Mutur the UTHR makes a potent point: “One thing is certain about the ACF killings. They would not have happened if minimally, timely disciplinary action had been taken against SP Kapila Jayasekere once his role in the Five Students outrage (in Trincomalee in Jan. 2006-T.G.) became widely known. Instead he was promoted to SSP in July 2006″ (Special Report No. 30: Unfinished Business of the Five Students and the ACF Cases-1.4.2008). A permissive mindset and the resulting impunity make even preventable crimes and avoidable mistakes inevitable. As the UTHR points out, if the government carried out an impartial investigation into the killing of the five students in Trincomalee, the Mutur tragedy, with all its adverse consequences, could have been avoided. By enabling the covering up of the first crime the road was cleared for a second and a far more devastating crime. By not taking action against the Trincomalee killers a message was sent down the line that targeting any Tamil is ‘kosher’ since most Tamils are somehow, in someway akin to the Tigers. The Mutur massacre would not have happened without this ethno-centric mindset.

The UTHR Report has named names, given ranks. It is now up to the government to carry out an official and impartial investigation. The only way the very serious charges made by the UTHR Report can be met is through such an effort; if that effort is not made or if it is made in a biased manner, the government will stand accused of complicity in a most heinous crime against its own citizens. So far the state and the regime have moved in a manner that lends credence to the charges of a cover up. It is time to realise that any attempt to deny the victims and their families the justice they deserve as citizens of Sri Lanka can be far more damaging than the initial crime itself. If the perpetrators of these two crimes are brought to justice Sri Lanka will get some much needed breathing space internationally. Our credibility with both the Tamil people and the international community will increase while the Tigers’ will suffer by comparison. The startling revelations made by the UTHR gives us a chance to approach the issue from a different angle. If we fail to do so, that window of opportunity will close, destroying our ability to win the backing of the international community and to regain the loyalty of our own Tamil citizens.

There is a world of difference in the way a Tamil and a non-Tamil would experience the security measures-some necessary, some excessive-taken in the context of the war. As that unnamed young Tamil man, a humble waiter by profession, pointed out, “It is not waiting in the lines or the search of our bags that trouble us as much as the chance of being picked out, arrested and never being able to see our families again. I know neighbours it has happened to” (Washington Post–1.4.2008). Most Tamils would have or know someone with similar stories, just as many a Sinhalese and a Muslim in the North-East or the border areas would have their own horrendous experiences of what it is like to live in the shadow of the Tiger. The least we can do is accept the reality of the problem and try to minimise avoidable errors and crimes by adopting an attitude of zero-tolerance towards anyone who harms civilians. If we do not draw the necessary distinction between Tamils and Tigers, how can we win the loyalty of non-Tiger Tamils? Without such loyalty how can we keep Sri Lanka whole and at peace?

When PM Ratnasiri Wickramanayake visited Israel, Prime Minister Ehud Olemrt advised him, ‘Do not give into terrorism because it will only bring destruction to your country”. Many hardliners in the Rajapakse administration, from his Defence Secretary to the JHU, would regard Israel as a model state which does not give the enemy any breathing space. Israel leaders steadfastly adhere to their policy of defeating terrorism by any means necessary irrespective of any other consideration, economic or political, humanitarian or legal. However the war still continues; the suicide bombers still come; Israel’s borders are not secure and there is no internal security either. The harsher the Israel policy gets the more dogged becomes Palestinian resistance. Both nations are caught in a vicious cycle of death and destruction seemingly with no end because the moderates are not strong enough to impose possible compromises on the polity and the society. The most potent lesson provided by Israel is therefore a negative one: how not to deal with the people from whose midst terrorists-and suicide bombers-come forth. If repression and military measures alone can succeed in a political vacuum, the Palestinian problem would have been solved long ago.

According to the UTHR Report the actual killing of aid workers was done by a Muslim homeguard and two Sinhala policemen. The Muslim homeguard’s brother, a member of an armed Muslim group, was shot dead the day before by a Tiger operative masquerading as a Karuna cadre. Here we have in microcosm the tragedy of Sri Lanka, created by unthinking extremism and maximalism; here we see in miniature the consequences of the enmity between Sinhalese and Tamils, between Tamils and Muslims, deadly legacies of Sinhala extremism and Tiger terrorism. If this vicious cycle is not broken we will never know peace and normalcy. The Tigers do not want that vicious cycle to be broken; in fact they want it to become more poisonous and more relentless. It is the responsibility of the government to break this cycle of hatred by offering the community from whom the LTTE gains nourishment a fair deal. A never ending conflict which saps the energies of all parties will be the only future we can expect unless we draw that critical line of demarcation between the LTTE and the Tamil people and offer the latter a just deal even as we resist the former with all the strength at our command.

Dangerous Regression

As we have seen, time and again, the Tigers do not respond positively to political measures; a peace process for the LTTE is merely a time to recuperate for the next war. Appeasement does not work with entities such as the LTTE. But while using military measures to face the undoubted threat posed by the Tigers political measures are necessary to engage and win over the moderates and the ordinary civilians. Negotiating with the Tigers is an exercise in futility; all the more reason why we should bypass the Tigers and offer the Tamil people a reasonable power sharing deal. Unfortunately the regime is unlikely to come up with a power sharing package because it does not accept the reality and validity of Tamil grievances. A government that is proud of 1956 and ignores 1983 cannot offer justice to Tamils because in its eyes no injustice has been committed in the first place. Similarly the regime will not be able to take actual measures to minimise human rights violation because it does not understand the reality of Tamil suffering and the validity of Tamil fear.

Given these critical absences, the Eastern province election will not help address Tamil grievances or Tamil fears. The recent local government election was free of violence but that is because it did not involve a contest and its results were a foregone conclusion. Given the deal between the PA and the Pilliyan group no one had any doubts as to which way the elections would go. The provincial council election can be another affair, if the opposition parties contest and actively campaign. And even if the election is free and fair what we are offering the Tamil people is nothing more than a return to status quo ante, an existence in a unitary state of Sri Lanka where the majority community has the whip hand, politically and militarily. Pilliyan group, given its anti-civilisational practices and its lack of a political programme, cannot be considered anything other than an appendage of the regime, a group of Tamil politico-military auxiliaries used by Sinhala hardliners to keep not only Tamils but also Muslims quiescent. Elections, even if they happen to be free and fair, will therefore not present the Tamil people with a different and a better option. This critical absence of an alternative will enable the LTTE not only to harden its resistance in the North but also to make a comeback in the East.

Politically and economically the danger signals betoken stormy seas, yet the government remains unheeding. The already debased living conditions of the masses will become further endangered as the looming global food crisis becomes a reality in the coming year. At a time when we need all the international assistance possible, help will be denied to us because of ‘good governance’ issues. The President seems intent not to appoint Constitutional Council, irrespective of these consequences. Everywhere the people are unprotected militarily or uncared for economically. A government that ignores the economic misery of its own Sinhala constituents is unlikely to care about the problems of minorities. Where are we headed in these troubled times? [courtesy: The Island]

Comments (6)

Higher Education Essential to Progress than Higher Literacy Rates

by Prof. Wiswa Warnapala

It is indeed a pleasure to be here on the occasion of the opening of the Pre-Clinical Building of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Kelaniya. This building, as the Vice Chancellor mentioned, represents yet another stage of the expansion of the Faculty of Medicine, and the aim is to increase the annual intake which, at present stands at 160. This building, which we ceremonially opened today, is to house the traditional pre-clinical departments; pre-clinical subjects, I am told, are taught in the first two years in the MBBS course, in addition, a language unit is to be set up to provide the required language skills for the undergraduates so that they can communicate with all types of patients. The entire cost of the project was in the region of Rs.178 million, and it was funded by the government.

[at the University of Kelaniya-file pic by sandunruki]

It is therefore relevant and appropriate at this stage to divert the attention of this distinguished academic audience to issues of both Medical and University education in the country. Since the establishment of the fully-fledged independent and autonomous University in 1942, the University system which, initially based on the traditional Oxbridge formula, had undergone a change in the last fifty years. Though the system of University education expanded in response to various popular pressures and issues based on a social demand model of education, there was no comprehensive policy strategy covering the entire higher education policy. Instead of adopting a common policy strategy based on the country’s development needs, ad hoc changes were made, resulting in the creation of several imbalances within the system of University education in Sri Lanka.

Though the formal University system began in 1921 with the establishment of the University College, professional medical education began in 1870 with the creation of the Ceylon Medical College, and it remained an institution under the Government Department of Health. It was in the same period that the Law College came into existence as another prestigious professional body. The Ceylon Medical College was able to create a small professional elite, and it was in line with the colonial policy of the period. The Ceylon Medical College, as one of the important institutions of professional education, contributed substantially to the development of University education and its absorption into the University system was such that it dominated Medical education in the country till the establishment of the Second Medical Faculty in 1961. The Ceylon Medical College and subsequently, the Faculty of Medicine dominated professional medical education for nearly a century, and this dominance came to be broken with the establishment of new Medical Faculties associated with the Universities which, in other words, meant that it followed the expansion of the Universities.

The Peradeniya Faculty was established in 1961, Sri Jayawardenepura Faculty in 1993, Kelaniya Faculty in 1995, Jaffna Faculty in 1978, Ruhuna Faculty in 1984, Eastern University Faculty in 2004 and the Rajarata Faculty in 2006. Today, there are eight Medical Faculties, providing medical education to 6025 students. In 2006, we selected 1111 students to the Medical Faculties and the number proposed on the basis of the A/L results of 2007 is 1155. The number of eligible candidates of the relevant subject area stood at 15,718, out of which only 7909 applied and the number selected was 4343. As you know, there is a massive demand for higher educational opportunities in the country and we have taken measures to expand the access; all parents, specially those in the middle class, prefer to provide a medical education to their children and the occupational mobility in the country is integrally associated with this perception. Because of this perception, there is a consistent demand for the expansion of medical education in the country.

Certain professional fields have been given University status with a view to diversifying the system of Medical education in the country, and the new Faculty of Allied Health Sciences is the newest example of this kind of diversification. Nursing education is to be given the University status, and initially, the University of Peradeniya and University of Jayawardenepura would undertake to absorb the existing Nurses’ Training Colleges with a view to providing the nurses with a professional degree and this is certain to enhance the quality of nursing education in the country.

Since the system consists of 15 Universities, there is this view that every University should establish a Faculty of Medicine, and this is primarily because of the fact that a large number of our students go abroad, seeking a medical qualification. Here, in this context that I would like to refer to two categories; there are established Medical Colleges which have been recognised by the Sri Lanka Medical Council and the second category includes schools which are sub-standard and they have not been recognised by the Sri Lanka Medical Council.

The Sri Lanka Medical Council has raised a number of pertinent issues relating to medical education in the country and the Ministry of Higher Education, taking into consideration its concerns, does not wish to establish Medical Faculties in the other Universities in the near future before the existing faculties are upgraded with the required facilities, especially their basic infrastructure. Though there is a need to accommodate the increasing number of Advanced Level qualified students, the functioning Faculties of Medicine, in my view, cannot expand the intake without compromising the standards of patient care and the doctor-patient relationship. For Medical sciences to be taught efficiently, well equipped laboratory facilities are necessary and they cannot be provided within a few months.

The Medical Faculty at the University of Rajarata, though it took a batch of 180 students, is still not properly equipped and there is a shortage of teachers. No good teachers can be attracted to a place like Rajarata; these difficulties which any institution is likely to face in the initial phase but they need to be overcome in order to provide the students with better system of education, and this is of special importance to professional medical education. The Sri Lanka Medical Council, as the organisation engaged in the maintenance of professional standards, has informed the Ministry of Higher Education that appropriate measures are necessary to protect the public from unqualified, poorly qualified and inadequately trained professionals in the field of medical education. We are conscious of such observations and I, therefore, can assure this audience that we do not intend to establish new Universities as well as new Faculties of Medicine in the near future but in terms of policy, we have recognised the need for expansion of medical education in the country. In planning our policy in respect of medical education, we proposed to consult both the Ministry of Health and the Sri Lanka Medical Council on matters pertaining to the establishment of a new Faculty of Medicine. In my view, this kind of consultation and relationship will help to overcome some of the problems and issues relating to the running of the Faculties.

It has been the policy of the Ministry of Higher Education to provide opportunities for the expansion of the post-graduate studies in all disciplines; in my view, post- graduate sector was neglected in the past as the policy makers always emphasised the need for expansion of under-graduate studies. The dearth of teaching personnel in the Medical Faculties could be tackled by expanding the number of courses in the Post-Graduate Institute of Medicine. A proper programme of expansion could address the dearth of specialists in pre-clinical and para-clinical subjects; more post-graduate students are necessary in such areas as Anatomy, Physiology, Bio-Chemistry and Pharmacology to meet the demand of Universities.

It is true that the post-graduate institutions are not properly monitored and they are not properly funded, and the ministry, through the University Grants Commission, proposes to supervise the post-graduate institutions in order to see that they become active partners in the development process. Yet another problem associated with the medical profession is the number of students going on scholarships to different countries. Since there is an ever-increasing demand for medical education, certain countries offer scholarships, and it is through this method that they attract students as private students. The Ministry of Higher Education awards a scholarship only after ascertaining whether the particular institution has been recognised by the Sri Lanka Medical Council and the ministry proposes to establish some kind of a mechanism with the assistance of the UGC to verify the credentials of the institutions, which provide medical education. This kind of control, though difficult a system to be adopted in the given global context, would help us to maintain standards and obtain professionals of accepted quality. As far as this matter is concerned, I tend to agree with the views expressed by the Sri Lanka Medical Council.

It is here in this context that I need to turn your attention to the main goals in the sphere of Higher Education. Today, the country is expected to give priority to accelerate growth, reduce poverty, achieve Millennium Development Goals and create a highly skilled workforce. In the context of the global economy, based primarily on the knowledge economy, higher literacy rates are not enough; take for instance, Karnataka State in India, its literacy rate is 54.5 percent but it remains one of the developed states in India. What I am trying to drive at is that higher education is an indispensable tool for achieving national goals. We need to move in the direction of a knowledge economy so that the country can build an educated workforce which will help all citizens to uplift their economic status. In order to achieve this, Sri Lanka, at this time, needs a development-oriented Higher Education Policy through which we can upgrade the quality and relevance of education offered by the Universities of Sri Lanka.

One has to acknowledge the fact that it is through Higher Education that goals of social equity and economic and social development could be achieved in any country as higher education’s primary role is to develop the intellectual and skills capabilities of our society. Such capabilities are necessary to address and resolve the range of problems and challenges faced by the Sri Lankan society. Higher Education must also play a central role in meeting the realities of international competition under the new conditions of globalization, and it is in this context that we need to devise a comprehensive policy on Higher Education with the sole purpose of enhancing the quality and relevance of higher education, and it is only on the basis of change that the country can convert the Sri Lankan Universities into centres of learning and active partners of development in the country. It is on this basis that we can build a new development framework that can support knowledge-driven economic growth, and it, in addition, requires an expanded and inclusive higher education system which can reach larger segments of the population. We intend to formulate a new Higher Education Policy on the basis of such vital considerations relevant and useful in the given context, both local and international.

I thank you for giving me an opportunity to share some of my views with this distinguished academic audience.

(A text of a speech delivered by Professor WISWA WARNAPALA, Minister of Higher Education at the Opening of the Pre-Clinical Building at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya at Ragama on 14th February 2008.)

Comments

The Eviction of Muslims in 1990 and exodus of Tamils in 1995 from Jaffna

By Sharika Thiranagama

As Sri Lanka continues to teeter on the edge of all-out war between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan state, it is hard but necessary to believe that the country does not need to endlessly repeat the same cycle of events. Roads within the war-zone areas of the north, and even more so the east, have once again been crowded with thousands of shelter-seeking Tamils and Muslims-continually pushed this way and that by warring parties. But this is a war for homeland on one side and for a sovereign state on the other, and neither actor will provide ordinary people with homes or lands or the basic rights of citizenship.

Largely forgotten in this conflict’s long years has been the fact that, 17 years ago, all 75,000-80,000 Muslims were evicted from the island’s north. A group of people who, like the Tamils who the LTTE claimed to be fighting for, had considered the north their inalienable homeland, suddenly found themselves on the other side of a border that attempted to sever their pasts and futures from their homes. About 65,000 northern Muslim refugees now live in camps in Puttalam District alone. These events need to be remembered in Sri Lanka, not only because acts of large-scale forced movement of ethnic minorities continue to be a feature of today’s conflict, but also because both observers and participants need to make constant links between these events and the forms of state or quasi-state power that are being claimed and put into effect.

The 1990 eviction of Muslims and the 1995 exodus of Tamils both were major one-time events of displacement in the north. The nature of both events help us understand the contradictory faces of Tamil nationalism, as well as the paradox that the situation represents: how one group of people, Tamils, has the freedom to belong but is without the freedom to speak; while the other group, Muslims, is without the right to belong but has retained the freedom to speak, because the community is not subject to the LTTE’s focus. It is necessary to grapple with this paradox if we are to understand what democracy could look like for those living in the north and east.

The eviction

In October 1990, throughout the five districts of Kilinochchi, Mullaithivu, Mannar, Vavuniya and Jaffna, the LTTE announced that all Muslims living within the Northern Province must leave within 48 hours. On Mannar Island, the LTTE announced that all Muslims must report to the LTTE office by the 24th of the month, and leave by the 28th. Despite protests by a delegation of local Tamils and the Catholic clergy, the LTTE sealed off Erukkalampiddy town in Mannar on the 28th, and forbade all further dealings between Tamils and Muslims.

Muslims from Puthukudiruppu, Tharapuram, Uppukulam and Erukkalampiddy were subsequently assembled on the beach without food, water or sanitation facilities, and forced to begin their outward journey. On the Mannar mainland, on 25 October the LTTE announced that the area’s Muslims must surrender their possessions, register with the LTTE office, and leave the following day. They were allowed to bring five travel bags per family, one gold sovereign and 2000 rupees. At the final checkpoint leading south, in Vavuniya, all additional items were removed.

The orders for the Muslim eviction came from the highest rung of the Tigers. This was an LTTE-only military operation, and there is no evidence of civilian collusion; no ordinary Tamils participated in the eviction. Neither was any reason for the operation ever offered. Did the LTTE, faced with a numerically and politically stronger Muslim minority in the east, simply decide to evict a much smaller and more politically vulnerable Muslim minority in the north? Precise reasons are difficult to establish. What is certain is that this was a decision to remove an entire community, and without any attempt to legitimise the action through popular campaigns.

Few commentators have systematically reflected on what this means for the LTTE’s relationship to both the Muslim and the Tamil communities, or even to its own local cadre. Certainly, the eviction order from LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran caught many local northern LTTE cadres by surprise. In many places, cadres were moved from their home area to other areas in order to carry out the exercise. One man from Mannar told this researcher, “We did not recognise the faces of those who came to evict us.” Another man’s story told of the young LTTE cadre, who he had known all his life, crying as he instructed the family to depart. The rebel leadership obviously feared that its cadres could disobey the eviction order.

In Jaffna town, Muslims were summoned to the grounds of Osmania College on 30 October for a 7.30 am meeting. The meeting ended by ten o’clock, with the order that they would have to leave by noon. “They told us that the man coming would say just two sentences,” Nachiya, one of the evictees recalls. “Everyone must leave in two hours.” There was no talk. That’s all he told us. He was a big guy in the Tigers, he didn’t sit on a chair, and he didn’t even stop the motorcycle.”

The Jaffna Muslims made their exit through a route carefully laid out by the Tigers, which took them through LTTE checkpoint after checkpoint. At each they were searched and more and more of their possessions removed. Jewellery was taken from the women. The thefts form some of the bitterest recollections of the Jaffna Muslims. Tareek, a former resident of Jaffna, tells a common tale:

People believed you could take what you could carry, but at every junction the LTTE took things from us. At that time my eldest son was not even one year old, and they took even the milk packets that we had for him. As they did so, they told us, “If you ever talk about this, we will shoot you.” In the end, we had only the clothes we were wearing. My younger sisters couldn’t even keep the jewellery they were wearing; they even took earrings from their ears. For us Muslims, it’s a big thing when these young men are touching our women’s ears and necks to take the jewellery off. When the women cadres searched our young women, they took them behind a screen. Inside, they took all the money. We came here with bare pockets. That’s like everybody behind us.

Muslim evictees were also stripped of land deeds, electrical goods, bicycles and even thermos flasks at the checkpoints. According to a 1991 report by the University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna), dozens of rich businessmen in Jaffna were held for further ransom, as were the well-to-do in other districts. A 1991 survey by the Research and Action Forum for Social Development, an organisation that works with northern Muslims, sought to calculate the financial loss suffered by this population during the eviction. The final estimate puts the collective loss of the evictees at around USD 110 million. In Jaffna, after the Muslim eviction, the LTTE made further profits by holding a massive sale of Muslim goods.

As such, one of the most common memories that the evictees have is that they all arrived in refugee camps with nothing. Indeed, the eviction had a tremendous levelling effect, with more or less the entire population being impoverished overnight. While this has changed over the last 17 years with the emergence of considerable internal hierarchies within the refugee communities, the eviction did intertwine lives in ways that were unimaginable before.

By November 1990 the Muslims were gone from the north; the LTTE had succeeded in converting the area into the Tamil-only territory for which it was fighting. This ethnic cleansing has since come to be known as the Eviction, and the community of Muslims created by this act, formally known as Internally Displaced Persons, refer to themselves as ‘northern Muslims’ and ahathi, or refugees. The Eviction created a whole new demographic, created in the aftermath of an unthinkably traumatic event that broke one set of communities in the north and created another-that of the refugees. Through peace processes and ceasefires, the right of Sri Lanka’s northern Muslims to return-together with an LTTE guarantee that they will not be evicted again–has never been given adequate priority.

The exodus

Vasantha, a young Jaffna Tamil woman, was 11 when she watched Muslims being forced to leave Jaffna. “I remember we were all standing outside. They were walking down the road with their two bags, which were all they were allowed to take. Sometimes they went past in vans, looking out of the window.” Five years later to the day, on 30 October 1995, it would be the turn of Vasantha and other Tamils in Jaffna to make own their long walk down the Chemmani/Kandy Road. When the exodus did occur, Rajan, who was 15 at the time, remembers that suddenly many of his neighbours began to talk about the northern Muslims. ‘The Exodus’ was the Tamils’ fate, Rajan and others felt, because they had not prevented the Muslim eviction. The connections were clear to them, as were the ramifications: in the end, no one was safe.

In 1995, after the breakdown of peace talks, the Colombo government began a new military offensive designed to dislodge the LTTE from the north. In July, there began an indiscriminate and brutal bombing campaign. The LTTE began to make arrangements for the transfer of the local population and of itself to the Vanni area, which would be its new headquarters. On 17 October, the Sri Lankan Army began its advance to Jaffna town, and from the 20th many Tamils began trying to leave Jaffna. Those who had paid the LTTE the demanded ‘National Defence Fund’ (two sovereigns of gold or SLR 10,000) were given free transport over the Jaffna lagoon to Vanni. Others, the remaining 300,000-450,000, began to prepare to make arrangements to stay in Jaffna, moving from private homes into places of refuge.

Rajan remembers that on the evening of the 29th, the LTTE came around to collect the National Defence Fund from those who had yet to pay. As the army closed in on Jaffna town, the LTTE announced, by loudspeaker, that the following day their troops would be doing battle with the Sri Lankan military, and that all must leave Jaffna immediately. LTTE officials also told the Tamil diaspora and the international community that the people had chosen to leave of their own volition, being unable to face living under the Sinhalese. By evening, the Chemmani/Kandy Road was crammed, as Jaffna’s 450,000-strong population began to leave at the height of the northern monsoon. Vasantha remembers walking painfully, pushed along with the crowd as they moved.

The [Navatkuli] bridge has been divided, half is occupied by the LTTE and half by the people. So the people are going on bikes, little motorbikes, and bullock carts, and walking with bags on their heads and all the things they could take. They don’t know where they are going, to a school or whatever it is-they are just moving there. And then, we see the LTTE’s cars and vans and all the things they confiscated from the people, and they are filled, filled with stuff. They were using us as human shields. They were moving faster than we were because they had vehicles. I remember we were passing [them], and then [saw] trucks and trucks of the LTTE filled with kerosene oil. So it was clear that they had all this all this time. They are not just leaving, they are taking all the things they had.

Outside the town limits, in Chemmani, the LTTE ordered the crowds to keep the road clear for LTTE vehicles, and to walk instead through the floodwaters. As resistance to its orders grew amongst the people, the LTTE cracked down harshly on the protesting voices. The road soon became littered with the bodies of those too weary to carry on. Rajan was travelling with his parents and his three younger siblings:

There were dead bodies all along the road. Old people couldn’t walk this distance. These people [the LTTE] really forced us, they were very rough. They wanted first place for their vehicles. When their vehicles were coming, they wanted us to get out of the way. There was also nothing: there was no water, there was no food. My little sisters were not yet one [year old] then. For milk we had to draw plain water from the well and put a little flour in it, and give it to them. There was no hot water, we ate just biscuits. In two days we had become displaced, and in those two days the difficulties we suffered had not been seen under this sky. First we stayed in a temple, and then we found friends. Other people stayed in the temples and the schools, there was so much difficulty in the schools. A school only had two toilets. Hundreds of families were staying in them, and there was no food or water.

As the humanitarian crisis received international attention, the Sri Lankan government attempted to forestall criticism of the bombing raids, as well as their previous failure to send rations to Jaffna, by forbidding journalists from entering the area. Meanwhile, some in Jaffna were still resisting the forced movement. It took the LTTE nearly two weeks to clear the recalcitrant population out of Jaffna, and they finally brought in buses to move out the remaining stragglers. Among the last to leave were some doctors and nurses in Jaffna Hospital, and some refugees hiding out in schools.

On 12 November 1995, the LTTE broke down the gates of Chundukuli School to remove Christians and Hindus who were hiding there. One elderly man had left in October with everyone else and, unable to bear the conditions in Chavakachcheri, 10 km from Jaffna town, had come back with his family. He recalls pleading with the LTTE cadre: “Little brother, because of you we went to Chavakachcheri and suffered there in the rains with no water or shelter. We came back. You say that if we stay here we will die. I don’t mind dying here in my home.” Such appeals notwithstanding, all of the refugees were quickly cleared from the school and put on a bus, which was playing loud Tamil songs. When the army entered Jaffna on 16 November, for the first time in more than six centuries the town stood empty.

After the event

In 2008, the displaced Muslims are still unable to return to their homes in the north. While a few families have taken a chance and made it back, the LTTE has refused to give a guarantee that no eviction will ever happen again. In contrast to the Muslim experience, even though Jaffna’s dispersed Tamil population was forbidden by the LTTE to return, less than a year after the exodus around 200,000 had already defiantly done so. Unable to prevent the return, the LTTE instead had to make allowances-albeit grudgingly-for a Tamil population upon whose support it depends. The different experience vis-a-vis the right of return for the two communities demonstrates the distinct positions of Tamils and Muslims within Tamil nationalism-one obviously the very centre; the other, equally obviously, the excluded.

There is another, extremely significant difference. There is not a single northern Muslim home where the larger story of the eviction as personal and social loss is not narrated. Eviction, its perpetrators and its impact are given public space. In contrast, Tamils in Jaffna and Colombo, living in fear of the LTTE and ‘informers’, do not talk about their experiences in the open. One man, Suresh, recalls that immediately after the exodus stories of the experience began pouring in from all over, particularly from Tamil returnees in Jaffna and refugees in Colombo. But very soon thereafter, these stories subsided. The exodus became just another smouldering ’secret’ within the Jaffna Tamil community.

Given the stark differences in the post-eviction experiences of the two communities, this researcher began to think of the research as divided between ‘indoor’ and ‘outdoor’ ethnography-contrasting hushed interviews with individual Tamils in private houses, versus discussions with groups of Muslims who talked openly while standing amidst dense refugee settlements. Understanding the secret histories that tie Tamils and Muslims together, along with understanding these crucial differences, are both key to why we need new visions of life for the minorities in Sri Lanka.

Meanwhile, neither of these events, two of the largest forced movements in Sri Lankan history, are discussed or remembered within southern Sri Lanka or larger Sri Lankan society. This continues to demonstrate the indifference of the Colombo government towards its Tamil and Muslims citizens alike. This indifference has translated into continuing brutality, as evidenced by the forced movement of Tamils and Muslims in eastern Sri Lanka back and forth to suit the political needs and showmanship of a government intent on winning a military war against the LTTE. There have been no lessons learnt.

(Writer/Researcher Sharika Thiranagama is the daughter of Rajini and Dayapala Thiranagama)

Comments (13)

Tigers Stress On Recognition of Tamil Sovereignty As Basis For Any Future Dialogue

by a Special Correspondent

Even as President Mahinda Rajapakse was addressing the 62 sessions of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York last week, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) had in a pre emptive move made a call to the UNGA to rein in the Government of Sri Lanka by calling for a halt in military operations.

The LTTE had stressed that the “recognition of Tamil sovereignty was the basis for any dialogue.” The Tigers in their statement had said “The Government of Sri Lanka must end its deceptions; halt its military oppression, ethnic cleansing, and serious human rights violations; accept the aspirations of the Tamil people; and come forward to find a resolution that is based on the right to self-determination of the Tamil people.”

While as widely speculated President Rajapakse in his speech was to bank on the All Party Representative Committee (APRC) as the panacea for the ethnic issue, the Tigers had dismissed the APRC exercise as one meant to fool the international community. “This tactic of appointing ‘APRCs’ and ‘Round Tables’ to resolve the national conflict is an established deceptive habit of successive governments of Sri Lanka,” the LTTE had said.

While emphasising that they were still ‘restraining themselves in the face of government military operations’ the Tigers had further said that “it is always the LTTE that keeps the doors wide open for peace talks.” The LTTE statement is significant in that it marks a significant shift in Tiger strategy.

Following is the full statement:

The delegation led by Sri Lanka’s President, Mahinda Rajapakse is gathered in New York, USA, to take part in the 62nd session of the UN General Assembly. This delegation, as in the past, will use this opportunity at the UNGA to discredit the Tamil struggle for self-determination as terrorism and mislead the international community to cover up Sri Lanka’s failed records on human rights, humanitarian issues, and peace process.

At the time when world leaders are assembling at the 62nd session of the UNSG to discuss international issues, the Political Wing of the LTTE wants to focus attention on issues related with the current conflict situation and the peace process. As the LTTE and Tamil people are denied a fair chance to interact directly with the International Community (IC), we choose to submit this statement.

(a) Sri Lanka and the peace process

Since elected to office, President Mahinda Rajapakse has been systematically weakening the IC-backed Cease-Fire Agreement (CFA) between the Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) and the LTTE.

It has blatantly ignored all the promises that were made at the Geneva talks.

Further, the GoSL has tried to isolate the LTTE, a party to the cease-fire and peace talks, from the IC and thus obstructed the Tamil people from directly interacting with the IC on their legitimate aspirations in a fair conflict resolution process.

GoSL has made schizophrenic public statements that ranged from, the intention to “wipe out the LTTE” and give a political solution to the Tamils, and to “weakening the LTTE” in order to “force” it to come to the negotiating table.

The appointment of the All Party Representative Committee (APRC) to come up with a constitutional framework for a resolution to the conflict is another classic example of its duplicity.

This tactic of appointing ‘APRCs’ and ‘Round Tables’ to resolve the national conflict are an established deceptive habit of successive governments of Sri Lanka. But some members of the international community had shown confidence in this latest APRC and have been assuring everyone that it would come up with a framework for the resolution of the conflict. This misplaced confidence has not brought any constructive outcome to date.

On the other hand, the leaders of the GoSL make regular toxic comments and victory parades on the execution of the military campaign. Cynically exploiting the international discourse on “terrorism,” the GoSL locally justifies a war against the Tamil nation.

The latest and most categorical evidence came at the speech given by the Defence Secretary, Gotabaya Rajapakse, in the presence of his brother, President Mahinda Rajapakse, in Trincomalee on September 14, which was nationally televised. He said,

“We cannot establish permanent peace in the country by winning only half or two third of the war against terrorism….. President Rajapakse cannot implement the desired political solution to the north and east conflict unless LTTE terrorism is defeated 100 percent.”

Two important facts can be gleaned from this statement that was clearly endorsed by the President himself. Firstly, that the GoSL intends to intensify the war in the north and secondly that the APRC was a fa‡ade to fool the international community.

Indeed less than a week after making this televised statement in Sinhala, the GoSL on the eve of its representation at the UN General Assembly has again paid lip service to the peace talks.

Genocidal war against Tamil people

The growing statistics of civilian casualties amply prove beyond doubt that this war conducted by the Sri Lankan armed forces is indeed a genocidal war against the Tamil people. Oppressive laws sanctioned by a majoritarian Sinhala Government are legitimising its brutality. The Emergency Regulations give cover and impunity for unlawful arrest, torture, killing, and disposal of bodies without investigations.

Human rights and humanitarian law violations: In the 21 months since President Rajapakse came to power in November 2005, 1974 Tamil civilians were killed by the Sri Lankan armed forces and its allied paramilitaries and 842 Tamil civilians were either arrested or abducted and then disappeared by the same forces. Among those killed were four popular Tamil Parliamentarians, Joseph Pararajasingham, Nadaraja Raviraj (both of whom were sitting MPs), A Chandra Nehru (a former MP) and V. Vigneswaran (an MP designate elected to replace the assassinated Pararajasingham).

Over 69 of those killed during this period were children under the age of 16. In addition to these killing of children, more than 150 civilians, among them many children, have sought safety in the Jaffna Human Rights Commission in fear of their life. Indeed the vast majority of the civilians who have been killed and disappeared in this period are the Tamils.

More than 500,000 people in the Jaffna peninsula are cut off from land access to the outside and are denied delivery of essential items by land and are kept in an open prison for its own military purpose by the GoSL. Despite repeated requests by the people of Jaffna and at the last Geneva talks by our side, the GoSL has not heeded to this request and has kept the A9 route closed.

Land grab: The occupation war started by the GoSL last year has forced hundreds of thousands of Tamil people from their land thus depriving them of livelihood. Many civilians were killed and disappeared in the process. The displaced were then forcefully resettled against their wishes in certain locations. Indeed the UN High Commission for Refugees announced that it was withdrawing from the resettlement involvement due to this flawed process. In Sampur and Muttur East, the GoSL confiscated lands belonging to the people by declaring them as High Security Zones and is implementing programmes to create new Sinhala settlements in these regions.

Media suppression: In order to obstruct information about its war on the civilians that is causing unimaginable hardship for the people, the GoSL is suppressing media freedom in many aspects. Those who operate despite such threats are murdered. Eleven journalists have been murdered since 2005 by the GoSL operated forces. The Uthayan daily from Jaffna, the voice of the most threatened people, is continuously operating under threat. Another journalist from the south who exposed corruption in weapon procurements of the GoSL has also come under death threat.

Labelling ‘terrorist’: Representatives of the international community, who have raised their voices on these horrendous violations of humanitarian norms, have been repeatedly targeted by the GoSL with the most vicious attacks. It is typical of the leaders of the GoSL to use the brush of “terrorist” and “LTTE sympathiser” on anyone who raises their voice for justice and decency in this island. Among those who have been painted thus are, UN Under Secretary for Humanitarian Affairs, John Holmes, UN Representative for Children Affected by Armed Conflict, Ambassador Allan Rock, and Australia’s Former Foreign Minister and current President of International Crisis Group, Gareth Evans. They have all been called by senior members of the GoSL as “White Tigers.”

(b) LTTE and the peace process

We strongly believe that the international community understands that the Tamil liberation struggle against oppression has been taken up according to international norms. And it cannot be compared to aimless, intolerant causes of violence: terrorism

Further, we expect the international community recognise that it is always the LTTE that keeps the doors wide open for peace talks. LTTE unilaterally declared a ceasefire in 2000, after recapturing many towns in Wanni and the major Sri Lankan military camp in Elephant Pass, thus paving the way for the ensuing peace efforts. Yet the then regime of President Kumaratunga did not come to the peace table until after testing its military strength in yet another military operation and facing further losses.

We again gave time and counsel to the new regime of President Rajapakse to take forward the peace process. But his regime ignored all the agreements reached at the table, and even refused to heed the humanitarian needs of the people.

Whereas the LTTE continued to respect and urge for a full implementation of the cease-fire agreement, the Rajapakse regime eventually embarked on its war of occupation. It started the Mawilaru attack on the pretext of humanitarian need despite the patience exercised by the LTTE.

This military campaign of Sri Lanka has continued ever since in the east and the north, under variously codenamed operations, while the LTTE has continued to restrain itself, confining only to defensive operations.

(c) Expectations of the Tamil people from the international community

In the context described above, we urge the international community:

1. To recognise the concept of the sovereignty of the Tamil people, and support the peace process in accordance with this principle.

2. To provide appropriate opportunities to the Tamil people to express their aspirations, as have been given to the people of East Timor and Kosovo.

The Government of Sri Lanka must end its deceptions; halt its military oppression, ethnic cleansing, and serious human rights violations; accept the aspirations of the Tamil people; and come forward to find a resolution that is based on the right to self-determination of the Tamil people. The IC must rein in the GoSL to bring it in line.

Comments (25)

JVP leader says elections should be held in the east

B. Muralidhar Reddy

‘It will encourage democracy, promote development and consolidate gains made against the LTTE’

The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) is of the firm view that the Mahinda Rajapaksa government in Sri Lanka should hold elections to the provincial council in the east as soon as possible, under the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, to consolidate the recent gains made by the military against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

In an interview to The Hindu, JVP leader Somawansa Amarasinghe said that though his party was opposed to the 13th Amendment, made as a follow up to the 1987 India-Sri Lanka Accord, it believed that elections in the east would encourage democracy and promote development.

“Our party has reservations about the India-Sri Lanka accord and the consequent 13th Amendment to the Constitution. However, since it is now part of the statute, we see no difficulty for the Rajapaksa government in holding elections to the local bodies as well as the provincial council in the east. Otherwise, the military advances in the east would not be useful,” Mr. Somawansa argued.

He said elections in the east would not only bring back democracy and equality, but also encourage people in the Wanni under the control of the LTTE to rise against the outfit and send the right signals for economic growth.

The JVP leader maintained that any attempt to impose a ‘federal system’ on Sri Lanka would not resolve the problems in the country as the national question in the island nation was not related to territory, but about democracy and equality.

“We believe efforts to resolve the national question should not violate the mandate of the people. It is the conviction of the JVP that the mandate of the people is to safeguard the status of Sri Lanka as a unitary state,” he said.

Mr. Somawansa conceded that there were certain obstacles in the way of free and fair elections in the east, particularly with the presence of certain armed groups, and maintained that the Government could overcome them by offering a general amnesty to all those who were ready to join the democratic mainstream.

The JVP leader said no government in the country in the last 25 years paid attention to the socio-economic problems of the people and the whole debate about the national question was lop-sided.

“We should not play around with the Constitution. All talk about a federal solution has no meaning. It is often not realised that more than 50 per cent of the Tamils in Sri Lanka live outside the so-called homeland of Tamils. What do they stand to gain by a federal set-up? In our view, it would only create more problems for the Tamils”.

“There are huge gaps in the development status of provinces. For instance, while the western province accounts for 50 per cent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the share of eastern province is mere 2.5 per cent. That is why we say the issue is not federalism but democracy and equality,” the JVP leader said.

Mr. Somawansa said his party chose to walk out of the All Parties Representative Conference, constituted by the President to evolve a national consensus on a resolution of the ethnic conflict, when it began its work without “defining the problem of what constituted national question and came forward with a draft for a federal solution.”

On the Mahinda Rajapaksa government, the JVP leader said that while the military gains in the east were a plus point, inflation, corruption and a jumbo size Cabinet imposed huge burdens on the people.

On India, Mr. Somawansa said that while the JVP believed that New Delhi had a role to play in helping Sri Lanka based on its sovereignty, the statements such as the one made by National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan that Colombo should only look to New Delhi for its defence needs would not be helpful.

[Courtesy: The Hindu]

Comments off