|
|
|
  |
| Sunday, 7 November 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Editorial |  |
| News Business Features Security
|
Please forward your comments to the
Editor, Sunday Observer. E-mail: [email protected] Snail mail : Sunday Observer, 35, D.R.Wijewardana Mawatha, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Telephone : 94 11 2429239 / 2331181 Fax : 94 11 2429230 Clarity of opinion vital for consensus Media reports of news pertaining to the peace process are getting increasingly confusing. Whether this is due to the confusion in the minds of the parties involved or due to deliberately fed misinformation is hard to tell. May be it is a mixture of both. An intractable conflict like ours necessarily breed diverse and opposing views. As interests of specific groups and strata in society are at stake there is a tendency for various stakeholders to dogmatically cling on to one's own views. There is little soul-searching. They are not interested to find out whether some of these strongly held views had become anachronistic with times or whether there are practical means of realising one's objectives through dialogue and consensus. The need for consensus is universally accepted, though some are skeptical about its possibilities. One prerequisite for consensus, however, is clarity of opinion. At present it is hard even to define the positions of the key players. If one is to move towards consensus the different and differing views should be identified clearly. We make an attempt below to identify them. The Government is ready to seek a negotiated solution based on a federal structure for a United Sri Lanka. Thus it implicitly accepts the right of the Sri Lankan Tamils for internal self-determination. It is also ready to start negotiations with the LTTE on the basis of the latter's ISGA proposals. It has its own proposals for an interim administration. It believes that the interim solution should be linked with the final solution. In other words, the interim solution is a step in a process that would culminate with a final solution. The LTTE is ready for a negotiated solution based on a federal structure within Sri Lanka. It however, insists that the negotiations should begin on the basis of its ISGA proposals. It is ready to discuss alternative proposals after the negotiations have started. It also says that if attempts at winning internal self-determination fail they would opt for external self-determination, i.e. secession. The JVP says power should be decentralized but not devolved. It is for a unitary Sri Lanka. It is against the ISGA proposals but is not against a negotiated settlement. Further, it says that it will go along with a solution agreed by all. The UNP is for a solution based on a federal structure and thus accepts internal self-determination of the Sri Lankan Tamils. It wants the government to start negotiations with the LTTE based on ISGA proposals. It is obvious that there is near consensus on negotiating with the LTTE. There does not seem to be a strong objection among the majority against beginning the negotiations on the basis of the ISGA. Since negotiation is a process of compromise or give and take, it is clear that alternative proposals to the ISGA could be laid at the negotiating table. As the Ceasefire Agreement stipulates the negotiations would have to proceed towards a final solution. The preamble to the Ceasefire Agreement says "Bringing an end to the hostilities is also seen by the Parties as a means of establishing a positive atmosphere in which further steps towards negotiations on a lasting solution can be taken". There seems to be some confusion regarding whether there is an Oslo Declaration or not. There is actually no Oslo Declaration. The parties to the conflict, however, agreed at the Oslo session to seek a solution based on a federal structure. This was stated in the statement issued by the Royal Norwegian government after the Oslo session of the peace talks. Since both parties did not contradict the statement it could be assumed that both of them agreed to seek a solution based on a federal structure. Neither the politicians nor the media should confuse the issues. It is better if all contribute to make matters clearer through further dialogue. The National Advisory Council for Peace and Reconciliation could help much in that endeavour. |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security | Produced by Lake House |
