|
|
|
| Sunday, 30 April 2006 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Future Scenarios for War or Peace in Sri Lanka by Kumar Rupesinghe The international context Recently I was examining the research on major armed conflicts around the world. What struck me was the number of deadly conflicts which have significantly dropped since a decade ago. The SIPRI year book which monitors armed conflicts around the world recorded over 32 major armed conflicts about two decades ago. However, by the year 2004 armed conflict have dropped to almost half the number, recording 17 armed conflicts around the world. Another important factor is that the reality of the world has significantly changed with September 11 where a global coalition against terrorism has created conditions for more stringent measures being taken against guerrilla movements who espouse terrorism as a principled means of resolving political disputes. Another reason is that globalization and economic development in their own countries and compelled movements to reconsider strategies of armed struggle. The Sri Lankan context It is in the above context that we have to examine whether the deadly conflict in Sri Lanka will continue till the year 2010. If the Sri Lankan conflict continues to the year 2010 then Sri Lanka will slip way behind other countries in Asia who aspire to achieve growth rates of between 10-12 per cent in the years to come whilst ours remain around 5%. To answer the question as to whether the Sri Lankan conflict will go beyond the year 2010 I will examine three future scenarios which are likely to evolve in the future. Naturally scenario building cannot be a perfect tool in forecasting future trends but scenario building could possibly delineate possible contours as to what is likely to happen. I have been compelled to make this analysis due to the fact that the Geneva talks has been postponed and both parties have not lived up to their obligations to quell the violence. The LTTE has been roundly condemned by the International Community and others regarding the massive reaction by violence and claymore mine attacks on the armed forces and the attack on the Commander in Chief of the armed forces by a suicide bomber. This has been accompanied by the LTTE being banned in Canada and threats of further steps to be taken by the European Union. The LTTE on the other hand has protested at the killing of one of their leading supporters in Trincomalee, Wigneswaran, killings of LTTE cadres by armed groups in government controlled and uncontrolled areas. Further the violence created by the bomb blast in the vegetable market in Trincomalee where Sinhalese mobs attacked Tamil civilians and shops causing the death of Tamils and damage to their properties. Another significant aspect to be noted is that both sides have been rearming their armed forces exponentially. With regards the Sri Lankan Armed Forces, the new commander Sarath Fonseka asked in January this year for a three months time period to replenish its depleted arms and equipment and called for a major reorganization of the military and intelligence units. In the budget this year the GoSL allocated Rs. 96 million for defense expenditure which constitutes a 30% increase in the defense budget. The LTTE on the other hand has stated in their Martyrs day speech last November that they would be preparing for struggle in the year 2006 claiming that they had little faith in the political leadership in the South.. After Rajapaksa won the LTTE made a positive statement saying that they would give the Mahinda Presidency a chance. Further the LTTE has been collecting large sums of money within the Diaspora claiming that the collection of funds was to pursue the final war. Funds collected have been as much as $2000 -5000 from each family, $10,000 to $100000 from business houses and $100000- 1 million a year from Hindu temples. If we calculate the funds collected for the war effort it is likely to exceed $ billion which is higher than the amount allocated in the Sri Lankan budget for this year. The three scenarios that I would like to pursue are the following. * Low intensity warfare and covert operations conducted by both sides sometimes through a proxy war. * Limited strike by the LTTE to renegotiate with the GoSL based on a new balance of power. * All out warfare by both sides Low intensity warfare Low intensity war or proxy war has been the situation which has governed the situation since the CFA was signed. An analysis of the CFA shows that since the signing of the CFA there has been over 850 killings particularly in the North and the East. The killings in the first two years was a result of political killings and assassinations by the LTTE on intelligence officers of the state, individuals from other political parties apposed to the LTTE. Subsequently in the next two years we see a dramatic rise in killings with the advent of the Karuna faction where killings have increased to over 650. Over 250 LTTE cadres have been killed particularly in Batticaloa. A marked feature of these killings is that over a third of those killed have been civilians. Although the parties have demonstrated that they can control the violence the spate of killings after Geneva demonstrates clearly that both sides have not been able to abide by the agreements reached. Can low intensity violence continue ad infinitum? Some may argue that a now war no peace situation is better than all out war But the question to be posed is whether the low intensity war is a sequel to a limited war or a full scale war. Limited war This scenario suggests that the LTTE would be preparing for a limited strike with the intention of capturing the Jaffna Peninsula and Trincomalee. The argument for a limited strike is as follows. With regards the CFA it reflected the balance of forces at that time where the line of control was drawn in favor of the LTTE. However the line of control is not more than 10% of the land mass in the country. This line of control does not enable the LTTE to control the Jaffna Peninsula and Trincomalee. A limited strike to achieve these objects would shift the balance of power further and enable them to enter negotiations on a stronger footing. In this scenario of a limited war it is likely that the war would once again reach Colombo where considerable damage would be inflicted on the economic assets of the country.I would argue that a limited war could eventually lead to a total war. If we analyze the breakdown of negotiations during the Chandrika Kumaratunge -LTTE negotiations period the break down and loss of confidence in the negotiations process led the LTTE to strike at a naval boat hoping that this would be a limited signal to the Government to hasten confidence building measures and come back to the negotiations table. But what happened was that the President then declared total war against the LTTE through the war for peace strategy. In the eventuality of a limited war the GoSL would make a temporary retreat from Jaffna but would reorganize itself nationally and internationally to challenge the LTTE. Total War Total war is of course unthinkable. It is unthinkable because it will destroy hopes of an economically strong Sri Lanka and generations of our future children will suffer. The weapons capability of the two sides is enormous and deadly weapons will be deployed by both sides. If we look at the experience of the war in the past in it will be a conventional war, an air war, a war of the sea and a guerilla war. Currently the strength of the army is around 150000 and it will be increased by another 50000. It is reported that the Secretary for Defense has stated that the war can be won with the support of Karuna. In this scenario Koruna will be provided with a battalion and will engage the LTTE in the Wanni. Another recent article in the observer The forthcoming elections in Tamil Nadu may shift the balance where there would also be large scale protests in favor of the LTTE in South India. The Government would try to develop an international coalition against terrorism. Those who advocate war suggest that the USA may deploy a warship on the seas of Sri Lanka to destroy Killinochi. The LTTE on the other hand will concentrate its forces in the North and in particular to capture the Jaffna peninsula holding 40000 troops hostage. It will also try to capture the naval base in Trincomalee combined with sustained suicide bomb attacks in Colombo with the intention of crippling the economy. The consequences of such a war are immeasurable. Given the sophistication of weapons over ten thousand casualties will be bourn by both sides. There will be a large scale refugee exodus to India and elsewhere. The economy will be in ruins, with the first casualty being the tourist industry which may be reduced to less than one hundred thousand as compared to six hundred thousand this year. The export industry will be affected with insurance premiums on the rise. There will be a flight of foreign capitol and an all time low in the stock exchange. The political crisis will lead to new coalitions and arrangements. Preventing war Can such a war be prevented? It is my contention that in modern wars there are no winners but all sides are losers. The USA an exponent of military realism may in fact say that their war in Afghanistan was a winner but this is in the short term and not in the long term. Today the Taliban is reorganizing itself. The USA may claim that they won in Iraq by destroying the regime of Saddam Hussain but the verdict is still uncertain and it is likely that the USA will be bogged down for years to come. A war in Iran may again have unforeseen consequences. What military realism has done is to not only overstretch the military arm of the USA but has created conditions for widespread insurgent movement and protest in the entire Middle East. Can the war be won in Sri Lanka? The realists in Sri Lanka think so. They want Killinochi to be bombed and the LTTE destroyed. They want to abrogate the CFA and resume hostilities. I beg to differ with them. These ideologues of war have not proved their realist theories in the theatre of war. The realist paradigm was tested during the war for peace period and it miserably failed. It is precisely because both sides could not win that the CFA was signed and today endorsed by all subsequent governments. Therefore the only logical step to be taken is to strengthen the CFA and work towards a negotiated solution. It is imperative that Geneva 2 happens soon. The problems associated with the transport of LTTE cadres to the North can be resolved. The President has called for a cessation of hostilities and the aerial and naval bombardments have stopped. I understand that the LTTE will reciprocate with a similar decision to stop violence. All this has been possible through negotiations and diplomacy and this diplomacy as averted a serious resort to war. An atmosphere has to be created where acts of violence by other armed groups has to be prevented. There are parties or third forces who may wish to precipitate war. Extreme vigilance must prevail. The challenge facing both sides is to implement the decisions taken in Geneva. It is then that an atmosphere of tranquillity could prevail to address the core issues facing the country. I believe that it is political will and determination to stay the course
that will save the country from another calamity. The primary responsibility
for war prevention is with the parties and the political will to negotiate a
solution. But it is time that ordinary citizens of this country who
overwhelmingly want to peace to demonstrate their opposition to war in every
way possible. |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
| Produced by Lake House |
