'India can make or break peace in Sri Lanka' - Prof Jayadeva
Uyangoda

Prof Jayadeva Uyangoda
|
Jayadeva Uyangoda, Professor and
Head, Department of Political Science and Public Policy, University of
Colombo and Founder-Director of the Centre for Policy Research and
Analysis, explains to Managing Editor Sheela Bhatt in an interview why
he thinks the ethnic conflict will take time to resolve, and the role
India can play.
'The LTTE is a unique case'
Q: When do you see the conflict ending in Sri Lanka?
A: There is no early solution to the Sri Lanka problem because, as I
said, LTTE has maximalist political agenda of regional autonomy and the
Sinhalese political class has a minimalist political agenda for regional
autonomy. This is the challenge that India, who is a player in the
region in a big way, should understand. I have a feeling that neither
India nor the international community understands the extreme layers of
complexity of Sri Lanka's ethnic conflict.
Q: What is it that India and the world community cannot understand?
A: Sri Lanka's complexity is something like this: you have a majority
ruling class which is not yet ready to work out the settlement that
would give equality to the ethnic minority of Sri Lanka. Second, they do
not, they cannot, acknowledge and accommodate the minimalist position
presented by even the non-LTTE Tamil groups. These old Tamil forces also
say that settlement of conflict requires enrichment and rearrangement of
regional autonomy that should go far beyond the 13th amendment of the
Sri Lankan Constitution that was imposed by the Indians in 1987.
Q: So what is the answer?
A: Any workable solution will require recognition that Tamils are a
distinct community and the North and East will require what we may call
asymmetrical autonomy. And that is not yet recognized in Sri Lanka. You
know, the most advanced Sinhalese politicians would say that when
provincial powers are given to the Northern region, where Tamils are in
a majority, and the Eastern region where Muslims and Tamils are
dominating, they should have equal powers as the rest of the areas in
the country. But that idea won't work. And the Sinhalese have not even
agreed to those equal powers.
In the last 20 years Indian federalism has come to recognize some
asymmetrical autonomy. Look at the North-east and Jammu and Kashmir,
India is redefining internal boundaries without any problems. The
Sinhalese political class is not yet ready for the radical
reconstitution of the State power structure. A final solution of Sri
Lanka's ethnic conflict requires reconstitution of the post-colonial
unitary State. I don't know whether it will be with the LTTE or without
them but even after 25 years of conflict the Sinhalese political class
have not come to that stage yet.
Q: How many more people will die before that understating comes?
A: That's the tragedy, the fundamental issue.
Many more people will have to die for the Sinhalese political class
to understand that Sri Lanka needs radical reconstitution of State
powers. Protracted ethnic conflict always requires a protracted peace
process. That's why perhaps, initially, one has to have an incomplete
and imperfect peace process. Some may call it negative peace. We need a
credible ceasefire agreement to begin with.
Q: How has violence changed your society?
A: Violence has become a part of Sri Lankan society. It's very
difficult to see how Sri Lanka can extricate itself from this culture of
violence. At the political, cultural levels we have become a violent
State. We are a highly militarized State. The counter State movements
like JVP and LTTE are equally violent. We have no moral qualms in using
violence.
We have a great level of individual violence in Sri Lanka.
Individuals have turned violence against themselves. There is a high
level of community violence. Unfortunately, we have internalized
violence.
Surprising, because Buddhism, the majority religion, is based on
non-violence.
We have Buddhism which has been highly politicised. There is a
contradiction between what is preached and what is practised. It's a
paradox of Sri Lanka. Every Sri Lankan is flabbergasted and intrigued by
the obvious dichotomy of compassion preached in our religion and extreme
violence that defines every day of Sinhalese life.
Q: What kind of a role does India have in Sri Lanka?
A: India can make or break peace in Sri Lanka. India is a part of Sri
Lanka's conflict as well as its solution. It's involved since 1980. I am
not only talking about the training of the LTTE by India. This conflict
is Sri Lanka's problem but it's solution will be a South Asian solution.
As I said earlier, the Tamil nationalist project is to get maximum
and extensive regional autonomy, more than the North-east provinces as
an alternative to a separate state. But the Sinhalese fear that the
moment you give regional autonomy to Tamils it will be a stepping stone
to separation. What it means is that Sinhalese want political
guarantees, while the Tamils and LTTE believe that no agreement will be
fully implemented by the Sinhalese political class. They quote past
experiences. The LTTE thinks that the armed struggle, military
equilibrium with Sri Lankan army and the strategic equilibrium with Sri
Lankan State will only guarantee negotiations and implementation of any
peace settlement. The LTTE thinks that political guarantee given within
Sri Lanka won't work, it has to come from outside. That political and
security guarantee can't come from US, Japan or France but from South
Asia.
In the case of the Mozambique peace agreement the guarantee came from
the South African region. India will have to be very careful in their
engagements in Sri Lanka.
There will be a lot of resistance among Sinhalese nationalist forces
against India's engagement again. India has the 1987 experience before
it that suggested that no solution can be imposed from outside. It has
to come from within, and India should facilitate the solution. The LTTE
is for normalization of its relations with India. Sri Lanka is also
watching carefully the developments in South India. Initially [when the
Congress led government was formed in New Delhi] many believed that
India will back military action against the Tigers, and now Sinhalese
nationalists are a little disappointed that it is not going to happen.
Q: In the fast changing global scenario, how long can the LTTE
strategy survive?
A: As far as I understand, the LTTE is not going to allow the Sri
Lankan State any regional or global military alliance to destroy what
they consider as achievements of the Tamil liberation struggle.
Eventually, the LTTE wants a political strategy to work for a Tamil
regional sub-state.
Q: Do you read more into US interests in the issue?
A: I don't think the US will back any military solution for the Sri
Lankan problem. It seems the US policy is now to back India in its
policy in Sri Lanka.
Q: How do you read Prabhakaran's current state of mind? Is he a
despot with a paranoid mind?
A: It's difficult to describe him. He is a man with a historical
sense.
He thinks that he is a person who can deliver political freedom to
the Tamil nation. He thinks that he can manipulate his military strength
and political strategies to get it. I think he is a great manipulator.
He is a very clever military and political strategist. I don't know
where or when or why he will fail. To say anything about Prabhakaran is
utterly controversial. It creates massive reaction. When I say anything
about Prabhakaran I have to think 100 times. Before I speak I have to
remember that I have to live in Colombo.
(Courtesy Rediff.)
|