|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 31 August 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Two nations, one country: can both communities co-habit? Sixth Sense by Raj Gonsalkorale
As the saying goes, if we all deserve what we get, then the quality of what we get has to reflect our own values and our outlook to life. We often complain about our politicians, but we keep on electing representatives who seem to have gone from bad to worse over the years. And, to make matters worse, while one government blames the other, we have regularly increased the number of representatives to different political establishments, giving them huge benefits like super luxury motor vehicles, duty free cars, and a string of various allowances eventhough, as the pithy Sinhala saying goes, we do not even have finger nails to scratch our rear. Our debt levels have sky rocketed, and we are living beyond our means as we have never done before and we continue to entrust our future to politicians who have not added any value or provided any returns on the investment the country has made on them. Yet, in addition to the exponential increase in the number of politicians in various assemblies, we have continuously increased our cabinet, often with ministers who have not been able to shed their sub standard ratings, and questionable integrity. Be that as it may, we do need to ask ourselves whether it is right to point our fingers entirely in the direction of these opportunists, who have done nothing but grabbed the opportunities that have come their way? We must ask why we should not point fingers at ourselves, and ask whether at least some of us would do differently if we were in similar situations. Shouldn't we therefore, individually and collectively take even a larger share of the blame for allowing these things to happen? Or, perhaps knowing what we are, and our own values, would it be wrong to say that we deserve what we have got? If not, how could one explain our implicit connivance in the denting of our civil society? Armed conflict Today, our sub standard collective, principally the politicians of the South as well as elected politicians of the North, are witnessing the disintegration of the nation State as we have known it for sometime, and instead of addressing the issues that have been responsible for this disintegration, we are negotiating the secessionist demands of a group of power hungry armed cadres, who, as it is becoming increasingly apparent, do not seem to be content with anything but a State within State political outcome to the armed conflict they have been engaged in for more than 20 years. Here again, shouldn't we ask whether we deserve what we have got? Are we in a position to blame the LTTE for grabbing the opportunities that have come their way? Is it wrong for them to demand the maximum when they are in a position to do so, when we are at our weakest? Machiavelli would have said the LTTE are fools if they do not do what they are doing. If we had acted to strengthen civil society, where the rights of every individual in this country were recognised for their inherent worth, not their ethnicity, and if we had truly recognised the equality of all citizens, their right to security, their right to dignity and their right to opportunities, we would not have had an LTTE to contend with, and we would not have had a war that has drained us so severely to leave us in the parlous economic situation we are in today. Economic situation All this may be said to be in the past, considering we have reached the situation we are in today because we had not acted in the manner described over so many years. The question that needs to be asked today therefore is, whether we have at least recognised now, that we are equals, and that one group of citizens should not have any preference over another on account of ones ethnicity. Have we moved away from the ideals of Sinhala hegemony? Can we honestly tell ourselves and our children that Sri Lanka belongs to all, and it is not a Sinhala nation? Would our Buddhist prelates accept this and tell this to the Nation? They have every right not to do so and they may take refuge in their belief, some might say a belief based on myth rather than fact, about a pronouncement said to have been made by Lord Buddha that his Dhamma will survive, thrive and be protected by the Sinhala people, and therefore this is a Sinhala, Buddhist Nation. The ultra Sinhala nationalists also have the right to toe this line and take their followers down this path. They must all remember however that their claims could then be mirrored by another set of counter claims, namely the historical homeland theory promoted by the LTTE and other Tamil nationalists. This is the risk and the responsibility that proponents of a Sri Lanka/Sinhala nation must take and face the consequences. One could always have an endless debate over historical theories and try to live the present bathed in the glory of the past, but both sides of the divide has to remember and must wake to the fact that contemporary reality requires a futuristic, visionary approach that meets our needs today rather than what might have existed yesterday. Whatever the historical perspectives are, the more moderate Tamils, driven by the insecurity and indignity they have had to face in contemporary Sri Lanka, are bound to take refuge in the factual situation that exists today, that is the existence of a contemporary Tamil homeland in the North, which fact is under no doubt, and in the East, a more contestable homeland due to the equal mix of Sinhala and Muslim people in that region. If Sri Lanka and all its citizens are to move away from a homeland concept, historical or contemporary, this will have to apply equally to a Sinhala homeland as well as a Tamil homeland. If we are not prepared to shed this theory and accept that there are no homelands, Sinhala or Tamil, and the entire country is the homeland of all, with no ethnic group having any more rights than a another group, we have no other option but to give in to LTTE and accede to their demand to give them a political unit with identical powers to a separate State. Sinhala hegemony can continue to thrive then in the Sinhala homeland, as it does now, and Tamil hegemony can thrive in their homeland. If the communities feel that they have reached the position of oil and water, never be able to mix and form any kind of homogeneity, there is no option, but to divide on an ethnic basis. Best brains Our political and religious leaders, principally our Buddhist clergy, as well as Tamil political and community leaders, must confront this reality and convey their position to the country. If they wish to move forward as one Nation, the best brains in the country could begin consultations with the people, political as well as non political organizations and commence a process to strengthen civil society and arrive at a political situation which does not require the creation of a political unit as envisaged and demanded by the LTTE. They can also begin a process to develop a new Constitution that reflects this new thinking, and enshrine institutions that safeguard the rights of minorities in all parts of the country, not just in the North and the East. If they do not wish to take this direction and wish to continue the belief in a Sinhala homeland and Sinhala supremacy, as well as a Tamil homeland and Tamil supremacy in their homeland, then the Sinhala people might as well accept the reciprocal right of the Tamils, and the LTTE, to claim their own homeland, and negotiate a political solution on this basis. The sooner this is done, the better and less acrimonious it will be for the two ethnic groups and the future of a new Sri Lanka, comprising two nations, one country. If this concept is to be the basis of a political solution to the ethnic conflict, Tamil people in particular will have to remember that there will be two classes of Tamils, some with more rights than others, assuming that the Sinhala Nation, where a majority of Tamils live today, will continue to claim their superiority in their homeland. One has to question the worth and longevity of this solution and wonder whether it is the beginning of another problem. The long term, sustainable solution will arise from a change of attitudes and a change in thinking about Sinhala supremacy, and acceptance of equal ownership of this country by all ethnic groups. Till then, it is unlikely that there will be a solution to the ethnic conflict, and it is even more unlikely that meeting the demands made by the LTTE will provide a solution for the long suffering Tamils in Sri Lanka. Devolution Several surveys done recently have indicated the willingness of a majority of citizens, both Sinhala and Tamil, to have a negotiated political solution. What still divides the two communities is the concept of the solution, with a majority of Tamils indicating their preference for a political unit with extensive devolution, and the Sinhala majority probably not yet convinced about the extent of devolution and wishing for greater central authority over the entire country, with devolution limited to administrative issues. There is obviously a big gap between the wishes of the Tamils, which they believe arises from their right and the wishes of the Sinhala people, which they believe arises from their generosity towards the Tamils. More than any other reason, it is this condescending attitude of the Sinhala people which still arouses the suspicions amongst the Tamils, and their ire, and which makes any real homogeneity very difficult, if not impossible. The real solution is therefore based on a change of attitudes. Whether both communities are willing and are able to shed centuries of ingrained attitudes, prejudices and their suspicions, is the question and the challenge for both. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
