The Sri Lankan Peace Talks and the ISGA Proposals

by M. Nadarajan, November 17, 2004

sangam.org/articles/view2/639.html

Newspapermen and many governments continue to give their views on the peace process, spouting out nonsense without, in most instances, any knowledge of what they are speaking about or the background to the problem. In order to make any meaningful comments, one should look at the past, the present and the future.

When Tamils refer to their aspirations, most people outside Tamil areas pretend not to know what these are, despite the fact that they had been explicitly spelt out at the Thimpu talks of 1985.  Some speak about preserving the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country.  That concern would be in order if separation takes place.  If a federal system within a united Sri Lanka with internal self-determination is to be explored, the question of preserving the country’s territorial integrity and sovereignty does not arise.  Do those who shed tears for such preservation think that the countries which have federal systems of government, such as the US, India, Canada and tens of others, do not have territorial integrity and sovereignty?

Anyone who knows the background of the national question should not be surprised that, under the circumstances that prevailed, Tamils took to arms.  The Tamils tried to obtain redress through democratic and non-violent methods, and signed pacts with Sinhalese governments.  Those governments unilaterally abrogated the signed pacts.  Not only did these attempts at accomodation fail, but Tamils were subject to several communal attacks and pogroms, resulting in death, suffering, and destruction of billions of dollars worth of property.  It was then that Tamils, as a last resort, gave their representatives an overwhelming mandate to ask for separation.  The Sinhalese governments changed the constitution twice.  Both times Tamil requests were denied and they did not take any part in the process.

The worst pogrom, in 1983, and the subsequent war resulted, as President Chandrika stated in a recent address to the United Nations, in as many as 1,200,000 Tamils leaving the island as refugees.  Ministry of Rehabilitation figures show that over a million men, women and children became internally displaced, many of them multiple times.  Hundreds of thousands continue to remain so.

Recently Chandrika made an open apology to Tamils for what was done to them by the then government in 1983.  However, it was under her stewardship as President and Commander- in- Chief of the armed forces, that the worst atrocities took place in pursuit of her “War For Peace” from 1995-2000.  These atrocities have been written about so many times by International human rights organizations.  The total number of deaths was estimated at around 50,000 for a number of years.  Then the standard estimate went up to 64,000, but the actual figure is much higher.  The Tigers have lost about 17,800 youth dead, the army must have lost about the same figure.  If you include Tamil and Sinhalese civilian men, women and children, the number of casualties would be closer to 100,000, of which about 38,000 are combatants and 62,000 are civilians.  The highest figures that I have seen referred to are by Prime Minister Ranil and LTTE political head S.P. Tamilselvan, both of who mentioned a figure of 80,000.  According to Amnesty International over 90 % of the civilian dead are Tamils.  Other atrocities, loss of livelihood and destruction of property also took place.

What should the Tamils get to be compensated for their losses?

It is easy for those who are not directly involved to say, “Go back to the negotiating table and negotiate.”  Negotiate what?  The LTTE has declared unilateral cease-fires at least twice.  They have tried to negotiate, saying they believe in peace.  There has to be something at the end of the tunnel, which they can sell to the Tamil people.

Since the cease-fire, the lives of Sinhalese have been rewarded with a peace dividend, but the Tamils have received hardly any such dividend.  Normalcy has not retuned to the life of Tamils.  Hundreds of thousands are still displaced and army patrols go past many times a day.   What was included in the CFA has not been implemented in full, nor have matters agreed during the several rounds of talks.

In order to understand the lack of trust between the Tamils and Sinhalese I would refer to an article by this writer titled “It is a Matter of Trust” which is in the archives of the Tamil Sangam website.

Tamils fulfill all definitions of a nation.  There are two nations in the island, the Sinhalese and the Tamils.  This must be accepted as a first step toward peace.  Both have their own language, religion, culture and background.  There has never been a Ceylonese or Sri Lankan nation.  Before the advent of the colonial powers, Sinhalese and Tamils had at various times ruled over different parts of the island, and even over the whole island.  Tamils who adopted Sinhalese names also ruled in different parts of the island.  At the time of the advent of the first colonial power there were three Kingdoms – the Kandyan Sinhalese Kingdom (ruled by a Tamil), a low country Sinhalese Kingdom, and a Tamil Kingdom in the NorthEast of the country. The much-quoted Cleghorn Minute of 1799 states this very clearly.  The Portuguese, the Dutch, and the British, till 1833, ruled the Kingdoms separately.

People think that discrimination came about only after independence and that under colonial rule the inhabitants of the island lived peacefully.  When a Sinhalese – Muslim riot took place in 1915 and the British imprisoned some Sinhalese leaders, a British educated Tamil, Sir P. Arunasalam, braved the U-boat infested seas to go to Whitehall and obtained their release.  On his return he was hailed as a national hero and Sinhalese leaders stood in the place of horses and pulled his carriage.  Sir Arunasalam was a founder and first President of the Ceylon National Congress.  In 1921 the British introduced an electoral system not based territorial basis, but on a communal basis – the first open instance of divide and rule!  There was a seat reserved for an “educated Ceylonese.” The Sinhalese promised that the seat would be earmarked for Sir Arunasalam.  At the last minute they changed their mind and nominated a Sinhalese – the first open act of discrimination.  Sir Arunasalam and his brother Sir P. Ramanathan were upset and left the Congress to form the Ceylon Tamil League.

In the Legislative Council Mr. D.S Senanayaka was the Minister of Agriculture.  He set about to change the demography of the Eastern province and brought in hordes of Sinhalese and settled them with state-aided colonization in large tracts of government land, and even on land belonging to Tamils and Muslims  who were driven away.  A major river was dammed and irrigation provided at government expense.  The result was that the percentage of Sinhalese in the Eastern province rose from a little over 4% in1924, to a little over 9% in 1947, a year before independence.

D.S. Senanayaka became the first Prime Minister of independent Ceylon, after having given his word of honor to Tamils that they would be treated fairly.  Successive Sinhalese majority governments continued the colonization process to such an extent that today Sinhalese claim to be almost one third of the Eastern Province and have started speaking of it as not part of the Tamil homeland.  Several pacts were signed with different governments tacitly accepting the East as part of the Tamil homeland, and it is explicitly stated so in the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987.  If you want to read more about this, I would recommend you visit the archives of the Ilankai Tamil Sangam website where an article titled “Fait Accompli ” by this writer is posted.

Now some Sinhalese are speaking of the de-merger of the North from the East and the holding of a referendum only in the erstwhile Eastern province to find out if the East wants to de-merge from the North, without also giving a similar choice to those in the North.  Sinhalese think that they could persuade the Muslims, who speak Tamil, and are about 35 or so percent of the East, to join them in a vote for a de-merger.  The renegade Col. Karuna’s defection, induced or otherwise by government forces, has also thrown a new spanner in the wheel.  Tamil blood is being split un-necessarily without any direct Sinhalese hand in it.

While the CFA provides for the disarming of paramilitary forces working alongside the army or their redeployment outside the NorthEast, this requirement of the CFA is not being observed.

When the British left the island, based on guarantees given by Sinhalese leaders, they expected fair play and justice to minorities.  The constitution instituted at independence had clauses that gave some protection to minorities, providing a second chamber, and appeals to the British Privy Council.

Soon after independence minorities found that they were at the mercy of rapacious majority Sinhalese who tried to dominate and dictate to minorities.  The 1948 United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights was ignored.  One of the first acts of Parliament was to disenfranchise almost a million upcountry Tamils brought in from India from around 1833 to 1937 to work on the plantations.  Almost all of them had lived in the country for generations and had voting rights.  Tamils lost almost 40% of their representation in Parliament at one stroke.  Then followed discrimination against minorities in every sphere of life including education, employment, and development of their areas.  Discrimination was done with impunity based on majoritarian numbers.  Sinhalese believed that they were the chosen race and that others are there at their sufferance.   A Sinhala flag (with 90% of its size dominated by the Sinhala lion) and a Sinhala national Anthem were introduced.  In 1956 Sinhalese was made the only official language of the country.  Non-violent opposition to this change led to anti-Tamil riots.  In 1970 by the introduction of standardization of marks Tamil Students had to get substantially more marks than Sinhalese to enter Universities.

In 1972 a new constitution was passed by using the ruse of the Parliament constituting a constitution assembly, using the power of numbers, and ignoring Tamil objections.  Ceylon was renamed Sri Lanka, declared a republic, sections of the constitution protecting minorities were removed and the second chamber, and appeals to the Privy Council were abolished.  Pride of place was given to Buddhism, virtually making it a state religion.   The 1966 United Nations’ Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was ignored.

In 1978 a new Constitution was passed, the principal feature of which was the introduction of an Executive Presidency and a system of proportional representation at elections.  The primacy given to Buddhism was further entrenched.  More anti Tamil riots followed the passing of this Constitution.

There have been several subsequent amendments, one of which is supposed to make Tamil an official language, following the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord.  The section now reads “Sinhalese shall be the official language.  Tamil will also be an official language” instead of saying Sinhalese and Tamil shall be official languages.  What matters is not what the legislation says, but what the practice is.  Even after this change was made in 1987 in the aftermath of the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord, Tamils, including members of Parliament, continue to receive many communications in Sinhalese.  If something is in the law and is not implemented, the redress is to go to courts and spend a lot of time and money.

If this problem had been solved on the basis of the 1957 Bandaranaike–Chelvanayagam and subsequent pacts, all the death and devastation that has taken place since, could have been avoided.

After years of fighting, during which the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the 1981 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, and the 1992 Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic Religious and Linguistic Minorities, all of which were not observed, confirmed by statements made by Chandrika herself during the run-up to the Presidential election of 1994, which included “Peace at any cost,” the LTTE declared a unilateral cease-fire which was reciprocated.  However the subsequent talks ended in failure.

For the second time, based on statements made in the run-up to the general election of 2001 by Ranil Wickramasinghe, the LTTE again declared a unilateral ceasefire upon his election and the government reciprocated.   A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed with the help of the moderator, Norway.  This MOU was based on equality between both sides, and pn maintaining that balance of power.

As on the previous occasion, the LTTE maintained that their most important desire was to bring normalcy to the lives of Tamils.  Unfortunately, several matters referred to in the MOU and agreements reached during the talks, were not implemented and the LTTE suspended talks in April of 2003.  They continue to reiterate their desire for peace, and normalcy in the lives of Tamils.

After the talks were suspended, the government submitted three proposals, the first two of which were not acceptable to the LTTE.  There was no response to the third one.  In the meantime, LTTE personnel visited several countries, examined the structures of other governments, spoke to constitutional experts and, after a meeting of International and Tamil legal experts, submitted the Interim Self Government Authority proposals (ISGA) for consideration by the government. .

From the time of the Thimpu talks of 1985 Tamils have maintained that they would give up the demand for separation if Tamil aspirations were met.

The ISGA proposals have spelt out, for the first time what the interim arrangements should be within a single country, pending a final settlement.  The UNF government had eventually agreed to commence discussions on the ISGA proposals and the LTTE for its part had said that they were prepared to consider amendments during discussions,

Interim administration is nothing new.  A final settlement has been discussed since 1956 and could not be agreed on.  In order to reach agreement certain basic principles have to be agreed on.  If the governments insist on taking a majoritarian attitude, the national question will never be solved, repeat never.

Following the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord President Jayawardena agreed to set up an Interim Council of 12 of which two would be Sinhalese, two Muslims and 8 Tamils, two of which were to be from the TULF which now translates to TNA.  This was not implemented because one of the choices for the Council was not acceptable to President Jayawardena.

President Premadasa said he would give ELLAM (meaning everything) but not Eelam.  President Chandrika offered an interim administration during her first round of talks and told a magazine that it could be given for ten years.  Prime Minister Ranil also offered to give the LTTE an interim administration.

Even after the signing of the MOU there has been recruitment for the armed forces and importation of arms.  This will eventually create an imbalance between the two signatories.  The latest budget proposals for next year show an increase in the proposed expenditure for defense.

Ex-Prime Minister Ranil made arrangements to sign pacts and defense agreements with other countries and spoke of that as a safety net for the Sinhalese.  President Chandrika is also pursuing the same course.

Ranil has offered support to the President if she commences peace talks on the basis of the ISGA proposals.  This is the first time that a major party in the opposition has offered support to a government on this issue.

It is more than a year since the ISGA proposals were submitted.  A few days after they were submitted the President dissolved Parliament and, following elections, her coalition formed a minority government.  Statements made by her and her ministers make it look as if they are for peace.  However, her statements change from day to day and depend on the audience.  She tells what she thinks her audience of the moment would like to hear.  Her Marxist coalition partners have explicitly said that they were opposed to any negotiations.  They seem to want to continue fighting

Actions speak better than words.  The President has appointed a Strategic Planning Committee to evaluate defense mechanisms in the NorthEast and make recommendations to rectify shortcomings.  Indian army and navy chiefs visited Sri Lanka and reported on the defense situation.  She has visited New Delhi and arranged to sign a new defense pact.

The President has summoned an all-party conference of all political parties and all religious groups to a National Advisory for Peace to discuss peace and advise her.  She is not naïve enough to think that anything will come out of it.  There will be various opinions expressed, with no conclusions.  This is one way of delaying the issue.  The Constitution is being blamed for the inability to do things they want to do to resolve the national question.  In this connection I would recommend those interested to read my article titled “It’s the Constitution Stupid” posted on the Ilankai Tamil Sangam website.  If the Constitution does not permit a desired outcome, then, for goodness sakes change the Constitution.

Chandrika wanted to talk about the final settlement first, knowing fully well, that after 48 years it had not been possible to arrive at a solution.  How many more years will it take?  Till that time there will be no normalcy in the lives of the Tamil people and they will continue to suffer.  The situation would be the same if one adopted her suggestion that the final settlement and interim arrangement be discussed concurrently.

I quote some of the recent statements from the government side.  “The government is committed to peace through dialogue, not war.”  “The government will continue to pursue a lasting solution based on equality, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.”  ” The government believes in just peace that would serve all communities equally.”   During her speech to the UN the President said, “The conflict was engendered by the inability of our nation at the moment of decolonization 56 years ago to weld together the separate aspirations of the three main communities to live freely and in dignity.”   She spoke eloquently about the question of equal treatment of citizens and how equality and freedom could address the conflict.  She also spoke about democratic pluralism and human rights.  The government spokesman called on the LTTE to resume negotiations on International Peace Day and said that both sides should show flexibility.  The LTTE have said that they are prepared to give up the demand for a separate state if Tamil aspirations are met.  What flexibility has the government shown?  Are these statements serious or just humbug?  If they are serious, the problem can be solved soon.

The President wanted to impress on the US administration that they should use pressure on the LTTE to accept the government’s solution.  Mr. Richard Armitage made a statement asking the LTTE to renounce terror and return to the negotiating table.  The LTTE have been saying repeatedly that they want peace and want to continue negotiating, based on the ISGA proposals first.  The government could bring up any suggestions they have during negotiations.  Once an Interim administration is in place, the final settlement can be negotiated.

Mr. Armitage spoke about the 64,000 deaths as if it was the LTTE that caused them.  Figures given earlier give the true picture.  One should not rely on what Kadirgamar tells them.  Terrorists are not born, but made by circumstances, and they would become good citizens if those causes were removed.  There should be no confusion between freedom fighters and real terrorists.  We can name any number of people who are friends of America who were at one time called terrorists.

Would Mr. Armitage and his ilk stand up and truthfully say that a section of the population of any country need not be treated as equal to others?  Those who call for laying down of arms must realize that it is only because of the possession of arms by the LTTE that the government is talking to them.

All citizens must be treated as equals in every respect.  No religion should be given preferential treatment.  The country should be secular.  Administration in the Regions should be in the hands of the people of that region and there should be power sharing at the center.  We do not have to tell Mr. Armitage or Tony Blair or others from countries with Federal constitutions how these have to be implemented.  Those westerners who were involved in the drawing up of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina or that of Montenegro and Serbia, know how this should be done.  What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

An expert of federal systems from Canada has said that there are 24 types of federal government.  The countries mentioned in the previous paragraph are recent examples of how these should work. The USA and Canada are examples of how these problems were solved in earlier centuries.

People who have perhaps not read the ISGA proposals, or do not understand the meaning of what is said in them have rushed to judgments such as “They are a stepping stone to separation,” “They go way beyond what was agreed in the final solution as envisaged in Oslo,” “They are way beyond what is found in any federal system anywhere in the world.”  This is absolute nonsense.

There was no agreement of what the final settlement would be in Oslo.  As mentioned in the preceding paragraph there are several systems of federalism including con-federalism.  Internal self-determination was not defined.

There should be no talk of devolution, since that would mean powers given to a lower body from a higher one, which the higher body could take back at will.  It is surprising that people who come from countries such as Mr. Armitage of the USA, which have federal systems, have also exhibited their ignorance.  There is no need to rewrite what has been posted on websites already.  One Arvalan wrote an article titled “ISGA: Legitimate, Practical & with Precedence” and this writer wrote one titled “World-wide Comments on the ISGA Proposals” both of which were posted on the Tamil Sangam website and are available in the archives section.

It is absurd to expect the LTTE and Tamils, after what they have lost and gone through, to accept any half-baked solutions.  If a constitution based on matters discussed in the previous paragraphs is installed, and its implementation guaranteed by the UN and the important major powers including the regional power India, there is no doubt that the problem would be solved.

Nothing is solved unless it is solved right.

Comments are disabled on this page.