Mahinda promises undivided state, honourable peace
From S Murari, Chennai
Chennai, 12 January, (Asiantribune.com):
President Mahinda Rajapaksa, the only Sri Lankan leader who has brought the decades-long civil war to an end but who is still to win peace, has promised an honourable settlement with the alienated Tamils, but within a united State.
Mr Rajapaksa, who is seeking a second term two years ahead of his term to cash in on the victory over the Tamil Tigers who fought for an independent Eelam for nearly three decades, has said in his 70-page election manifesto:" After several decades, we are new able to function as one country under one law. At this Presidential election campaign, I have decided to place my views frankly before the country so that we can engage in an open and intellectual discourse regarding a new Constitution".
He,however, made it clear that the 13th amendment, an offshoot of the 1987 Indo-Sri Lanka agreement which led to the creation of provincial councils not only in the embattled north and east, but also in the south, is now an "intrinsic part of the Constitution" and has come to stay.
He said:" I am determined to think afresh and to find a new solution to the crisis in the North and the East. Having considered all the pros and cons of the steps taken in the past on this issue, I would like to consider an undivided state, honorable peace and a majority consensus".
He said "rather than imposing a solution from above, I have sought to arrive at a solution through discussion and dialogue with political parties, civil society organizations and the people themselves. It is extremely difficult to arrive at consensus in a conflict rife with disillusionment, divisions, individual views and blood shed. However we have already laid the foundation to achieve consensus. While I agree that everyone has the right to his or her opinion it is my contention that we need to arrive at consensus on the facts. It is this wide national consensus that is required for national cohabitation".
This is in contrast to the general promise made by his rival and former army commander Sarath Fonseka that he will seek national reconciliation. This is what Fonseka has said in his manifesto:" “I will start a process of national reconciliation.I will help all Tamil, Muslim and Sinhalese affected by the war. A program of immediate relief measures for war affected persons and areas will be implemented which will also address the burning problems of Tamil speaking persons. All remaining IDPs will be immediately re-settled and the grant for resettlement will be increased to a minimum of Rs. 100,000 per family and assessed upwards based on need. Within the first month I will take steps to register all other persons displaced due to the war and see that they are re-settled without further delay. All detainees in relation to terrorism will be prosecuted, rehabilitated or released. I will promote and foster our Sri Lankan identity based on our ethnic, religious and cultural diversity. I will ensure the freedom of worship without any hindrance or discrimination".
In other words, Gen Fonseka has focussed more on healing the wounds of war than on solving the long-festering ethinc strife.
On the same issue of rehabilitation of displaced people, Mr Rajapaksa is more specific. He says: "All restrictions hindering the free movement of the people in the Northern Province will be removed. Given the security risks, the high security zones will be gradually phased out. All those from Vavuniya, Mannar and Jaffna and part of Mulativu and Killinochchi are already resettled. The remainder from Mulativu and Killinochchi Districts will be resettled systematically without delay, based on the speed at which the de-mining process takes place".
Further, "a comprehensive project will be implemented to resettle the Muslim persons forcibly evicted by the LTTE from the Northern Province during 1990, in their respective places of origin with due attention being paid to their housing, livelihood and infrastructure facilities".
Mr Rajapaksa believes that though the LTTE has been defeated, there can be no lowering of guard."I do not believe the threat to the security of our country has been completely eliminated although the brutal terrorism in our land has been defeated. I am fully aware that it is possible that security threats could emerge in various forms and circumstances. However, I am confident that our brave armed forces will be able to face any challenge, with fortitude for the sake of our country. Therefore, I will ensure that our forces are strong at all times.
Brushing aside western criticism of human rights abuses during the final stages of the war with the LTTE between January and May last year in what a Dublin-based group of eminent human rights
group has called a war without witness, Mr Rajapaksa has said :" I state with deep responsibility that our security forces have acted with utmost discipline and humanity in keeping with all international conventions, during the humanitarian operations in our war against terror.
Therefore, I will solemnly pledge that no person will be allowed to take action against any officer or soldier of our armed forces at an international level, as a result of any betrayal due to any financial inducement or other selfish or unpatriotic reason'.
This is an indirect dig at Gen Fonseka who made the charge in an interview with Sunday Leader only to retract later, that during the final stages of the war President's brother and Defence Secretary Gothabaya Rajapaksa ordered the ground commander to shoot top LTTE leaders who came forward to surrender.
In a self-congratulatory mood, Mr Rajapaksa has said:" I believe that countries that are still struggling to combat terrorism could benefit from the knowledge and experience we have gained by confronting terrorism for over 30 years. Therefore, I will establish a Center for War Techniques and Strategy to provide knowledge and technical skills to the forces of other countries, who require such training".
While Gen Fonseka makes no mention of remerger of the east with the north, the core demand of the Tamils who consider the united north and east as their traditional homeland, Mr Rajapaksa has firmly ruled out that possibility by indirectly asking the Tamils to accept the fait accompli of two councils and promising elections in the north also. He asserts:"I will re-establish the Northern Provincial Council under the 13th amendment with immediate effect".
He justifies the creation of two councils instead of one on the ground that the people of north too will have a chance to exercise their democratic rights like their counterparts in the multi-ethnic east. As he puts it: "As in the Eastern Province, Provincial Council Elections will be held in the Northern Province within a short period of time to establish democracy.
Thereby new representatives will be included in the All-Party Conference and I believe that this would be a forum to arrive at a true national concurrence".
Going into specifics, Mr Rajapaksa has said:" After two decades, "we now have experience regarding the Provincial Council system. Different opinions and views regarding the relevance or irrelevance and features of the system are discussed. There are those who are in favour of the system and those who are not. However, it is an intrinsic part of the Constitution through the 13th amendment and is a functional system. I am in favour of an open discussion on the amendment to the Provincial Council System. This discourse will be the basis for the discussion that I intend to initiate with all political parties and organisations".
In the same breath, Mr. Rajapaksa also said past proposals like the district development Councils and regional councils too can be discussed." What we need is not a divided system but a system that will establish the unitary state. Keeping this in mind, I will open a discussion and arrive at consensus on how to move towards a divisional administration.
As part of electoral reforms, Mr Rajapaksa promised a proposal to implement an electoral system for the Provincial Councils that is an admixture of the Pradeshiya Sabha and District proportionate system.
The President has also promised that a senate will be established to facilitate the participation of religious leaders and professionals who are not represented through the electoral process to ensure that the legislation in parliament and the regulations in the
Provincial are subject to meaningful discussion and debate. "This Senate will have no impact on the unitary state and the supremacy of Parliament".
He further said:" I propose to change the proportionate electoral system, used in electing members to Parliament. I propose to re-introduce constituencies that cover one or more Divisional Limits. I propose to set up a District and National Proportionate System to provide representation for minority political trends and ethnic groups.
"My objective is to establish a stable government; a strong opposition and representation of all minority trends through the above amendment. As a result, there will be a member of the Parliament who is responsible for each area and those who do not have wealth or power will have an opportunity to be elected and represent the constituents".
On the question of abolition of the all-powerful executive presidency, which was a hot topic among the Sinhalese at one time, the President is silent. However, he says the President's powers will be clipped in crucial areas.He says: "The power of the President to dissolve Parliament, arbitrarily, after one year will be abolished except in a national exigency, as a mark of respect to the people’s mandate to Parliament".
Further, the President will participate in parliamentary sessions to establish co-existence between Parliament and the President".
In a dig at the UNP regime of 17 years which ushered in the executive presidency, Mr Rajapaksa says."In the past, the Executive Presidency was used to postpone elections, to topple elected governments, to disrupt the judiciary, to ban political parties, to suppress demonstrations and lead the country towards a violent culture, to sell state institutions at under-valued prices, to defend criminals and to grant concessions to unscrupulous businessmen. Agreements that betrayed the country were entered into using the powers of the Executive Presidency.I used such powers to unite the country"
He has promised anopen discussion on the Executive Presidency with all parties. The Executive Presidency will be converted into a Trusteeship which honours the mandate given to Parliament by being accountable to parliament, establishes equality before the law, is accountable to the judiciary and enacts laws that are accountable to the judiciary, and is not in conflict with the judiciary.
Click to read Mahinda Chinthana
- Asian Tribune -
Comments
While we agree that all
While we agree that all political unrest is basically due to inequities in society, given the social structure inherited by Lanka historically speaking, Lanka has done marvellously well. Historically, we inherited a certain Class system in the south & a Caste & Class system in the North that proved to be a hindrance to the progress of a mass of people, be they Sinhala, Tamil or even Muslim. These hindrances are being removed, under a Democracy. Even Britain had similar social systems (sans Caste) in place prior to World Wars I & II. Actually, the British Class System was the proto-type for the entire British Empire ! Also, please take a good hard look at the prevalent Caste & Class Systems of TAMIL NADU, especially the situation regarding the Tamil Dalits (Untouchables). Tamil Nadu seems stuck in a time warp as far as these social hindrances are concerned. Tamil Nadu attitudes profoundly affects Lanka, especially the North. We understand the difficulties of unravelling the problems, but please do not look at Lanka in isolation, as if Lanka was the only place with such problems. Lanka had to contend with 500 yrs. of Colonial Rule plus social problems of Tamil Nadu as well. Hasn't this small island done well, in spite of the negativities it has had to face ? Some people are in such a hurry for change, knowing full well that irreversible mistakes can be made in hasty action.
As marvelous as Somalia
".... Lanka has done marvelously well" - Commentator
Yeah, perhaps so, if your point of reference is Somalia!
Ceylon at the time of national Independence was the 2nd wealthiest nation in Asia, second only to Japan. Today, it is one of the weakest states in the world and in real terms its rate of development has far lagged that of Tamil Nadu. Furthermore, if one wishes to characterize the death of over 100,000 citizens over ethnic differences and deaths of untold thousands due to Marxists insurgencies as "done marvelously" then it is clear the claimant's measures of success are abysmally low.
Over the last 30 years or so Sri Lanka missed the bus on many development opportunities such as the world wide Information Technology explosion. While many states such as India, Philippines, S. Korea, Taiwan and Chile effectively exploited the IT boom of the 80's and 90's to build their respective national economies, Sri Lanka could not. The IT outsourcing industry initiated by Indian expats in the U.S. through their Fortune 500 U.S. employers gave India's IT outsourcing industry a head start beginning in 1988 - over 20 years ago. Today this matured industry is a mega billion-$ industry benefitting the entire Indian nation. Even if Sri Lanka begins a fully efficient development process tomorrow, it will take at least another 20 to 30 years before it comes even close to competing with these nations with a ready experience base. Despite the obvious handicap and the urgency to succeed and win in a ferociously competitive global economy Sri Lankan nationalists insist on a "go slow and cautious" approach to national reconciliation also notwithstanding the fact they have had 60+ years to put the house in order. Go on, proceed with your slow and steady approach - and in another 10 years the nation will only be another 40 years behind your neighbors, close to being another Somalia. Get real my friend - we live in a highly competitive world where survival is defined in terms of speed, smarts and excellence and the nation is already behind by at least 30 years. In this competitive environment either you're gonna be a driver who is in charge or one that is driven by stronger powers to supply maids and drivers to serve them. You know what you are in the present, but where you want your future generations to be is a consious choice.
The one and only hope for Sri Lanka is expeditious national reconciliation – to the satisfaction of all communities – followed by rapid economic development. [Despite the naive thinking of some at high quarters, there absolutely cannot be any measurable national economic development until permanent peace and national reconciliation.] Regrettably, the Sinhalese Buddhist nationalists and the Tamil separatists will ensure that neither happens.
How deep are we stuck in the mud?
All constitutions up to 1972 were drafted by GB, our colonial master, from 1802 to 1948. From 1948 to date the authority of governance has been in the hands of us, the sons of the soil and the Constitutions of 1972 and 1978 were drafted by sons of the soil. Whether they were true sons of the soil, I cannot say because I am not a political scientist or a political historian. Only thing I can do is to referring to certain policy decisions between 1948 and now that, to my understanding, appear to have impacted negatively on our march towards development with unity in the country.
Between 1948 - 1972 under Dominion status (Soulbury Constitution)
- Sinhala only in 1956
- Free distribution of surplus wealth to all without investing same on development of infrastructure for regenerating wealth
Under Socialist Republic of 1972 (Colvin R De Silva's Constitution)
- Creation of a Public Service Commission subservient to Political Authority
- Lowering the productivity and profitability of land by acquisition of private land above 50-acres (about 20-ha)
Under Democratic Republic of 1978 (JR Jayewardene’s Constitution)
- Creation of the political monster called Executive President with “no accountability” and unproductive sub-legislature called Provincial Council
- Curtailing the freedom of the individual in governance by destroying the electoral system by introducing the proportional representation (It can be exercised only at Presidential Election and at all other elections the individual has to come through a group)
The good side of the political monster called the Executive President has to be viewed from the point of the need for centralization of power to defeat the terrorists who denied our country the rightful place among the developed nations (not among developing nations) for nearly 30-years.
- A lumpen’s approach was required to defeat LTTE, which was led by a lumpen who was the king of smugglers in Velvetithurai and only the Executive President could do that. It was done by centralizing the powers vested in independent bodies created under the 17th Amendment to the 1978 Constitution and by appointing almost all Members of the Parliament on the Government Side Cabinet Ministers to support such centralization. (UN cannot interfere in affairs of a member country, which has conducted its affairs democratically with the representatives elected by people endorsing same)
- Creation of Lanka Logistics Ltd to procure all requisites of the war machine without conforming to Procurement Procedures of the State.
That Sri Lanka has won the war against the terrorists who called themselves LTTE is a globally accepted truth and it is also a fact. All Sri Lankans, who like to live in a unitary state, should now rally to take the country forward in the march towards development and therefore the opportunity should be used to elect a person who can lead us there.
Forget about the issue of who should be credited for the victory. Let us consider that all Sri Lankans, who tolerated all the madness of our leaders and suffered during the war in anticipation of a brighter future, are the victors. Let us compare the qualifications and qualities of and experience in leadership of all candidates in the race in choosing the right person for the job of Executive Presidency.
So my kind request to AT readers is to give it a start by comparing the manifestos of MR and SF on the basis of a nationally acceptable criteria. This is the only opportunity we have excercise individual freedom guaranteed by the Democratic Republic Constitution of 1978.
Whether stuck in mud depends on guts
In answer to your question, the nation is not only already buried deep in mud but will continue go down further very fast until Sri Lankans demand that their goverment create a truly secular system that is secure, just and dignified for all its citizens. Until such time expect to go down further in mud becoming the supreme suppliers of maids, drivers and laborers to the rest of the world. Sri Lankans must come to grips with the fact that the basic causes for the national condition are social, economic and political inequalities and strive to make the corrections and forge forward as a single people of a united nation. Making the corrections will require significant compromises by all segments of society - Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, Buddhists, and others - but until they do so, things will remain miserable. The LTTE was only a symptom of the underlying problems, which to date have not been corrected, and they will not simply vanish unless tackled head-on with courage and wisdom. Compassion, flexibility, openess (to new ideas) and capacitiy for unhelathy detachment from the past and archaic ideas are the imperatives of the moment.
Regional Councils under the Bandaranaike - Chelvanayakam Pact
I hope the editor will permit my second posting, somewhat long, as I think it is important to place some information before Thamby7 and others about Regional Councils.
Firstly, they were an integral part of the Bandaranaike – Chelvanayakam Pact of July 26th 1957, nearly 53 years ago.
The Regional Councils were opposed for one basic reason, and that being the introduction of the principle of Asymmetrical devolution in the country, and the possible amalgamation of the Northern and Easter provinces to form a single, autonomous region. Had the principles outlined in the Bandaranaike – Chelvanayakam Pact been extended to the rest of the country and similar powers given to regions in all parts of the country, it is possible the Pact may not have been opposed and finally abrogated.
The difference between the Provincial Councils that President Rajapaksa has accepted, and what General Fonseka has allegedly accepted, is that the former provides similar powers to all provinces (symmetrical devolution) and there is no provision for any amalgamation, while the latter, if we are to listen to the TNA and not Mr Fonseka, provides asymmetrical devolution and the amalgamation of the Northern and Eastern provinces. This is very similar to the Regional Councils under the BC Pact, and it will be opposed not just by many Sinhala people, but sections of the Tamil community as well, as did happen in 1957. On this occasion however, it is being opposed by sections of the Tamil community who wishes to take the path outlined by President Rajapaksa, that is, limited devolution of current central government powers to provincial councils within a unitary Sri Lanka, greater devolution to peripheral administrative units for local governance issues, and constitutionally guaranteed power sharing at the centre, including the formation of a bi cameral legislature.
President Rajapaksa’s other stand is that a political solution has to be worked out by all communities who are no longer under the threat of a gun at their heads, so that a meaningful discussion could be held in a free and peaceful atmosphere where politicians, civil society, professionals and a host of other key personnel could engage in a discussion and come to some kind of consensus.
In fact it has to be said that this is the main reason why all previous agreements between politicians never worked, as they were hatched between a few people and often in secracy. People never participated in formulating any of those proposals or Pacts or Agreements.
The Bandaranaike–Chelvanayakam Pact was an agreement signed between the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike and the leader of the main Tamil political party in Sri Lanka S. J. V. Chelvanayakam on July 26, 1957.
The pact was greeted by mixed reception around the country, and was immediately opposed by certain sections of both communities.
The leader of the All Ceylon Tamil Congress, G. G. Ponnambalam opposed the pact, as did Member of Parliament C Suntheralingham, who in a letter to Chelvanayakam wrote that instead of the regional councils promised by the pact, he wanted “an autonomous Tamil state which would constitute a Commonwealth of Dominion of Tamil Ilankai”. So it is worthwhile noting that a Tamil Eelam was alive and kicking in 1957!
It also sparked suspicion among Sinhalese nationalist leaders, who saw it as a sell out to Tamil people. The main opposition in the Sinhalese community came from the opposition United National Party, headed by J. R. Jayawardene.
Part B of the pact identifies the principle of Asymmetrical devolution that formed the basis of the Pact.
1. Regional areas to be defined in the Bill itself by embodying them in the Schedule thereto.
2. That the Northern Province is to form one regional area whilst the Eastern Province is to be divided into one or more regional areas.
3. Provision is to be made in the Bill to enable two or more regions to amalgamate even beyond provincial limit; and for one region to divide itself subject to ratification by Parliament. Further provision is to be made in the Bill for two or more regions to collaborate for specific purposes of common interests.
SPECIAL POWERS specified under the Pact to Regional Councils
Parliament is to delegate powers and specify them in the Act. It was agreed that regional councils should have powers over specified subjects including agriculture, cooperatives, lands and land developments, colonisation, education, health, industries, fisheries, housing, social services, electricity, water schemes and roads. Requisite definition of powers be made in the Bill
TAXATION AND BORROWING powers specified under the Pact
1. The powers in regard to the Regional councils vested in the Minister of Local Government in the draft bill to be revised with a view to vesting control in Parliament wherever necessary.
2. The Central Government will provide block grants to the regional councils. The principles on which the grants will be computed will be gone into. The regional councils shall have powers of taxation and borrowing.
So, as far as accepting President Rajapaksa’s model Vs General Fonseka’s model, which is similar to the BC Pact Regional Councils, there is a vast difference. So it would be incorrect for Thamby7 or anyone else to say President Rajapaksa is accepting what was opposed in 1957. In fact one could venture to say President Rajapaksa is offering a model that will be acceptable to most Sinhalese and perhaps most Tamils, if they are allowed to think and make up their own minds without being pressured by some Tamil politicians whose only goal is move towards a separate State, using any other model as only as an interim solution. No wonder many Sinhala people are suspicious of the politics (or politricks) of these politicians.
I do not think that the
I do not think that the Councils proposed by SJV Chelvanayagam in the late 1960s, I think, are much different from the the current Provincial Councils. I was not referring to the Councils proposed under the B-C Pact way back in the 1950s.
And the Councils proposed by SJV in the late 1960s encompassed the whole island. And SJV also included a proposal that the Provincial Councils could seek to increase their powers in certain aspects through a pre-defined process, which also required agreement among a certain number of provincial councils in various parts of the country, or something to this effect. I cannot recall all the details.
And the "Daily News", at that time a non-government newspaper, pooh-poohed SJV's idea and sarcastically commented that SJV was hoping that if his proposal were adopted, the Provincial Councils in the South would seek to increase their powers in certain pre-defined areas which would automatically increase the powers of the Provincial Councils in the North and the East. The "Daily News" didn't explain what was abhorrent about the Councils in the North and East receiving increased powers if the Provincial Councils in the South also desired these same increased powers.
THE COUNCILS PROPOSED IN THE 1950s ARE DIFFERENT FROM THOSE UNDER THE 1960S PROPOSAL.
However, as I have stated many times, if a strong power-sharing arrangement is worked out for the Centre that brings all the communities together in the governance of the whole country, the level of devolution required could be limited. Unfortunately, all we keep hearing is empty rhetoric. How many times did Prez Rajapakse state that the APRC's solution was around a corner. May be, the solution is still negotiating the corner.
Devolution and misinformation - Response to Thamby7
I strongly urge Thamby7 to do his research before airing his views as half baked information could only misguide readers. First he spoke about provincial councils propposed by Chelvanayakam and said they were not very different to what President Rajapaksa has accepted now. When information on the basic differences between the two was pointed, we are now told of provincial councils of the late 1960s. Presumably he is now referring to the Dudley Senanayake - Chelvanayakam Pact of 1965 which was about District Councils. This Pact was a political agreement between the two, for Dudley Senanayake to get the support of the Federal Party during the 1965 election. These units are very different to what President Rajapaksa has accepted, the obvious being that they were District Councils and we are now talking about Provincial Councils. Besides that as I stated in my earlier response, this agreement also failed for the same two reasons as the earlier proposal. Firstly, it was an agreement between two people without any consultation with representatives of the poeple. Secondly, it aprovided asymmetrical and special treatment to Tamils in the North and East, especially on land matters as seen in the agreement quoted below. Thamby7 also refers to the All Party Conference initiated by President Rajapaksa. He has probably forgotten that the UNP, JVP and TNA boycotted it, the former for political opportunism and the latter on the instructions of the LTTE and for fear of their lives from the LTTE had they crossed the LTTE. What good would any proposal coming from a body sans the UNP, the other major political party in the country and the TNA, the largest political entity for Tamils at the time, been if the government decided to bring forth some proposals? President Rajapaksa's stand is that he is against the merger of the North and East, and he is against any Asymmetrical devolution. He has stated he will present a set of proposals after the election for a wide discussion by all relevant people and bodies and that he will implement them once the Parliament passes them and people approve it at a referandum. Isnt this the right path to take? Please Thamby7, do your home work before writing.
Dudley Senanayake - Chelvanayakam Pact, March 1965
Mr. Dudley Senanayake and Mr. S. J. V. Chelvanayakam met on the 24-3-1965 and discussed matters relating to some problems over which the Tamil-speaking people were concerned, and Mr. Senanayake agreed that action on the following lines would be taken by him to ensure a stable government:
(1) Action will be taken early under the Tamil Language Special Provisions
Act to make provision of the Tamil Language to be the language of Administration and of Record in the Northern and Eastern Provinces.
Mr. Senanayake explained that it was the policy of his party that a Tamil-speaking person should be entitled to transact business in Tamil throughout the island.
(2) Mr. Senanayake stated that it was the policy of his party to amend the Language of Courts Act to provide for legal proceedings in the Northern and Eastern Provinces to be conducted and recorded in Tamil.
(3) Action will be taken to establish District Councils in Ceylon vested with powers over subjects to be mutually agreed upon between two leaders. It was agreed, however, that the government should have power under the law to give directions to such councils under the national interest.
(4) The Land Development Ordinance will be amended to provide that citizens of Ceylon be entitled to the allotment of land under the Ordinance.
Mr. Senanayake further agreed that in the granting of land under colonisation schemes the following priorities be observed in the Northern and Eastern provinces
(a) Land in the Northern and Eastern provinces should in the first instance be granted to landless persons in the district.
(b) Secondly, to Tamil-speaking persons resident in the Northern and Eastern provinces.
(c) Thirdly, to other citizens in Ceylon, preference being given to Tamil residents in the rest of the island.
Problem is lack of political Will
It seems like there are more blueprints for a governing system for the tiny island than blueprints for a space craft for the Jupiter Mission!
Folks here may be missing the point: perhaps it is the lack of political Will rather than political arrangements which is at the center of the problem.
Just another unfortunate case of Tamil deceit
Just another unfortunate case of Tamil deceit to return to the British Apartheid. Chelvanayakam was a ferocious racist who even proposed a Tamil Homeland in Malaysia, the land of his birth in 1957. Luckily for the Malays they reacted promptly to the threat posed by Tamil hegemony and intransigence unlike the compromising and tolerance driven Sinhala Buddhists, it was because of this that Chelvanayakam perused his race politics in Sri Lanka vigorously. He is the one who cried out "why should the Sinhala a smaller nation than that of the Tamil have State onto themselves while the Tamil a larger nation does not". The pacts were merely part of this agenda, as he infamously said "little now, more later". It is this "little now, more later" mentality prevalent amongst the Tamils that all peace talks and compromises never worked. Whenever one unreasonable demand was met another 10 were slapped down and Tamil leadership would declare themselves "unsatisfied" and "our (illegitimate) grievances are STILL not being met" and the blame would be tossed onto the Sinhalese once again as it is always. Little by little they would squeeze more and more, never stopping till they return to the British apartheid of Tamil dominance over the Sinhalese. Only at this point will Tamils truly feel "equal" and "satisfied", but i doubt their "grievances" will ever be solved as Sinhalese will forever be the scapegoat, even bad weather can be traced back to Sinhalas.
I was not referring to the
I was not referring to the Dudley S. and Chelvanayagam pact (and I was not referring to the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayagam pact.) IN FACT, I WAS NOT REFERRING TO ANYTHING ASSOCIATED WITH PACTS, BUT TO A PROPOSAL MADE BY SJV CHELVANAYAGAM PROBABLY IN THE LATE 1960s IN ORDER TO BREAK THE STALEMATE.
ALSO, IT WAS PROBABLY DURING THIS TIME THAT C.SUNTHARALINGAM OF THE TAMIL CONGRESS SUGGESTED THE SWISS MODEL OF GOVERNANCE.
THIS A WAS A PERIOD WHEN THE DEEPLY UPSET TAMILS WERE MAKING DIFFERENT PROPOSALS IN ORDER TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. BUT THE SOUTHERN POLITICIANS REFUSED TO LISTEN UNTIL MILITANCY RAISED ITS UGLY HEAD.
NOW THE FOCUS HAS TO BE ON A PERMANENT SOLUTION. WE ARE GLAD THAT NOW THERE IS FINALLY A REALISATION THAT WE DO HAVE A PROBLEM THAT IS CRYING OUT FOR A SOLUTION.
Some people keep looking at
Some people keep looking at the past instead of the future, which explains the nature behind those still trying to push Tamil homelandism.
What next return to British apartheid? Unfortunately this goal is still in the minds of Tamils, still stuck in the ill begotten "glories" (artificial power, wealth and privileges) of the past -specifically the European period which by far was the most destructive for Sinhalese in particular.
Sad that many Tamils always drift back to that period with a sense of nostalgia, pride and enjoyment.
Whatever has happened to the TNA?
Why has the TNA gone silent about what has been agreed with General Fonseka? Surely they should have said something about President Rajapaksa's policy statement that clearly says he will not divide the country by merging the North and East? Gen Fonseka is yet to deny he entered into an agreement with the TNA, so the country is taking the stance that he did agree to the merger of the North and East, a basic condition of the TNA.
BTW, in regard to another comment here as to why provincial councils were opposed 60 years ago, it might be apt to ask the question whether even Democrats would have voted for a black american to become the President of the USA 10 years ago, and whether many of the European countries would have even dreamt of a European Union 50 years ago. Political developments are unfortunately circumstantial and not based on logic, or whether something is right or wrong. Its best if we can all think of the future than constantly dwelling on the past.
Raj G has overlooked a very
Raj G has overlooked a very important point in my comment. SJV Chelvanayagam's proposal, in the 1960s or 1970s, for regional councils such as the current Provincial Councils, were excoriated by critics who argued that SUCH REGIONAL COUNCILS WOULD PAVE THE WAY FOR THE EVENTUAL DIVISION OF THE COUNTRY.
AND NOW PREZ RAJAPAKSE HIMSELF STATES (ARTICLE ABOVE), THAT PROVINCIAL COUNCILS ARE HERE TO STAY. THUS, A KEY POINT IN MY COMMENT IS THE BLATANTLY FALSE ARGUMENTS OF THE FEAR-MONGERS IN ORDER TO OPPOSE REGIONAL COUNCILS AROUND FORTY YEARS AGO. A KEY POINT IS THAT PROVINCIAL COUNCILS HAVE NOT DIVIDED THE COUNTRY. BUT THE COUNCILS, AS PREZ RAJAPAKSE HIMSELF CONCEDES, ARE NOW AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE COUNTRY'S GOVERNING STRUCTURE. A STRUCTURE THAT PROMOTES UNITY THROUGH DIVERSITY.
AND IT IS THE VERY SAME TYPE OF BLATANT LIES THAT ARE NOW BEING PERPETRATED WITH ARGUMENTS SUCH AS THE ONE THAT A MERGER OF THE NORTH AND EAST WOULD LEAD TO DIVISION OF THE COUNTRY, AND THE REST OF THE BALONEY.
And SJV Chelvanayagam's proposal for regional councils was not 60 years ago. It was in the late 1960s, or very early 1970s, I think.
It is interesting to note
It is interesting to note Prez Rajapakse asserting that Provincial Councils are now an intrinsic part of the Constitution and are here to stay. Yet when SJV Chelvanayagam first proposed councils of this type way back in the 60s or 70s, many screamed and shouted that councils of this type would be a step toward division of the country.