An Impeccable Moderation
By Revd. B J Alexander
23 September, 2005
Countercurrents.org
There are shared historical events in Sri LANKA between the predominant Sinhalese and the Tamil speaking communities. However, these events of violence and violations circulate for most part as oral history with diverse interpretations. Perceptions of the history of ‘origins and ownership’ of the predominant community seem to establish antagonistic and retaliatory contexts. Therefore within such environment; communal cohesion and maintaining a semblance of order become possible, tragically though, by constant repetition of violence.
It is no surprise that both the pre and post colonial history of Ceylon/Sri Lanka is indeed fraught with betrayals, serial killings, tortures, lynching, ethnic cleansings, pillage and plunder. These criminal acts cannot be lumped together for political convenience and merely recorded as “violations of human rights”. In most cases, these were politically motivated heinous atrocities against Tamils. Very often, such acts of terror were nothing but “near miss” genocides! [Keeping Rwanda in mind; when is genocide is actually recognised as genocide?]
Social scientists generally identify three categories as primary causes found within a socio-political conflict: a) identity b) territory c) ideology.
Lets us briefly examine whether these above genres are applicable to the Lankan context.
Identity
It is believed that ‘where we are from may have an impact on as to where we are now. Does the Sri Lankan national crisis hinges on origins? The Tamil speaking Muslim community is never in doubt of their identity. Many among them are distant relatives of their Arab ancestors while some may even be converts to Islam. However, what connects them primarily as an identifiable community is their mother tongue Tamil. Ceylon Moors intrinsically see themselves as Tamils. Secondly what unites them is Islam. The Tamils: both the up-country and the low-country Tamils have no qualms of their origins. Some Ceylon Tamils may even think and articulate in English as their first-second language. This is owing to the Colonial baggage. Certain sections of Tamils may of course only converse in Sinhalese as their first language (owing to the fact that they have been born and bred in Sinhalese areas). None of these factors however, interferes with their essential Tamil ness. It is safe to conclude that the cause for a separate state for the Tamil speaking people [1]does not spring from an identity crisis. The struggle for Eelam began as a result of a repetitive suppression unleashed on Tamils by denying even their fundamental human rights!
The predominant Sinhalese however, constantly suffers from a mis-perception of them. It stems from a myopic and an inflated view of seeing them both as glorified guardians of Lanka and as sole protectors of the Theravada strand. Such interpretation places Sinhalese, sadly under the gloomy clouds of guilt ridden psychotic state. The Buddhist Pali mytho-historical chronicles, believed to be written around 600 CE by monks, present to its readers, origin narratives of the Sinhalese. The question of whether these texts are written in allegorical language is carefully ignored because of fear that its status as “authentic text” of history with a divine mandate would be under critical scrutiny! These texts receive a preferential treatment as sacred “facts” and therefore it is literally interpreted. The genesis narrative explains that the Sinhalese came into being through bestiality – hence Singaya: the Lion people. The story takes strange twists of violent expulsions of demonised (Yakkini) founding matriarch by the young Aryan prince – an absconding Patriarch. The narrative exposes an incest (which has deep psychological implications); resulting naturally in inferiority and negativity. Such distorted history propels one in to an axiomatic vicious cycle; in order they might “protect” by violent means a non-violent Philosophy! Once caught between these opposite poles of attracting gravitational pull, one finds that, it provides the framework of an inescapable defence mechanism articulated via politico-Buddhism. This religious façade upholds the puffed up identity; which in fact, is a concealment strategy of a “distorted” identity! As a result, ethnic violence is spiritualised, legitimised and democratised. And ethnic hate franchised.
Territory
Is the Tamil Question a territorial conflict? Every inch of territory is Sinhala urumaya – broadly meaning that it is by divine right, belongs ONLY to the Sinhala people. This rationale will not permit other communities to co-exist within their ancestral home lands. That is why even recently there were media reports of Buddha statues being installed forcibly in Tamil speaking towns. Planting a Bo-tree and consecrating the premises and installing a statue of Buddha have been the ritual in which territory is claimed! For years this has been the way in which secret colonisation was conducted. So for the Tamil speaking people re-claiming the home land; or as the LTTE would call it as ‘liberating the ancient territory’ becomes an essential part of survival.
It is within these traditional home lands one’s ancient tradition, culture, language, art, music, folklore etc; are preserved while evolving. The traditional homelands are not exclusion zones, as some would have us believe. It will be detrimental if fresh ideas were to be blocked out. In this global environment other cultural influences will be synthesised especially via the satellite media. If one interprets the idea of traditional homelands solely in terms of raising imaginative defensive walls from hegemonic forces, then it can be viewed upon positively as protection against oppressive powers. It becomes paramount importance that the territorial integrity of Tamils is recognised globally. By doing so, the Sinhala population could be satisfied to work within the territorial integrity of the Kotte and the Kandyan Kingdoms and could then effectively begin to sort out their own differences. This should no doubt help the Sinhalese to overcome the “minority complex of the majority”.
Ideology
The Sinhalese -Tamil conflict may be viewed as an ideological strife only if one views nationalism as an “ideology of identity”. Some suggest the conflict as a Marxist struggle. How many genuine Marxists are there in Sri Lanka is a good question to ask? In any event, the Sinhalese utilize the logic of the scapegoat to establish its ‘true’ origin and distinction from the “other”. It is well to remember, that the “other” does include the Tamil-speaking Muslims. Hence the Muslims are more openly supporting the struggle for the Eelam especially in the East and not falling for the ‘jihadi’ ideologies propagated by the State only to divide and spoil.
Frederic Barth saw ethnicity as a dynamic relationship across borders describing an out side and an inside, “us” vs. “them”, a dichotomy eminent in most discourses of identity, ethnicity and nationalism.
The nationalism of the Tamils as an ideology does not exclude the international implications of living and inter-relating within a global village. The Tamils here in Sri Lanka and in the Diaspora have given their energy into the celebration of difference while also learning from their ‘unique’ experience.
Conclusion
The Sinhalese ought to seriously review their politico Buddhism and establish a fresh world view based on factual history rather than on mythical belief systems. Until this paradigm shift happens, the reality suggests that no amount of peace talking could bear sweet fruit. Identity, territory, ideology: it is mainly within these three cords of unity, among other realities, an amicable settlement could be attained.
The West in its power and resources however, would need to overcome the temptation to impose peace - taking in to consideration only the geo political selfish interests. Such action would bring about only a cosmetic change that would benefit the political elites and the power brokers – not the down-trodden and the dispossessed. The Sinhalese mind set nonetheless is engraved in this mythical enterprise of politico-Buddhism. Mythical fantasies of the Sinhalese, such as the “sole sons of the soil”, should be dislodged by accommodating alternate views on shared history.
The Buddhist administered State will have to be convinced first by logical persuasion to agree for a two state solution. International pressure via economic instruments may need to be employed against the Sinhalese State to renounce its scapegoat mechanisms against the Tamils. Having exhausted all diplomatic channels, only as a last resort, military coercion might be considered in order to regain Sovereignty of the Tamil nation. This extreme measure – perhaps a possible threat: tempered with proportionality, ought to be the ‘red card’ when repeated negotiations were to fail; ceasefire agreements and human rights continually breached. The peace interlocutor will need to engage actively as the referee – to use the soccer analogy. Without such realistic soul-searching exercise of conflict transformation; all would just be theory – an impeccable moderation.
[1] The narrow stance of Tamil Eelam is only for the Tamil speakers may also bring with it unique problems of alienation; taking primarily into consideration non-Tamil speaking Diaspora. Tamils in some respects are akin to the Jews who are scattered around the globe. The connection among them is made by their Jewish ness not in terms of spoken language. Tamil suffering due to occupation by alien forces however is identical in more than one way to the Palestinian struggle. This matter is worth considering and opens for debate.
