Peace in Sri Lanka?
Wednesday, 05 June 2013 
Can there ever be peace in Sri Lanka? I truly hope so. But one thing is for sure – the country is far from close at the moment, despite what the government there would like us to believe.
Four years and two weeks ago, on the 18th May 2009, the brutal civil war between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) ended. After months of targeting civilians being herded into smaller and smaller tracts of land (designated as ‘No Fire Zones’ by the Sri Lankan government), directed shelling of the makeshift hospitals set up in these areas, and the final release of the remaining 300,000 people into a second nightmare of the notorious internment camps, the final act of the Sri Lankan government was the eventual execution of the LTTE leadership. The war crimes committed by both sides have been widely documented by the UN, human rights organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and particularly in a series of documentaries by Channel 4 that has now culminated in a film No Fire Zone, and is being taken on a world tour by its director Callum McCrae and his team.
The acts committed in these final few months were horrific, and the Tamil people, and anyone else caught up in these atrocities, will no doubt be scarred for years and decades to come by what happened on those small areas of land in the North-East of Sri Lanka. That this was genocide, in its most brutal form, seems little in doubt to anyone who knows the long history of the conflict. Justice must be fought for, and the perpetrators must be prosecuted at the ICC for what they have done. That the international community allowed this to happen, and still grant the Sri Lanka respect as a law-abiding state, and member of the Commonwealth, is shocking in the wake of the accusations against it. Furthermore, the country is due to actually host the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) this year, and become chair of the Commonwealth itself for the following two years. This, in an organisation that claims to uphold the values of human rights and freedom, and has expelled other states for human rights violations, seems unbelievable.
These injustices must be righted before any progress can be made – that much is clear. No-one can be expected to start to heal from such pain and suffering while the person responsible has got away with their crimes scot-free. However, this is only the first step in the long road to peace in Sri Lanka. Justice for these crimes would only take us back to 2008, before the final Sri Lankan government offensive against the LTTE. The reasons for the previous 25 years of war would still exist, even if President Rajapaksa and his allies were finally behind bars. The issues that caused the initial unrest, and led to the formation of the LTTE, will still be there. How to solve those is a thornier problem.
Ever since Sri Lanka gained independence from the British in 1948, and the many kingdoms that existed pre-colonisation were merged into one state, there have been problems between the Sinhalese majority and the Tamil minority. The history of the island has been dotted with discrimination and unrest, and marked by specific events that remain sources of anger and resentment to this day, such as the pogroms of 1958 and 1977, the burning of the Jaffna Library, and Black July, the name given to the horrific month during 1983 when hundreds of Tamils were killed by Sinhalese mobs.
The LTTE was formed in 1979 with the sole aim of establishing a separate Tamil state (Tamil Eelam) in the North and East of Sri Lanka. The organisation itself provided both hope and direction for the Tamil people; as a result they – and in particular their leader Velupillai Prabhakaran – garnered a great deal of respect and even love from those they fought for. The LTTE were highly organised, and even ran the North-East as a functioning mini-state, with proper infrastructure, for a number of years. However, in the end, they became the roadblock to achieving their own aims. The reason for this was a combination of decisions they took, and unforeseen world events that eventually led to their downfall.
Firstly, the LTTE was established at a time when the world looked very different. It was the middle of the Cold War, when any secessionist movement had to make its choice between East and West. Unfortunately for the Tamils and LTTE, their affection for socialism at this time did little to endear them to the USA and the West, who of course were the eventual victors. Finding themselves on the wrong side years later ended up costing them dealing. Secondly, they employed tactics that made it very easy for them to be vilified, particularly in Western media and political discourse. These included the use of teenage soldiers, willingly or otherwise, assassinations of political figures who stood in their way, and pioneering the use of suicide bombers. Whether these methods can be justified in an uneven war can be debated, but the important point is that they made the LTTE an easy target when successive Sri Lankan governments wanted to persuade the US and Europe that it should be left to deal with the situation in any way it deemed necessary, and gave Western powers easy excuses for inaction during the final months of atrocities in 2009.
This combined with the third factor – the unfortunate timing of the US-led ‘War on Terror’, which coincided with the LTTE reaching the height of its power – making it easy for the Sri Lankan government to discredit them. Thus, the LTTE were hurled well over the line separating freedom fighters from terrorists, allowing the Sri Lankan government to advocate the banning of their organisation throughout the Western world. I suspect that if the LTTE were established today, at a time when we in the West have started to realise that things are never so clearly black and white, and where the Syrian and Libyan freedom fighters can maintain Western support despite comparable actions, they might have had more success. But as it was, once they were tarred by the terrorist brush, they and their supporters were doomed.
So, is there hope for peace now? I think that depends on what we think peace should look like. The Sri Lankan government would like us to believe that reconciliation is taking place, and the country is successfully healing its wounds. In fact, this is regularly used as the reason for why the international community should leave the situation alone, and stop going over the past. And yet, the situation for ordinary Tamil people in Sri Lanka is now at an all time low, with increasing militarisation of the North, disappearances a regular occurrence, amongst the worst media freedom in the world, and the Sri Lankan government taking more and more land owned by the Tamil population – from those settled there, those internally displaced and the Tamil diaspora. In addition to this, there are still many families who even now, four years on from the war, do not know what happened to their loved ones, whether they are alive or dead, and where they are being held.
Even without the war crimes allegations hanging over the current administration, there are now more reasons than ever for the Tamil people to be angry. The events in 2009 might have caused a temporary loss of hope and direction among the Tamil people, but that is all. Already, the Tamils are regrouping and reorganising, particularly in the diaspora – and this time, they are keenly aware that they must take the international community with them. This is not over yet, however much the Sri Lankan government wills it to be.
So what would real peace look like? I think it is clear that autonomy – or better, independence in some form – is the only true solution for the North and East of Sri Lanka. The time for reconciliation has passed, there has now been too much bloodshed, too much suffering. As one Tamil friend put it to me – would you tell a domestic abuse victim, bloodied and terrified, that they must continue in their marriage, that they must make an effort to make it work, because their spouse promises to do so too? No. You would realise the cruelty of making that demand, and how impossible their situation is. You would realise that they have the right to walk away. The only chance for both sides to recover is if they are allowed to part ways, and to learn to live separately.
In the case of Sri Lanka, the Tamils have not even received an apology, or acknowledgement of what they have been through. All they hear is triumphalism, celebration at their expense, and threats and accusations when they even ask for justice. How can they be expected to just continue with the status quo, when they have had no closure, and still have no say in how their wounds are healed? Though it might seem drastic to those on the outside, and is highly resisted by those in power, separation must be countenanced if there is ever to be real peace in the country.
The process for the creation of an independent state is far from simple. This cause is fought for again and again the world over, and very few regions achieve this status despite years of struggle. But there are recent examples of success: Kosovo declared itself independent in 2008, and has been recognised by 99 members of the UN, following the 1990s war; South Sudan became a separate state in 2011, as a result of a referendum conducted as part of the peace agreement at the end of the civil war in 2005. Closer to home, and as a result of a far more peaceful – but just as long-term – campaign, Scotland will be holding a referendum next year to decide whether or not it will leave the UK. As a British citizen, I hope the Scottish people will choose to stay. But I respect their right to make that choice, and will respect their decision either way.
Personally, I am in general in favour of greater integration between countries. Idealistically perhaps, I hope that one day there will be no need for borders between countries. But we are very far from that stage, and I cannot condone one group of people being oppressed just because we are afraid to challenge sovereignty. If there are clear borders, a history of conflict between two groups, and the wish of the minority to rule themselves, then the right to self-rule must be granted. That is the only route to peace in a case such as this. The continued land-grabbing and resistance by the Sri Lankan government may delay the process, but it will only lead to further difficulties when this separation happens. Eventually the Tamil people must be allowed to rule themselves, in their own land, in order for them to truly heal and rediscover themselves as a people, free of persecution and oppression.
By everhopeful
Courtesy - Sprinklingofhope.com
