Why The Government Needs To Overcome The Fear Of Labeling
The recent attacks in Ampara were perpetrated reportedly based upon a canard that continues to re-surface from time to time. While this piece refrains from divulging into the details of the rumors and how the said chain of events transpired, such acts of violence undoubtedly warrant utmost condemnation and swift investigation and legal action against the perpetrators.
The incident was discussed the following day at the weekly Cabinet meeting, raising concerns over escalating tensions between the Muslim and Sinhalese communities, in particular with regard to police inaction during attack. Ministers Rauff Hakeem, Mano Ganesan, Daya Gamage and Rishard Bathiudeen condemned the violence and urged the government to ensure that action is taken against the culprits for inciting communal violence. Separately, Opposition Leader R. Sampanthan issued a media statement condemning the attacks, and President Maithripala Sirisena was quoted stating that such incidents are detrimental to reconciliation in the country.
Unfortunately, there is a disturbing tendency in our country to continue treating such attacks as isolated incidents perpetrated by angry mobs, rather than seeing them as a part of a larger pattern of violent extremism that prevails in the country. Politicos and media reports often describe such events as ‘incidents’, ‘attacks’, ‘clashes’, and ‘tense situations’ orchestrated by ‘angry mobs’. Simply and boldly put, what transpired in Ampara is a clear-cut case of hate crime driven by extremists. It baffling as to why, still at this point, the state leaders and senior officials are reluctant to publicly and explicitly declare such attacks as a hate crime. How many more incidents fuelled by different ethno-religious groups would it take to accept that Sri Lanka faces the threat of far-right extremism? It is high time that the state adopts the accurate terminology to describe the prevailing circumstances, and to muster the courage to label the incident for what it really is. At this juncture, it is imperative that we examine beyond the scope of the particular incident, and examine the greater security implications to the ‘politics of labeling’.
Right-wing extremism in Sri Lanka
Following the annihilation of the violent Tiger terrorists, Sri Lanka’s security vacuum was replaced by the re-emergence of ultranationalist rhetoric from all fronts, as well as politicisation of faiths. Essentially, we witnessed the interplay of ethno-religious fascist movement against minority groups, and the growth of radical extremism among the minority groups. While the ultra-nationalist Sinhala Buddhist groups have been hitting the headlines for hate speech and actively inciting communal disharmony, there is also reportedly a rise of hardline Salafi sectarian groups, as well as the birth of Siva Senai, Sri Lanka’s first Hindu right-wing organisation in 2016.
The previous government is being accused for tacitly supporting anti-Muslim attacks, but the incumbent regime is yet to respond accordingly due to its unwillingness to declare the incident as hate crimes, and failing to accept that right-wing extremism is a national security threat prevailing in the country. Generally speaking, following communal clashes we see only politicos of the minority ethnicity raising concerns, and the state leaders and senior officials tend to shy away from explicitly condemning the hate crime in the strongest terms. Reactions elicited from the latter, if any, fall under one or more of the three categories: a) vague in nature; b) urging the authorities to apprehend those responsible as an answer; c) blaming opposing political forces for the attacks. Today, there is still a general lack of acceptance at the state level that hate crime fuelled by right-wing extremism (regardless of the ethno-religious background) is a legitimate security concern for Sri Lanka. While several arrests made last year is commendable, it is inadequate in addressing the larger issue at hand.
