Inter-Religious Harmony: Mr President, Moving From Rhetoric To Action Is Vital And Urgent

By Jayantha Dhanapala and Professor Savitri Goonesekere -March 24, 2013

Jayantha Dhanapala

The Friday Forum has, in several earlier statements, drawn attention to the breakdown of law and order witnessed in Sri Lanka in the recent past.  We have pointed to the escalation of grave crimes committed even in public places. Recent campaigns by women activists have highlighted a serious problem of gender-based violence and child abuse.  The failure of the police to act swiftly and effectively in enforcing the law has encouraged individuals and groups of people to take the law into their own hands.  The environment of impunity has provided opportunities for gang and mob violence and caused a growing sense of fear and personal insecurity.

Acts of mob violence have increasingly targeted religious minorities and places of worship. Several groups such as the Bodu Bala Sena and the Sinhala Ravaya, some led by Buddhist monks have engaged in campaigns which can seriously undermine communal and religious harmony and peaceful coexistence among our diverse communities.  The Friday Forum has already expressed its concern regarding the attack on the Dambulla mosque in April last year and the more recent anti-Muslim campaign. This campaign has become increasingly strident and has resulted in acts of mob violence against Muslims. Muslim commercial enterprises have been the target of attacks. Currently there are alarming reports of Muslim women and girls being publicly humiliated and even physically attacked on account of their attire. Several Christian places of worship and private homes have also been targeted. The burning of the Mother Mary statue in Avissawella early this year and the reported mob attacks on a Christian religious centre in Kahatagahapitiya a few days ago are two among many such incidents. It has also been reported that private residences in Nawala and Weeraketiya were attacked by mobs, interfering with the rights of the occupants to engage in religious activities. Some monks have joined groups of persons who have sought to assume the role of law enforcement agencies, engaging in a dangerous trend of “policing” supposedly in the interest of the majoritySinhala Buddhist community.

The Friday Forum unequivocally supports the right to freedom of religion and speech enshrined in our Constitution.  We recognize the rights of all citizens to peacefully express their opposition to what they disagree with, for example by boycotts.   However, such rights do not extend to perpetrating acts of intimidation and violence against anyone. Statements and actions which arouse racial and religious tensions inciting violence cannot be tolerated as freedom of religion, speech and expression.  Vigilantism and mob rule must also be unequivocally condemned, and those who attempt to engage in such activities must be dealt with under the law.

The Friday Forum urges all responsible citizens including religious leaders to actively oppose and counter acts of racial and religious hatred.   We also call upon the government to act swiftly to prevent people taking the law into their own hands in the name of these destructive campaigns.  While acknowledging the constraints under which the Police carry out their duties, the Friday Forum urges the Police to take immediate and firm measures to enforce the law and safeguard personal security of citizens who are victims of these campaigns.    We welcome the recent statement of the Inspector General of Police reported in the Daily Mirror of 16 March 2013 where he warned that some elements appeared to be making a subtle attempt to disturb racial and religious harmony. The IGP declared that the police department is committed to ensuring the safety and security of everyone belonging to all races and religions and will treat everyone equally.  Any opinions, he said, must be expressed respecting the law of the land, and solutions must be found to problems through negotiations. We urge the Government to ensure that the IGP and the Police are given the space and support they need to carry out their functions and duties.  Implementing the recommendation of the LLRC that the Police be delinked from the Defence Ministry and the independent Police Commission be reinstated has become a critical need in the current context.

It is encouraging that some politicians, at both provincial and national levels, have voiced objections to racist organizations in the strongest terms. It has also been reported that two Ministers of the North Western Provincial Council have taken firm measures, together with the Police, to prevent these groups from carrying out campaigns of intimidation and harassment against minority communities. While expressing our appreciation of these individuals for their responsible leadership, the Friday Forum again calls upon the President to act immediately and decisively to effectively counter these campaigns.  The government has a responsibility to foster communal harmony, to maintain law and order, and to ensure peace and security in the country.  Moving from rhetoric to action is vital and urgent if we are to avert a tragic escalation of violence.

Jayantha Dhanapala                                                          Professor Savitri Goonesekere

On behalf of Friday Forum, the Group of Concerned Citizens consisting of;

Mr. Jayantha Dhanapala, Professor Savitri Goonesekera, Rt. Rev. Bishop Duleep de Chickera,      Professor Camena Gunaratne, Professor Arjuna Aluwihare, Professor Gananath Obeysekera,                 Ms. Shanthi Dias, Professor Ranjini Obeysekera, Mr. Lanka Nesiah,  Rev. Dr. Jayasiri Peiris,                     Ms. Anne Abayasekara,  Dr. Upatissa Pethiyagoda,  Dr. A. C. Visvalingam, Dr. Devanesan Nesiah,           Mr. J.C. Weliamuna,  Dr. Deepika Udagama, Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne,  Mr. Ahilan Kadirgarmar, Mr. Ranjit Fernando, Mr. Javid Yusf,  Ms. Manouri  Muttetuwegama,  Mr. Daneshan Casiechetty,          Mr. Faiz-ur.Rahman, Mr. Prashan de Visser, Mr. C. Jayaratne.

If resolution is not implemented, US may push for punitive action

Geneva drama shakes Indian government also; it tried to toughen the draft to please the DMK, but failed

Pakistan works hard to win the support of Islamic countries for government, but our own EAM still indulging in DPL harakiri

By Our Political Editor-Sunday, March 24, 2013

Perhaps never before has a resolution at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva brought a government to the brink of collapse or allowed a country facing accusations to relax whilst others did diplomacy for it.
That in essence is the action-packed saga of the second US-backed resolution approved by the Council on Thursday. Twenty-five countries voted in favour, thirteen against, eight abstained and there was one absentee from the 47 member Council. The table on this page shows how the countries fared during a General Assembly session of the HRC. It was watched live by Sri Lankans through a UN webcast also downlinked by a local TV channel.

Some 48 hours ahead of Thursday, changes in the final US draft saw an ostensible moderation. A few foreign diplomats in Geneva described it as only a chocolate coating over the tough and bitter clauses. It was the result of behind-the-scenes diplomacy between a world power, the United States, and a regional power, India. Diplomats of the two countries were locked in close dialogue. For India, the need for re-phrasing and even exclusion of provisions that seemed “intrusive” was important in its own national interest. It did not want such provisions to become instruments to be used against it someday. The seemingly beneficial fallout was for Sri Lanka.

Seizing on that action which appeared to him as a “watered down” resolution was the Dravida Munnetra Kazhakam (DMK) of Muthuvel Karunanidhi. Angered by it, he decided that 26 DMK MPs in the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, including cabinet ministers should withdraw. They quit on Tuesday. This was notwithstanding three cabinet ministers – A.K. Anthony (Defence), P. Chidambaram (Finance) and Ghulam Nabi Azad (Health) – rushing on a flight from New Delhi to Chennai to plead. The DMK leader who accused the Congress Government of “watering down” the resolution refused to change his mind. He wanted a reference made to investigating “genocide,” clearly a transparent political ploy. With that action, Karunanidhi appears to have not only outsmarted his Tamil Nadu political archival Jeyaram Jeyalalithaa. Above all, he has also placed the government of the world’s largest democracy, India, a lame duck administration.
In marked contrast, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Hina Rabbani Khar set in motion a diplomatic campaign for Sri Lanka. On her directions, Zamir Akram, Pakistan’s Ambassador to the UN in Geneva, arranged for meetings in the Swiss city of diplomats from the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and what are described as “like-minded” groups. During at least three different sessions, Akram lobbied for Sri Lanka. Consequently, OIC countries Kuwait, Mauritania, Qatar and United Arab Emirates (UAE) voted against the resolution.

This was besides Pakistan. Another member, Burkina Faso abstained. Libya and Sierra Leone were the only two OIC members to support the US move. If not for the seven Islamic countries, vote in favour of Sri Lanka would have been only six. Their support was despite lobbying by US diplomats about the issues Muslims were facing from the Bodhu Bala Sena (BBS) and a line in the resolution which expressed concern, among other matters, on “discrimination on the basis of religion or belief.”

That seemed the scene setter for two days of talks between Sri Lanka and Pakistan on April 4. Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary Jalil Abbas will be in Colombo for the event with External Affairs Ministry Secretary Karunatilleke Amunugama. A gamut of bilateral and regional issues is expected to figure in the talks, an EAM official said. Abbas will also call on External Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris and President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

As for Sri Lanka itself, Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe, President’s Special Envoy on Human Rights, was picked with less than three days to go for the Human Rights Council sessions. The earlier plan was to leave matters in the hands of Ravinatha Aryasinha, Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to the UN in Geneva. Rajapaksa, though in favour, later changed his mind and was not happy leaving it in Aryasinha’s hands alone. If Samarasinghe had little time to work on strategy, it was spelt out to him by President Rajapaksa only on Monday, March 11, just a week before the voting, as revealed in these columns last week. Contrary to wild speculation, Samarasinghe did not have a trump card up his sleeve from Rajapaksa to play in Geneva. Parachuted into the diplomatic battlefield, the ground for an assortment of more than fifty Sri Lankan delegates last year, he had to hold the reins with Ambassador Aryasinha. Yet, there are volumes of lessons to be learned from the aftermath in Geneva. This is at a time when all and sundry are being blamed for the outcome. Nothing is being said about the conduct of Sri Lanka’s foreign policy if indeed there is one.

In the light of confusion over how the different draft resolutions evolved, an explanation is necessary before one takes a look at other issues. From late January, the US began consulting its allies on a draft resolution and won Indian support for the move. One of the early drafts to circulate was dated February 16. The salient provisions in this draft appeared exclusively in the front-page lead story of the Sunday Times of February 17. As it continued to evolve during consultations by US with different countries, various drafts emerged. They were revealed in the Sunday Times (Political Commentary) of February 24, March 10 and March 17. At 2 p.m. on March 8, the US handed in to the UNHRC Secretariat in Geneva a draft resolution (A/HRC/22/L1) dated 12 March notwithstanding the discrepancy in the dates. Thereafter, a revised text (A/HRC/22/L.1/Rev.1) was handed over to the Secretariat at 6 p.m. on March 18. This text dated March 19, endorsed by 41 co-sponsors, both HRC members and non-members, was approved by the Council on Thursday. It reads:

Promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka   Read More

BBS’s Latest Target- Muslim Dress Code

By Sharmini Serasinghe -March 24, 2013

 

Sharmini Serasinghe

With the ‘Halal’ issue exhausting all the hot-air being blown around it, now here comes the Muslim dress code to the fore. Muslim women are now being pinched, pushed and spat on because of their choice of dress in the form of a long loose over-garment called the ‘abaya’.

It was not until the effervescent Saffron Brigade (Bodu Bala Sena) drew attention to it did anyone pay much heed to the ‘abaya’ which is a common sight especially in urban areas of the country. Upon further investigation into the relatively recent popularity of this outer-garment favoured by some Muslim ladies in Lanka one finds significantly varying reasons for it.

Lankan Muslims

Of the three leading ethnic groups in the country it is only the Muslims of Lanka who bear a religious rather than a linguistic, ethnic or racial identity. Unlike the Sinhalese and Tamils, the Moslems cannot generally be identified by their language, dress or cultural identity. Therefore Lankan Muslims until recently assimilated inconspicuously into the rest of Lankan society and were never regarded as a ‘threat’ by the ‘other’.

It is interesting to note that this relatively new trend by some Lankan Muslims to embrace the Middle Eastern styles of the Arab dress code in the form of the ‘abaya’ and ‘thobe’ (long loose shirt for men) etc., is especially seen amongst the younger and more urban Muslim men and women. Others among the older generation still favour the sari draped in the customary Muslim fashion and shirt, trouser or sarong for the men.

This trend of a ‘different’ dress code denotes a stronger outward expression of the Muslim religious identity. Therefore it has drawn greater attention to the Lankan Muslims rather negatively in the eyes of some, as a conspicuous social ‘other’ as it makes them more ‘visible’ and different. This unfortunately seems to have formed a psychological barrier even between some among other communities and the Lankan Muslims.

In civilized society one’s attire constitutes a very significant form of non-verbal communication, more so in a multi-cultural one, where what one wears conveys nonverbal clues about his or her personality. In such a context the ‘abaya’ and ‘thobe’ which are ‘culturally new’ to Lanka, appear to have riled not only the Saffron Brigade but some among other communities as well.

It appears that to them the messages conveyed through this attire is “we are different from you” or “we are not one of you”. Hence the general message conveyed through this attire to the ‘other’ is interpreted to be one of aloofness, from other ethnic communities.

I personally know several Muslim ladies who until recently dressed like the ‘other’. However since donning the ‘abaya’ they have been socially marginalised by some. They are no longer invited by their former schoolmates to parties or other social gatherings. From what I have been told, it appears that the ‘others’ feel uncomfortable with their friends now covered from head to toe.

This is indeed a sad state of affairs and does not augur well for peace and unity in a multi ethno-religious country; but it is not an issue that time cannot heal. Nevertheless in the interim this could provide sufficient ammunition to the likes of the Saffron Brigade to drive their point home. This in turn makes the Lankan Muslim today, extremely vulnerable through their conspicuous visibility to the psychotics.

Lanka’s Eastern Muslims

On a recent visit to the Ampara district in the East Coast I gained a much wider perspective of how and why some Lankan Moslems have embraced the Arabian mode of attire. And strangely I didn’t see as many dressed in the ‘abaya’ and ‘thobe’ as I expected to, in an area predominantly populated by Muslims. Save a few the others whom I met and spoke to were dressed in sari, shalwar kameez, sarong, trousers and shirt.

From what I gathered it appears, that given the significant number of Lankan Moslems who have lived and worked in the Middle East, where they had to adhere to a strict dress code prevalent in some of those countries, on returning home, continued the dress code.

This has now become a ‘trend’. It makes them stand out as financially well-to-do, due to their employment abroad, and therefore sends a silent message to others in their community, that they now belong to a higher social status. The middle class Muslims refer to them derogatorily as the “new rich”.

There are other economic reasons as well. I met a mother of four daughters Aiza in Pottuvil who herself was dressed in a sari draped in the customary Muslim fashion. She confessed that since her offspring decided on their own to don the ‘abaya’, as they regarded it ‘fashionable’, there was no longer a need to spend money on a variety of clothing since this long loose over-garment covered it all.

The advantage of the ‘abaya’ says Aiza is that one could wear even faded and darned clothes beneath it, and no one will ever know. Even the men, she says, don’t require many shirts, trousers and sarongs as before, since a minimum of two sets of the ‘Thobe’ (long loose shirt and trouser or sarong) are sufficient. As a result the family as a whole is now able to afford three square meals a day on the money they save on clothes.

Then there is another section among the Muslims that attributes the new Muslim dress code to a heightened awareness of ‘Muslim issues’ around the world and therefore a greater sense of membership in the global community of all Muslims. This is a relatively small section of Muslims with a ‘political’ mindset, who displays bouts of intolerance and extremism against the minority Sinhalese and Tamils in the East, in an attempt to scare them away from the area. As a result the handful of Sinhalese and Tamil residents in the area has formed a bond in unity against the aggressor.

Whatever the reasons Lankan Muslims have for adopting a ‘different’ mode of attire, is well within their rights as human beings. After all Lanka is still supposed to be a democracy and a civilized society where all are equal, therefore no one has the right to intrude into the privacy and freedom of another.

Let those rabble rousers be advised against using superficial and lame excuses such as a dress-code of a minority community to drive a wedge between our society and create unwarranted mayhem as a result. Politicians of the past have created enough chaos between the Sinhalese and Tamils let not their successors expand on that by creating disunity with the Muslims as well.

“Italian harlot” MaRa in a fit of rage (Lanka-e-News-24.March.2013, 8.30PM) While the unrest and demonstrations in Tamil Nadu are reaching alarming proportions against SL MaRa regime, and the number of protestors are snowballing, another extremist Tamil youth had set himself on fire yesterday and died. The 30 year old youth , Wickrema who immolated himself on 22nd died after admission to hospital today. 80 % of his body had been burnt. It may be recalled that previously too , in protest against the atrocities committed on the Tamils in SL by the SL government , an extremist Tamil youth in Tamil nadu , Kuddalor district immolated himself . Interestingly , in SL however , though the extremist leaders and extremist morons, are most violent and vociferous , and staging a series of demonstrations against the attack on SL monks in India who were assaulted , chased from behind and assaulted again and again even as one of them was fleeing; and against India voting at the Geneva sessions in disfavor of SL , not one of these SL extremist fanatics or morons , Champika Ranawake , Nanasara sex starved harem owner of five wives, Ravana , Wimal Weerawansa , and Bengamuwe Nalaka took their lives or even made such an attempt genuinely, implying that SL extremists and so called nationalists want to enjoy their luxury life at the expense of the deluded gullible masses. Of course they will certainly encourage the foolish followers of theirs to die for their bogus cause. But not one of these extremists will die for the cause, that is for sure. The Rajapakse regime that is using Ministers, Champika and Wimal Weerawansa to spearhead protests had today used Cabinet Minister Dallas Alahaperuma and held a media briefing, where a completely different and dubious picture was painted. ‘We saw , some politicians and leading media Institutions are seeking to arouse Indian opposition and protests . During the period of President Late Premadasa too a situation as this arose, and the country was driven into a tense and violent situation. The country was set on ‘fire.’ No matter what, we shall not allow such a situation to spring up. We shall not fall into that dire position. Our friendly historic ties with India will not be dented. Even when defeating the terrorists such protests erupted in India , but the stern stance taken by them then has not been forgotten by us.’ Dallas Alahaperuma stated . In this connection , ‘some parties’ he referred to are constituent ‘coolie’ parties of his alliance government. Italian harlot ---------------- Already unhinged MaRa whose lunacy had hit a new high after the Geneva defeat at voting had summoned some of his favorite Ministers to the Temple Trees yesterday to discuss what measures shall be taken in the future. After the arrival of these stooges , MaRa in a fit of rage and insanity had furiously berated Sonia Gandhi , the Indian Congress leader in the most vicious and filthy language ‘This Italian harlot came and got even Rajiv Gandhi killed. She is a CIA agent trying to break up India . We won’t get scared of that harlot’ , MaRa had yelled out. Finally the stooges who attended the discussions had to return after listening to a barrage of choicest foul and filthy words against an Indian female leader tripping off MaRa’s crocodile tongue.. It is learnt that MaRa had desperately tried to speak to Sonia Gandhi on several occasions the previous day , but there had been no response from the other end. Later Basil Rajapakse who boasts of bosom friendship with India had also made tremendous efforts to speak to Sonia without avail.

Sri Lankans disappointed with India over UNHRC resolution

Saturday, March 23, 2013,
Colombo: Reaction to India's support for the US-sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka was negative in the island nation on Friday, with the media calling it a 'let down' and an ally in the government demanding a "drastic change" in the country's foreign policy towards New Delhi. 

Angry over India's move, the Heritage Party, part of the ruling-alliance, has called for a drastic change in the Lankan foreign policy by giving cold shoulder to India and supporting Pakistan's stand on Kashmir. 

"We urge the government to build a foreign policy for Asian solidarity and brotherhood without India", a JHU statement said. 

Commenting on the statement, JHU leader and Minister of Technology Research, Champika Ranawaka said, "We urge the government not to grant commercial or diplomatic favours because India has disregarded our sovereignty". 

"We also wish to stress that Sri Lanka ought not continue trade and tourism ties with Tamil Nadu, which is hostile to us", Ranawaka said. 

Ranawaka said Tamil Nadu politicians, MG Ramachandran, Jayalalithaa and Karunanidhi must be held responsible for rights violations in Sri Lanka due to their backing of the LTTE since the 1980s. 

Sri Lanka must be thankful to Pakistan and Maldives for holding the SAARC spirit alive when India chose to violate it, the party said. 

"India is holding on to Kashmir by force since 1947. There were reports of many mass graves for which India is responsible," Ranawaka said. 

Meanwhile, the Sri Lankan media termed India's backing for the resolution as a 'let down' and noted that it was Islamic nations who had come to Colombo's rescue. 

All Sinhala paper leads highlighted India's vote against Sri Lanka, besides driving home the point that it was Islamic nations who had come to Sri Lanka's rescue. 

"India joins USA to beat SL," was the banner lead in the English daily 'Daily Mirror', the next to which was a comment from the powerful defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, "India disappointed us". 

'The Island' page one story "Gotabhaya deeply disappointed with India's stand" supplemented its lead, "Resolution against SL passed ?India supports US". 

"Would India address its accountability issues to the satisfaction of Western powers or the UN", Rajapaksa queries. 

The Island's hardhitting editorial, "Geneva: a triumph for hypocrisy" fired a broadside on the Tamil Nadu influence on New Delhi's foreign policy, "now that India has voted for the US resolution, Karunanidhi is likely to rejoin the UPA government...But India is sure to realise its folly sooner or later; it is digging itself into a hole". 

Its sister Sinhala daily 'Divayina' editorial captioned 'Tamil Nadu we are familiar with' branded the South Indian state as the mother of Tamil separatism, its backing of the Lankan Tamil terror outfit. 

India along with 24 other countries yesterday backed a US-sponsored resolution at the UNHRC against Sri Lanka asking it to conduct an "independent and credible" probe into allegations of human rights violations. 

Thirteen member countries, including Pakistan voted against and eight member-states abstained from voting on the contentious resolution on 'Promoting Reconciliation and Accountability in Sri Lanka' which was adopted in the 47- nation strong UNHRC. 

Among the 13 nations which opposed the US resolution in favour of Sri Lanka were the Islamic nations: Indonesia, Kuwait, Maldives, Pakistan, Qatar and UAE. 

PTI 

Geneva, Halal And Bodu Bala Sena

By Kalana Senaratne -March 24, 2013

Kalana Senaratne

There are tensions and schisms erupting, there is a crisis in the making. One dimension of this crisis is the unfolding diplomatic debacle: the Geneva-crisis. The group Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) represents, and gives expression to, another dimension. The emergence of both was to be expected; both, however, were avoidable.

Geneva-crisis

After Sri Lanka’s sui generis performance in 2009, the Geneva-story has been a depressing one to a lot of people. Sri Lanka’s support-base has dwindled drastically. India which, in 2009, opposed a Western-sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka, stood up to remind the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillai, where to get off. Today, India is endorsing Western or US-sponsored resolutions, and acknowledging in the process reports produced by Ms. Pillai. The contrast couldn’t have been more damaging than this.

In the face of such developments, Sri Lanka’s message (articulated especially by her political envoys), both at the UNHRC as well as in Sri Lanka, has been one of fire and fury, but without much substance. Unfortunately, responses to criticism in the absence of much needed action on the ground do tend to take such a form. The Sinhala phrase ‘puss-wedilla’ comes to mind, so too does the phrase ‘popgun oratory’ (as the late Lakshman Kadirgamar once put it in response to some of Anura Bandaranaike’s statements). While such responses do come in handy at times, it is better that that approach, that demeanour, became the exception rather than the norm. But this will not be so given Sri Lanka’s continuing confusion over the situation it is in after the UNHRC’s adoption of the second resolution this month.

The situation is a serious one; not only because of the adoption of another resolution, but because of the fact that what Sri Lanka is failing to do is what Sri Lanka has promised to do. Stated differently, what Sri Lanka is being asked to do is what she has promised to do. And what she has promised to do amounts to what she is capable of doing.

Firstly, much of this trouble could have been avoided had considerable progress been made in terms of implementing the recommendations of the LLRC; especially those recommendations on humanitarian and human rights law. Satisfactory progress on issues such as the resettlement of IDPs, for example, does not continue to hold much value when the demand is for something else. So there needs to be a realistic assessment of why no one seems to be listening when Sri Lanka speaks.

Secondly, the question is largely about implementing the 13th Amendment. Here too, Sri Lanka could have established the Northern Provincial Council much earlier than the promised date (of September 2013). The current Sri Lankan Constitution has adequate safeguards in place to protect the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. And as long as powers are devolved to a de-merged North and East (and for practical purposes, this can be sans the devolution of police powers), Sri Lanka could go a long way in addressing some of the critical concerns raised by the so-called ‘international community’.

To be sure, this need not be done because the West is asking us to do it; nor should it be done because Tamil Nadu is up in arms against the people of Sri Lanka, or because Mr. Karunanidhi dreams of Eelam in his slumber. But it can, and needs to be done, to promote greater political and democratic participation within the country. As a foremost historian and critic of the ‘traditional homeland’ argument, Prof. KM de Silva, has recently reiterated:

“The democratization process will also require the establishment of a provincial council for the northern province. Elections to that provincial council will enable political parties and individuals to vie for positions in the council. Such a council will give the Tamils opportunities in influencing, if not fashioning, the development policy of the northern province. The Tamils could play a big role in the democratization process of the province” [in Sri Lanka and the Defeat of the LTTE(Penguin/Vijitha Yapa, 2012), p. 266].

If such measures are not adopted, further intrusion into Sri Lanka’s domestic affairs becomes inevitable. Since things have hit rock bottom, it is perhaps the best time to wake up.

Bodu Bala Sena and anti-Muslim rhetoric

Another dimension of the Sri Lankan crisis comes in the form of anti-Muslim rhetoric that is spreading fast throughout the country. Space for considerable foreign intrusion and interference could be created if inter-religious disharmony leads to violence.

I am not totally opposed to the broader dialogue or discourse groups such as BBS give rise to. In a world of symbols, identities and identity-promotion, reducing a praiseworthy concept such as the ‘Halal’ concept to a mere symbol (and that too, for commercial purposes) is problematic. And given that the symbol in question promotes, or reminds one of a particular religion, any person belonging to a different religion should have the freedom to raise concerns. Therefore, the Halal-logo is an issue, especially in a world of contested identities; and Muslim-leaders would do well to remember that, especially when a vast majority of the people of a country belong to a different religion. And perhaps the somewhat swift manner in which the Muslim-leaders (together with the cooperation of a few Buddhist monks) were able to address this issue further proves that the Muslim-community could have been more sensitive to the concerns of others, before groups such as BBS emerged.

But there is also a very dangerous and grotesque dimension to the BBS and its project. The manner in which its representatives raise issues can very easily incite anti-Muslim hatred and violence. This is especially the case when the BBS decides to hold public rallies. There’s something very grotesque in a Buddhist monk coming on stage and demanding incessantly that Sinhala boys and girls should now get ready to produce more babies as the Sinhala population is being threatened by the Muslims in the country. There is something sickening when certain monks demand that Buddhists should not visit Muslim-restaurants since the Muslims deliberately spit in their food before serving it to their customers [statements to this effect were made by monks during the recent BBS-rally held in Kandy]. These monks who claim to be the protectors of Buddhism and the teachings of the Buddha seem to have forgotten the Buddha’s teachings on ‘right speech’. Even if the time is considered to be ripe for airing such views, the manner in which they are raised is wholly unwarranted, deplorable.

Responding to the BBS-crisis

The question is: how can we respond?

Such developments generate two popular forms of responses, which I tend to think are of limited relevance today. Firstly, there emerges a critical counter-response which attempts to remind, or reiterate, the ‘original’ teachings of the Buddha. Secondly, there is a call for the creation of an overarching ‘Sri Lankan’ identity.

The first response (the ‘Buddhism-betrayed’ kind of response which has failed) is to be appreciated, but if over-stretched beyond a point, becomes problematic for a number of reasons. This is because advocates of Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism have already accepted that what they are promoting is ‘Sinhala-Buddhism’, and that it can be different from what is perceived to be the ‘original’ teachings of the Buddha. They would even claim that Sinhala-Buddhism is not the only kind of Buddhism, that it is even not the ‘correct’ form of Buddhism, but is one of many kinds of Buddhism prevalent in the world. In the face of such an admission, to argue that Sinhala-Buddhist nationalists are not promoting the ‘correct’ form of Buddhism takes one nowhere.

The second response is problematic since it is predicated on the assumption that there is something intrinsically good about the ‘Sri Lankan’ identity. Advocates of the ‘Sri Lankan’ identity don’t often realize that they too are engaged in the promotion of another kind of identity which, when developed as a counter-response to a different identity (and very often with hatred towards that other identity), can be as problematic as the identity that they like to critique. And even with such a broad identity, one needs to adopt certain positions in the realm of politics; and these decisions can always be construed as tilting towards a decision promoted by this or that ‘extremist’ identity. In other words, a middle-of-the-road ‘Sri Lankan’ identity is only good as long as no one questions the positions its proponents adopt; the moment they are questioned (‘Where do you stand on the issue of devolution, Mr Sri Lankan identity? for example), and their positions are revealed, they tend to fall into a camp they so vehemently critique.

I think the challenge ought to be a more difficult one than this.

One: while reverting to the teachings of the Buddha, it is necessary not to delude oneself into imagining that there is an absolutely and pure form of Buddhism – and that once this ‘pure’ or ‘correct’ form of Buddhism is pointed out, everything will fall into place. No, it does not happen that way, and therefore one cannot rest assured. Also, to put it bluntly, it is necessary to ensure that one does not, in trying to preach Buddhism, begin to sound more Buddhist than the Buddha himself.

Two: while an overarching Sri Lankan identity is a good idea, abstract theorizing takes one nowhere. In order to build such an overarching identity, one has to begin from somewhere. And if building an identity is what matters, it is perhaps necessary to begin with the narrower identity in question. So for example, if Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism is the problem, the first challenge would be to engage in re-imagining or re-constructing a different form of Sinhala-Buddhist identity (all identities, like everything else, are our constructions). Similarly, if Tamil (or Tamil-Hindu) nationalism is the problem, the task would be to develop a different kind of Tamil-Hindu identity. And one need not be shy to admit openly that one is inspired by certain teachings of Buddhism and/or by certain strands of thought contained in Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism, for example. The task is to be discriminatory (or selective) in what one wants to learn from such teachings and writings.

Without such an attempt being made to re-construct an identity one is closer to, I don’t think the task of building what, at the moment, appears to be an abstract ‘Sri Lankan’ identity will ever be practical or useful. Once these separate identities are rethought of in a more pluralistic way (and this needs to be done by all, not simply the Sinhala-Buddhists), there will be space created to build a more formidable, overarching, identity applicable to all the people. In fact, too much effort to do the latter may not even be required by then.

And in the present context, a task confronting a Sinhala-Buddhist would be to show that s/he is not some kind of bigoted monster; that a Sinhala-Buddhist, while promoting and preserving his or her religion and culture, is equally committed to promoting equality and harmony in society (and this applies to others as well). This is the most challenging task confronting critical elements within the Sinhala-Buddhist majority. In broader terms, a constant and vigorous re-examination of one’s identity becomes essential.

Thirdly, it is necessary to be clear that those who are seen to be protecting groups which have the potential to arouse ethnic and religious hatred need to be held accountable and responsible for any violence caused: politicians and public officials alike. Here again, the responsibility falls on people belonging to all religions and ethnic groups to remind their leaders that any form of violence would not be acceptable.

Conclusion

The crisis confronting Sri Lanka is not something which can be addressed by writing about it in a postcard and posting it to a judge. The situation calls for more intelligent and careful thinking on the part of Sri Lanka’s politicians as well as the citizenry in general. But very little thinking seems to be taking place these days. Surely, this cannot be our national trait.

‘Acting’ President Priyankara on cloud nine

Columns-Sunday, March 24, 2013

The opening of the Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport (MRIA) last Monday made him so ecstatic.�
At the nationally televised event, Aviation Minister Priyankara Jayaratne said the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA) in Katunayake was not international. It was the MRIA which had all the attributes of an international airport.

He had reason to be so bubbly. It was only the day before the event that he had acted as President at a rehearsal. Minister Geethanjana Gunawardena and several Parliamentarians, including Namal Rajapaksa, were present.
It was Namal who was first invited to stand in as President as the mock ceremony was to get under way.

The Hambantota District MP was shy and said that even during a rehearsal he would not want to do that. Perhaps a good trait when Namal the young politician is pursuing a political career in his father’s footsteps. He is careful not to give room for misapprehensions.

“Methana inna ayagen jeyeshtama Priyankara amathithuma. Ey nisa oba thuma Janadipathi boomikawa rangapanna (the most senior politician here is Priyankara Jayaratne. So you can act as the President),” said Namal.

Jayaratne blushed but lost no time in playing his role. It is not always that a UPFA politician gets to be the ‘acting’ President. So, no wonder he was swept off his feet and his head was in the clouds as he spoke the next day.
Rajaratnam brother also indicted on insider-�dealing charges

Rengan

When Sri Lankan expats hit the front pages of the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal, it’s invariably either for fraud, insider stock trading or medical malpractice.

A physician in Los Angeles, apparently owning two Rolls Royce limousines, was hit with a massive fine and a jail sentence a couple of years ago. Last year, another physician in New York was arrested by Federal agents for writing hundreds of prescriptions for pain killers, a controlled drug, even without meeting his mostly fictitious patients.
But the most notorious case revolved around Raj Rajaratnam, head honcho of the Galleon Group. He is now serving 11 years in a federal prison after his sentencing in May 2011. Two of his associates, an Indian and an American, were subsequently found guilty of conspiracy and securities-fraud charges and jailed. But the end is still not in sight, with more co-conspirators being forced out of the wood.

Last week, the ruthlessly long arm of the law, reached out to Rajaratnam’s youngest brother, Rengan, who is living in exile in Brazil. The 42-year-old stock broker, who worked for his brother’s hedge fund company, has been charged with six counts of securities fraud.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Rengan led the high life in New York with his ill-gotten gains, very much like his brother, Raj. At social gatherings, he insisted on the finest cognac and cigars (maybe Cuban?) and claimed that he had a black belt in martial arts. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) will pursue him — even if it be the Amazon jungles of Brazil, said one who is aware of the goings on.

All of these expats, incidentally, are from two of the most elitist schools in Colombo. Obviously, they were not taught these dirty tricks at school, but wherever they learnt how to manipulate stocks and defraud the US medical system, they didn’t learn one of the basic rules in a crime caper: “Steal, but never get caught”, remarked a friend.
As one wag from a rural Sri Lankan school now doing well in the US jocularly cracked: if this crime trend continues over the next 10 or 15 years, Sri Lanka could stage a gala cricket match between the old boys of both schools in a federal penitentiary, one of the meanest and toughest of US prisons, either in the state of Pennsylvania or North Carolina.

Were they behind Botswana’s abstention in Geneva?
Did the Britain-based Tamil Global Forum (GTF) and the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) in Sri Lanka jointly lobby Botswana to abstain from voting when the US resolution against Sri Lanka was taken up at the United Nations Human Rights Council sessions in Geneva on Thursday?

Just days before the voting, GTF’s Suren Surendran and TNA Parliamentarian M.A. Sumanthiran, as the picture here reveals, met the Botswana Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation Minister Phandu Skelemani. Some officials of the South African government were also involved in the discussions.

Namal says dirty jobs given to him
UPFA Parliamentarian Namal Rajapaksa devotes a day every week to meet the people, especially from the Hambantota District.�Last week, he was at Carlton House, the family home in Tangalle.

UPFA MP Udith Lokubandara and Provincil Council member Kanchana Wijesekara had turned up to see Namal. They were by his side as he listened to different requests from those visiting.A lady from Panadura walked up to Namal and said she needed a letter from him to obtain a route permit. Such permits are issued to those operating private bus services.

“Aney nendey mata ewa karanna behe. Eka karanne tender walinne. (Sorry Aunty, I can’t do that. It is done according to tender procedures),” he said. The lady shot back “Eka karaganna puluwan, oba thumage liyum kellak vitharai oney” (It can be done. I only need a letter from you).

“Kawda kiuwe magen liyumak oney kiyala. (Who said a letter from me is needed),” Namal asked.
“Hama kenama kiyanna deyak mahaththayo. (All are saying, Sir),” she said. “Balapan machan, okkoma kunu bere wewata wage karanna beri weda okkotama mage pitata danawa. (See, mates, like dumping all waste into Beira Lake, they are loading things that cannot be done on my back),” Namal told his two friends and colleagues.
Rebel MP singing his way to Wayamba CM’s post
Ruling UPFA circles are abuzz with reports that a top rung opposition Parliamentarian may give up his seat to contest the upcoming Wayamba Provincial Council elections from the government side.

Insiders say he is being earmarked for the post of Chief Minister. The new role may not be bad for the man who has sung his way to the top of the political ladder.
War pictures: Defence camera focuses on TV man
Defence authorities say they have identified the man who was responsible for providing battlefield photographs to pro-Tiger guerrilla groups overseas.�He had been in the frontlines when the military crushed the Tiger guerrillas in May 2009, representing a lesser known television channel.

He had since emigrated with his family to a western country, they say. Sleuths are busy tracking his past activities.

GL reacts angrily to Canadian Senator’s comments
Here is an abject lesson on how Sri Lanka’s diplomacy is being conducted. No matter if it pays dividends or not.
Canadian Senator Hugh Segal is in Sri Lanka on a ‘fact finding” tour for his country’s External Affairs Ministry (EAM) ahead of the Commonwealth Summit in Colombo in November.

After ending a tour of the North, Senator Segal gave a talk at the Kadirgamar Institute for International Relations and Strategic Studies this week.He spoke of the positive developments, notwithstanding some setbacks that he witnessed, prompting those in the audience to get the distinct impression that the Senator would give a somewhat favourable report on Sri Lanka to the EAM in Canada.

Came question time and a journalist in the audience asked for his views on the independence of the judiciary. The Canadian Senator replied that in his country, courts often gave judgments against the Government, but they did not impeach the Chief Justice as a result. He said he was proud of the independence of the judiciary in his country.
Who should get irked? It was Sri Lanka’s number one diplomat, External Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris. In a burst of anger, Peiris was to tell the Senator in the presence of all, that had he not been a guest of the Government, he would have known how to deal with him.

Naming, shaming and issuing threats seem to be now part of Sri Lanka’s megaphone foreign policy that rises like a lion at home, but is like a pussycat abroad. “Now”, said a distraught member of the audience ” wonder what the Senator will have to report on Sri Lanka”.

Fonseka’s men knock on UNP door
With no official recognition for his political party so far from the Commissioner of Elections, former General Sarath Fonseka’s supporters are trying to find a way out to be in active politics in the opposition.Recently one of them reached out to United National Party (UNP) leader Ranil Wickremesinghe. He has often said that people who want to join the party could easily enrol themselves as members by paying the required fee.

So, the position was spelt out. There would be no official posts for those who want to join in. However, Wickremesinghe said there were prospects for the group to join his broader alliance. He wanted the interlocutor to speak to UNP General Secretary Tissa Attanayake to get more details. The matter rests there.

Hangmen hanged
Two hangmen, who were recruited by the Prisons Department, have been fired.
Both were attached to a training programme after they were recruited recently following an interview process.
The duo who had gone on leave did not report for duty on the due date last month. Later they submitted appeals saying both had fallen ill.

Now prisons officials are mulling with the idea of providing training on “hangman’s duties” to those who are already in their cadre. The question is who would volunteer?
A witty prison official said they also might fall sick.

Jayasekera gives advice to teacher GL
For Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa, who has to mostly chair proceedings of Parliament, life is not always drab.
He injects his own sense of humour during speeches by both sides in the House. One such occasion came this week.
United National Party’s Kurunegala District Parliamentarian Dayasiri Jayasekera was on his feet. He referred to an occasion when popular singer Nanda Malini was subjected to harassment at the Kuwait airport.

Mr. Jayasekera asked External Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris to conduct what he called an awareness programme for Sri Lankan envoys overseas. This was to avoid repetitions like the one faced by Nanda Malini.
Speaker Rajapaksa quipped “Golayakugen guruwarayata labena upades piliganna (or accept the advice of a student that is given to his teacher)”.

Many of the MPs did not know the nuances of what Speaker Rajapaksa said. Jay