Showing posts with label minorities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label minorities. Show all posts

Monday, May 16, 2011

On Palestine & Sri Lanka: the Politics of Aid & Development - Some Reflections and Notes for Future Research

(Graphic Courtesy: The Hindu, May 20 2011)

Dr Sara Roy of the Centre for Middle Eastern Studies at Harvard University is an eminent scholar on Palestine. Her profile can be viewed here at wikipedia. In this speech delivered in 2008 she talks about the politics of donor activities in Palestine which ignored Gaza and supported West Bank with the intention of dissecting, splitting and diluting the Palestinian movement for independent statehood (Fast forward to the 38th minute of the video for this part of her speech). She talks about how Western donors engaged with the status quo in a manner whereby donor support by design and effect supported/support Israeli Occupation. She points to how the earlier notion of occupation as bad for peace is being replaced with 'normalising' occupation. Also see her response to a question on Hamas here.

There are definite parallels to Sri Lanka. Scholars like Patrick Peebles have commented on how the dry zone colonisation programme had an impact on the ethnic conflict. Serene Tennakoon has commented on how the rituals of big developmental project was important to the kind of post colonial nation building project that was being experimented by the Sinhala elite. Amita Sashtri in 1990 wrote an important article that dealt with the material basis for the movement for Tamil separatism. Sunil Bastian has extensively written about the politics of land reform. His recent article for Panos Sri Lanka provides for a good overview.

More recently in 2009 the International Crisis Group in a report (couched in a language that seeks to make the point without discomforting donors) points to the need for conflict-sensitivity and to ensure local participation in planning and implementing developmental projects in post-war Eastern Province.

In a lecture that i delivered at the invitation of the Jaffna Science Association at the Faculty of Science of the University of Jaffna on the 13th of July 2010 titled 'Environment and the Law in the Contest of Post War Development', I drew attention to the ADB Funded Dry Zone Water Supply Programme and how it related to the Maavilaru Anicut Controversy of 2006 that triggered the final war. I also drew attention to how quick fix, rapid, mega style development and associated political imagery is being used by the GOSL (with explicit or inadvertent support from donors) in post-war Sri Lanka to undermine the political project for sharing of state power. In that speech I drew attention to the following projects being currently funded by the ADB: 1) ADB's Dry Zone Water Supply and Sanitation Project - its sub project in Vavuniya - which involved the construction of dams requiring 700 acres of land (including the acquisition of 96 acres of private land belonging to Tamils), 2) The Iranaimadukulam Project of bringing ground water to 300,000 residents in Jaffna peninsula which i claimed would have a 'Cauvery dispute effect' in relations between the people of Killinochchi and Jaffna thus dissecting the Tamil community in the North and weakening the focus on the need for a political solution. (Consider parallels to what Sara Roy says about dissection of the Palestinian community) I also drew attention to the Extra Ordinary Gazette Notification 1617/32-2009 which detailed plans to build Mankulam as an urban centre and eventually the capital of the Northern Province. The Urban Development Authority disclosed plans to settle 100,000 people by 2010 in Mankulam and estimating the population to triple to 300,000 people by 2030. I questioned 1) whether this was being planned with the objective of further effecting demographic changes in Tamil majority areas with the focus now including the Northern Province and 2) the intelligibility of the water supply project to Jaffna from Iranaimadukkulam (in the Killinochchi District) given the water scarcity in Mankulam (also located in Killi). I also raised issues relating to the Lime stone quarrying taking place in Jaffna which in fact is a major contributor to ground water salination, being carried with support from the Ministry of Defence. I proposed that rain water harvesting would be the best response to the ground water problem in Jaffna and requested at that meeting for University academics from the relevant departments (Community Medicine, Geography, Law, Economics et al) to come together to study this issue scientifically. So far nothing has come out. I hope to research further on this on my own later this year.

Sunday, January 30, 2011

On why the Tamils (& the Minorities) Have No Space in the English Print Media in Sri Lanka

We have known this all along. But if someone was looking for post-war evidence of it, they should read today's Sunday Times Editorial. If anyone thought a section of the English media in Sri Lanka leaves some space for 'liberal', 'progressive' politics, think again. Note that the tone of the editorial is critical of the Govt. But note how even in being critical of the Govt they cant help but spat the communal venom.

The editorial:

1) spats venom on the TNA ("MPs of the TNA, most living in Colombo preaching the gospel of hate and communalism from their local pulpits seem assailed by convenient amnesia");

2) says that the GOSL is right in being wary of devolving powers to the North and East ("If the Government in Colombo is wary of devolving political power to the North, and quite rightly so, then there is a bigger onus on its part not to choose to ignore the happenings where its writ is now back in force")

3) justifies the High Security Zones ("it is far too early to dismantle the large scale and widely spread military garrisons in these areas");

4) has a utilitarian advise to the Govt on dealing with paramilitary forces ("No doubt, these political elements did yeoman service in helping the Security Forces neutralize the LTTE during the latter years of the 'war', but their determination to enforce an iron grip on the populace and run their writ on the politics of the area has all the hallmarks of backfiring on the Government.")

5) and plays on the Sinhala polity's fear psychosis that India/TamilNadu has an expansionist agenda in the North and East. ("The Government had better beware. Into the vacuum of inaction comes increased Indian presence. The opening of a consulate was the first step. The Sri Lankan Government must treat the North as part and parcel of this country before someone else considers it as an extension of Tamil Nadu".)

Monday, August 10, 2009

Analysis of how the Jaffna people voted in the Municipal Council Elections

(I wrote this first as an email to colleagues and friends. Groundviews published it yesterday night here. I reproduce it here on my blog)

It appears to me that the TNA and TULF might have got more of the Tamil votes than EPDP in Jaffna.

Out of 13 seats for the UPFA, 4 have gone to Muslims candidates. 9 are from EPDP.

A Northern Displaced Muslim friend of mine says that 3000 votes were cast by the displaced Muslims living in Puttalam (If anyone has a better/accurate number i am willing to correct myself on this). Moulavi Sufiyan of Independent Group 1 himself polled around 1100 votes. The rest went to UPFA.

Total number of votes polled by UPFA is 10,000. If you subtract the Muslim votes from the 10,000 only about 8000 votes have gone to the EPDP from Jaffna Tamil residents. (i substract only 2000 since about 1000 have gone to the Moulavi) TNA has then got almost the equivalent number of votes that EPDP polled- 8000 - from Jaffna Tamil residents. Add to this TULF's votes that's 9000 votes. More than actually what EPDP received. This also reduces the number of Jaffna MC Tamil residents who have actually voted from 20,000 to around 17,000.

Remedius, TNA's Mayoral Candidate has topped the preferential votes (4,233 votes). That is 1000 votes more than the second on the preferential list (an EPDP candidate). UPFA's Mayoral Candidate Theyvendran didnt get enough preferential votes to be elected.

It is also no secret that most of the 3000 resettled from the Jaffna IDP camps on the 5th of August were from Kurunagar. A key constituency for the EPDP. This link is from EPDP's Official site: http://epdpnews.com/news.php?id=4130&ln=tamil

No wonder Douglas Devananda has told Daily Mirror that he is disappointed with the results. He has told the local newspapers that it was a loss in Jaffna and a heavy one in Vavuniya.

Saturday, July 25, 2009

The Chechen model of Conflict Resolution for Sri Lanka

The soon to come back home UN Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to Geneva, Dayan Jayatilleke has repeatedly wrote about the Chechen (Chechnya) model (yes he loves Russia) for conflict resolution in Sri Lanka:

In a recent interview with David Blacker Dayan noted:

I have long advocated the Chechen solution — an all-out, combined arms war to destroy the terrorist militia, followed by the implementation of some form of autonomy and self-governance for the area and stabilization through the rule of an elected local ally. Our military victory has to be politically conserved and socially stabilised. That’s what my advocacy of the 13th amendment is about.

Earlier this year he wrote:

Do we attempt to imitate the Israelis and practice a policy of occupation, settlements and discrimination, triggering endless cycles of conflict, or do we follow the no less tough-minded but much smarter Russian leaders, who having had to smash the Chechen terrorist insurgency with untrammeled force, have since ensured a high degree of stability by devolving power to their Chechen ally the tough young Ramzan Kadyrov, and transferring enough economic autonomy to guarantee a surge of prosperity in Grozhny?

I excerpt this paragraph from the Times topic introduction to the Chechen issue from the New York Times:

Vladimir Putin anointed Ramzan A. Kadyrov as the region's president; his father had held the post before being killed by rebels in 2004. Mr. Kadyrov crushed the rebel movement. He has strong support in Moscow, where he is praised for quelling the insurgency, rebuilding areas devastated by the war and rejuvenating the local economy. But he has also been the focus of widespread accusations of human rights violations.

Mr. Kadyrov has sought increased autonomy for Chechnya. That goal may be helped by the official end to Russian counterinsurgency operations, announced in April 2009, a move of at least symbolic value to Mr. Kadyrov.

The announcement also underscored his success in establishing a stability that has, among other things, allowed rebuilding to begin in the obliterated capital city of Grozny. But critics charge that the peace has been achieved through campaigns of unsparing brutality that have included widespread human rights violations.


The announcement did not mention troop withdrawals, though Russian officials said they would now have more legal leeway to scale down the number of federal military and security forces. While the violence in Chechnya has declined, however, the insurgents have not been completely routed, and it seems likely that many troops and security forces will remain there for some time.


I will leave it to my readers to draw the parallels to how GOSL is positioning its local allies in the East and now in the North. It does look like the Chechen solution is taking shape except that President Rajapaksha is trying to do it without giving away anything, not even as basic as the 13th amendment. So Dayan who presses for it is sent home. Now at least Dayan should come out and say that he was wrong to have expected from this regime anything like even the 13th amendment and hence that his support for the regime right from the beginning was wrong. He won't.

Monday, December 22, 2008

'Majoritarianism wins with the acquiescence of the Minorities' ?

The following extract is from Prof Jayadeva Uyangoda's October article to the EPW (Economic and Political Weekly) dated 25 October 2008. A full version of the article is available from tamilnation here.

"I believed for quite some time that ethnic majoritarianism is a political condition that the political leaders of the majority community impose by means of coercion on the ethnic minorities. It accords an unequal, at best second class, status to the minorities. Minorities do not accept majoritarianism and they resist it. That is why ethnic conflicts flare up. Observing how the Tamil and Muslim political parties in Sri Lanka have come to accept the second class and unequal status with great pleasure, I changed, realising that my understanding of majoritarianism was an incomplete one.

I now know that ethnic majoritarianism is not necessarily coercive. It has a strong element of consent of the minorities, or at least their political leaders. Majoritarianism is completed when the political representatives of the minorities accept, with happiness and even in intense competition with each other, the condition of inequality. They do so in exchange of other benefits which are usually couched in the respectable language of “development assistance to our community”.

That is what the 25 years of civil war has done to the minority rights project in Sri Lanka."

The part italicised is my own emphasis from the original. It is a very short article and the excerpt above comes at the tail end of the article.

I am unable to agree with the professor's analysis (which is not detailed possibly because he was constrained by space) and hence my disagreement with his 'new conclusion' about majoritarianism. Prof Uyangoda's reference to the minorities accepting a second class status is possibly a conclusion resulting from his analysis of Karuna's, Douglas's and possibly Thondaman's politics.

I do not think the minority ever willingly gives into majoritarianism. I do not think that they give it up with 'great pleasure'. The fact that the minorities 'give up' is essentially related and directly linked to coercive majoritarianism. The Prof seems to tag this 'giving up' as unconnected with coercive majoritarianism. Its a victory of one over the other, where the victorious picks the new leaders of the minority. I would say Thondaman, Karuna and Douglas are all examples of this. The fact that these political parties have given up does not mean that the entire community has given up. These political parties have 'given up' because they were unable to survive in their attempts to resist coercive majoritarianism. The petty agendas of these political parties and their leaders cannot be taken as a give up by a minority. I can understand a war weary population seeking out developmental assistance - an assistance which is reliant on the resources the majority has almost exclusive control over. Hence destruction, starvation and hunger is a tool of coercive majoritarianism. War wearediness can also result because of the leaders of the minority struggle lacking startegic political vision as in the case of LTTE. The dillema of minority politics in Sri Lanka is not because it has given it up with 'great pleasure' as Prof Uyangoda calls it. It is because 1) coercive majoritarianism having been able to cleverly stick to the fundamentals of majoritarian democracy (having periodic elections) has succeeded or appears to have succeeded in winning over minority politics both by the use of tools associated with majoritarian democracy (again elections and numbers) and through the use of arms and 2) because minority politics lacks imagination and flexibility.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

White Van Abduction Legalised


I am reporting on this because the English print media has either got it wrong or didn't understand the proceedings in the Supreme Court (Daily Mirror) Or they have chosen not to report on it (Island - probably wasnt important enough for them). I think the flawed reportage or non reportage is deliberate because they probably believe or fear that such reporting will or will be considered as undermining the war.

The Supreme Court heard a case filed by Thondaman's party (the Ceylon Workers Congress) which is part of the Mahinda Rajapaksha Government yesterday, regarding the abduction of one of their trade union officials. The person had been abducted by a white van and becuase of the political influence CWC yields its party leaders were able to trace the person to the custody of the Terrorism Investigation Department (TID). The facts were not disputed by the State represented by the Attorney General's Department (Mr. Palitha Fernando, the Additional Solicitor General appeared). This is probably the first case and will be the only case where somebody who had been abducted had the courgae to go to courts to file a case. The reason is obvious because the person belonged to a political party in alliance with the Government. The CWC is to be commended for bringing it to courts and not pushing it under the carpet to save the reputation of the Government.

When the case was taken up before the Chief Justice's bench (the other two judges sitting with him were Justices Shiranee Tilakawerdena and Justice Sripavan) the Chief Justice in the course of the proceedings refused to condemn the mode of 'arrest'. He chasticised the petitioner's counsel, blaming him for bringing a case for 'international news consumption'. He said that the court can do nothing to give directives regarding the use of white vans as there were too many of them in the country!! He made unintelligible assertions in open court like for instance that Sri Lanka has the largest van population in the country and that it would not be possible to restrict the import or usage of white vans into the country etc!! (He was laughing when he said this and to my disgust a majority of the members of the bar and most of the public present laughed with him) Clearly what was being asked was for a delcaration that the police had violated the petitioners fundamental right by engaging in a mode of arrest that was blatantly unlawful and unconstitutional. The CJ also said that what was important was whether one was able to find the person who was abducted and hence it was an affirmative in this case there shouldnt be an issue. The counsel protested saying that this was possible because the petitioner belonged to a political party. The CJ was dismissive in his response. The CJ thought that a receipt being issued after arrest through the local police station should be satisfying. In his order at the end of the hearing he included the above 'condition' for 'arrests' being made using white vans nd also went on to say that since torture was not being alleged in custody that violation of article 13 of the constitution was not at stake. The conusel for the petitioner protested and said that they didnt say that. The CJ queried in response as to whether they are assuming torture was being inflicted. Surely the CJ was assuming that torture was not being inflicted!! The fomer assumption is more closer to the truth than the latter for anyone who knows anything about the TID.

What the Supreme Court has essentially done is legalise the use of white vans for 'arresting' a person on the condition that a receipt be issued after the abduction is carried out. This is probably the most absurdest of all sorts of 'justice' that this Supreme Court has meted out. And hence the white van abductions can now proceed with glee!!

The CJ was worried that the case was being brought beofre him for international news consumption. (I dont think the international media is that interested in what is happening in this country. For a start not even the national media is bothered). But irrespective of what has been said in the brackets above, surely if the international community didnt know this before the decision has confirmed that even the third organ of Government - the judiciary in this country is incapable of protecting the interests of its minority populations. Now thats the message that the CJ has clearly given for international news consumption.

Friday, August 29, 2008

Arundhathi Roy on Azad for Kashmir


I read Arundhati Roy's piece on the situation in Kashmir titled "Azadi: Its the only thing the Kashmiri wants: Denial is delusion" as usual she has a terrific piece. (Azadi means freedom) It can be read here. You might have to register to read it. Its free though.

Here are some excerpts and my comments:

For somebody like myself, who is not Muslim, that interpretation of freedom is hard—if not impossible—to understand. I asked a young woman whether freedom for Kashmir would not mean less freedom for her, as a woman. She shrugged and said, "What kind of freedom do we have now? The freedom to be raped by Indian soldiers?" Her reply silenced me.

I have recently heard from some and had certain conversations about the issue of minority tamils (Tamils from the lower castes). While i think the issue is a serious one that deserves meritorious consideration i believe that those who raise it have mischievous intentions. (for example when Malinda Seneviratne raises it) Reading Arundadhi's comment above, its an apt response to all those who raise questions about whether freedom or autonomy for Tamils will resolve the 'other' issues. The bigger issue weighs down. 'What kind of freedom do we have now', irrespective of whether i am from a higher caste or a lower caste as a tamil, or whether you are a man or a woman as a Kashmiri, is a persuasive response.

I post this following paragraph without much comment. It has a lot of comparison to the anxiety of what a 'free' or autonomous tamil speaking territory would turn out to be:

Arguments that spring from love are also fraught with danger. It is for the people of Kashmir to agree or disagree with the Islamic project (which is as contested, in equally complex ways, all over the world by Muslims as Hindutva is contested by Hindus).Perhaps now that the threat of violence has receded and there is some space in which to debate views and air ideas, it is time for those who are part of the struggle to outline a vision for what kind of society they are fighting for. Perhaps it is time to offer people something more than martyrs, slogans and vague generalisations. Those who wish to turn to the Quran for guidance will no doubt find guidance there. But what of those who do not wish to do that, or for whom the Quran does not make place? Do the Hindus of Jammu and other minorities also have the right to self-determination? Will the hundreds of thousands of Kashmiri Pandits living in exile, many of them in terrible poverty, have the right to return? Will they be paid reparations for the terrible losses they have suffered? Or will a free Kashmir do to its minorities what India has done to Kashmiris for 61 years? What will happen to homosexuals and adulterers and blasphemers? What of thieves and lafangas and writers who do not agree with the "complete social and moral code"? Will we be put to death as we are in Saudi Arabia? Will the cycle of death, repression and bloodshed continue? History offers many models for Kashmir's thinkers and intellectuals and politicians to study. What will the Kashmir of their dreams look like? Algeria? Iran? South Africa? Switzerland? Pakistan?

Saturday, August 02, 2008

'Burning memories'


The burning of the Jaffna Public Library was probably one among the first of increasing acts of violence against the Tamils in this country that peaked in July 83 and a memory of July 83 much talked in its 25th anniversary should also include a reflection of this important incident in the history of the ethnic conflict. This is a small note from my experiences with the Jaffna Public library.

******

'Burning memories' is the title of a 49 minute documentary that Someetharan of Jaffna/Batticaloa has produced on the burning of the Jaffna Public Library. Sommetharan in the past worked for North East Herald, Thinakkural Jaffna and studied visual media in Chennai. He had apparently worked on the documentary for three years. The documentary is available in multiple languages including Tamil and English. The production according to a review published in the Kalachuvadu (Kalachuvadu is a left leaning social, literary, political magazine published from Tamil Nadu. Read the review here) is to be welcomed for its efforts but regrets that the documentary does not provide enough scientific analysis of the incident. It notes that it is frequently repeated in the documentary that 97,000 books were burnt in the incident but does not provide an analysis of the kind of books/manuscripts were burnt and the nature of the irreparable loss. The review also notes that mostly 'moderates' have been interviewed and that given the prevailing situation in Sri Lanka that Someetharan has engaged in ceratin level of self censorship. I haven't seen the documentary yet. I am looking forward to watching it. The criticism aside I am very happy that somebody is using the medium of visual media to document incidents in the history of the conflict. A 'documentary' culture is pretty much non existent in Sri Lanka and this production should be welcomed.

More information re the documentary can be found here:
http://burningmemories.org/
http://kanapraba.blogspot.com/2008/06/blog-post_25.html

******

I was born 4 years after the library was burnt in 1981 and i very well remember the blackened library that stood in front of the Jaffna Central College until efforts to refurbish it started taking place after CBK came (more on this in the next section).

I was back home in Jaffna last June and i went to the Public Library twice when i was there. I like the spacious library a lot - i have always enjoyed the peace that comes with the vacuum that adjoins spacious tall buildings. I used it a lot during the final few months in the lead up to my Advanced Level exams. The library now does not have a lot of books. A few thousands possibly. The first time i tried to go to the library when i was there this time i was stopped at an army centry point and i was asked to surrender my NIC and to collect it on the way back. I know that this can be a dangerous thing to do and turned back. The area is a 'high security zone' (this phrase is misleading any part of Jaffna can become a high security zone whenever the military wants it to be) and apparently there was some top military brass having a meeting somewhere close by. The other time i took the Vembadi road which has become one way now. Have to take a lengthy road back to return.

The significance of the Jaffna Public library burning is to be understood by the weight that the Jaffna people attach to education. As has been widely commented on, education was one of the key areas that the peninsula's economic base rested on. There is a statue of Godess Saraswathi that is still found at the entrance to the library. She is regarded as the Goddess of Education in Hindu religious belief. Users of the library have to remove footwear before entering the library. This might be possibly to keep the floor which is white tiled clean. But i cant help thinking that it is also in a a sense a show of respect to the place. In the second sentence in this paragraph i use the word 'was' in the past tense. Jaffna no more enjoys a pride of place as an educationally advanced district. It is one of the seven out of the eight districts in the North and East which 'enjoy' the disadvantaged district status. Most of our students rely on the district quota and the disadvantaged quota for access to university education. One of the main causes for the conflict was standardisation. Today the Jaffna community seeks standardisation in the form of quotas and would be happy if the district quota is increased. The decline of standards in education in Jaffna is a direct resultant of the war and the burning of the library symbolically kick started the decline.

****

I also remember the politics behind the effort to refurbish and restore the Public Library. I identify with those who stood for the burnt library to stand as a memory of a part of history that should not be forgotten. That never happened. They could have constructed a new one if they wanted. CBK was adamant and wanted to force this act of benevolence down the Tamil peoples throat while she was waging a war for peace. I also recall the debates about the act of opening the refurbished library. I agree with those who felt that there should be no opening ceremony as such. I couldn't appreciate any extravagance associated with opening the library to public use again. The Jaffna Municipal Council is the proprietor of the library and the Mayor wanted to open it. Some were opposed to this for a really ugly reason - that he belonged to a lower caste. Anadasangaree at that time head of the entire TULF also wanted to open it himself. The LTTE also got involved and the scene became uglier. Anadasangaree's website provides a statement of the UTHR here which gives a brief of the incidents that took place: http://anandasangary.com/?p=201. I went through this link after i typed up this post and find that my views on the whole issue mostly resemble that of the LTTE. This is entirely coincidental.
The library was later opened for public use without anybody opening it.

******