INDIA AND TAMIL HOMELAND
As I mentioned last week Dr. Vickramabahu in his article on "Nalin, Champika and Prabhakaran" has replied to certain remarks that he attributes mischievously to me. It is wrong to say that we in Jathika Chinthanaya have sought the support of globalists to suppress Tamil racism. We know that it cannot be done and we have no illusions in this matter. Vickramabahu says: "Both Nalin and Champika showed relief and approval that the Bush administration has moved against terrorism after Sept. 11th incident. In this context , I found it extremely difficult to understand what they mean by the 'Western conspiracy behind the Tamil uprising'. They could not give any valid reason as to why Western powers should undermine the Sri Lankan regime and plant a Tamil separatist movement in this country. Also it is absurd to believe that the same Western powers will use their armed power to crush this separatist movement." As far as I am concerned I have never expected the Bush administration to move against the terrorism in Sri Lanka. I have explained at length that the USA proscribed the LTTE because it is a threat to them and not because of any sympathy towards us. The USA is in a dilemma as far as the LTTE is concerned. In Sri Lanka the LTTE is simply carrying out a policy that is to the liking of the USA. The LTTE is the main force that is trying to deprive the Sinhalathva,(Sinhala nation, Sinhala language, Sinhala culture, Sinhala history) its rightful place in the country. The colonialists, imperialists and now the globalists who have always wanted to undermine the culture and the history of a country support some ethnic group hostile to the nation or the main ethnic group that lives in that country. The globalists are using the Tamils against the Sinhalas. The imperialists used the Muslims against the Hindus in India, having failed to incite Tamils against the northerners first to fight for a separate state. In African countries one could quote enough examples to establish this point. The globalists have no special love for the Tamils except perhaps some understanding due to the fact that the Tamil movement in India and Sri Lanka has an ideology based in Christianity. It was the Christian Bishops and priests that were instrumental in creating a Tamil movement in India. It was this Tamil Christian movement that wanted to divide India even before the Muslims agitated for a separate state.The Justice Party was formed in the then Madras Presidency by the Tamils to establish a separate state. However, in India the large Hindu component of the Tamils with its Brahamin leadership was able to defeat the Christian ideology of the Tamil movement. In Sri Lanka that did not happen. The Christian influence in the Tamil movement in Sri Lanka is much more than that in India. The Tamil Christians are powerful and the percentage of Christians among the Tamils in Sri Lanka is higher than that among the Tamils in India or among the Sinhalas. After Chelvanayakam a Christian became the leader of the Tamil racist movement things started moving fast. He formed his Ilankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (Lanka Tamil state Party) better known as the Federal Party. I have referred to his biography by his son in law A. J. Wilson to show the hatred that Chelvanayakam had for the Sinhalas and his policy of little now and more later. The Hindus among the Tamils in Sri Lanka lost in the process and today there is no effective Hindu leadership in the Tamil movement.
I had no illusions whatsoever in reactions against the September 11 incident. I challenge Vickramabahu to quote a sentence from the large number of articles I have written to establish his claim. The USA on one hand does not disapprove the political activities of the LTTE in Sri Lanka. However at the same time on a global scale they do not like the LTTE for its connections with the Arab terrorist movements. The LTTE is banned in USA and the English speaking white countries in the world because of the latter. Then there is the more important Indian factor. India that trained the LTTE terrorists some time ago and that enforced the merger of the northern and eastern provinces and the concept of so-called historical habitats does not like the LTTE now. They want to defeat Prabhakaran. As the relationship between India and USA is not cold now as it was during the "cold war" period there is a possibility, as I have explained in the article on the 5th of June to the "Midweek Review", that the USA might support India to weaken the LTTE or at least to replace Prabhakaran. However, neither country is against Tamil racism and we cannot expect much from this "alliance".
Vickramabahu's point on homeland is very primitive to say the least. Also he misinforms the readers. He tried to do the same at the University of Moratuwa but when I challenged him he had to keep quiet. He says:"If a community has been living continuously in a region , by and large , in the recent period , then in general that land is considered to be their homeland. India is a collection of such homelands. In fact each state is named after the community related to it. But no one has exclusive rights. All are Hindustanis but Hindus have no exclusive rights either. Entire land of Sri Lanka could be considered to be the homeland of Sinhala , but not exclusively. In addition within Sri Lanka there could be a Tamil homeland for Sri Lankan Tamils. Already Veddha homeland is recognized in this sense. So why not a Tamil homeland? If such recognition is not possible then Tamils have no option except the struggle for separation with terror and violence."
According to Vickramabahu's definition any cast in Sri Lanka could have its own homeland. No homeland is defined this way. There is no Vedda homeland in Sri Lanka. But certain areas have been identified as land where they have lived, under the pretext that they are aborigines.(Veddas cannot be called aborigines as we have shown long ago. They were not aboriginal people whom the Sinhalas found when the latter came to Sri Lanka. The Sinhalas as a race or a nation did not come to Sri Lanka at any time in the history. The Sinhalas as a nation was evolved in Sri Lanka itself. When the Aryans, that is those who spoke Aryan languages and not a "sub species" or tribe with distinct physical features, a la early Max Muller, came to Sri Lanka they found various groups like Yakshas, Nagas, Milakas etc. The Aryans and these groups except the Veddas have mixed together over centuries to form the Sinhala nation finally during the time of King Pandukabhaya. Thus the Sinhalas are not colonisers who came from India to find the aborigine Veddas in Sri Lanka, and they are the descendants of the people who lived before the Aryans came. The Veva (Vapi)civilisation was not created by the Aryans who were more happy with the river valley civilisations. The Veddas most probably the milakas who did not want to give up their nomadic life remained a group outside the Sinhala nation for centuries. The Sinhalas, unlike the "civilised" Europeans, did not murder and annihilate the Veddas nor "civilise" them, respecting their decision not to be "civilised". Those who look at the world through the European eyes see aborigines in Veddas and colonisers in Sinhalas. They only draw parallels with the British and the aborigines in Australia and America.) But that does not mean that the Veddas could ask for self determination in these areas. Even here I have a feeling that the NGO's worked to get this recognition for Veddas claiming that they are aborigines in order to support the homeland claim of the Tamil racists. In any event the analogy is wrong, unless Vickramabahu succeed in formulating an "aboriginal" theory for the Tamils as well.
India is not such a collection of homelands, as Vickramabahu claims. This is the irony. India that forced us to recognise the so-called historical habitats of the Tamils have no homelands in that country. They have some states demarcated on a linguistic basis. However, that has nothing to do with the homeland concept. In India, say for example in Tamil Nadu, more than 90% of the population is Tamil. And of the Tamils in India more than 90% live in Tamil Nadu. In Sri Lanka the same cannot be said. The majority of the Tamils in Sri Lanka live outside the northern and eastern provinces. In those two provinces if not for the Muslims the Tamil speaking population becomes less than 60%. If the eastern province is taken separately the percentage of the Tamils is reduced to thirty five percent. Muslims would not like to be grouped as Tamil speaking people as it undermines their identity as a religious group. The troubles in the eastern province is due to the attempt by the Tamil racists to dictate terms to the Muslims in that province. Historically the Sinhalas had been in the present eastern province for thousands of years, the Muslims from the time of King Senerath and the Tamils for about two hundred and fifty years. How could the present eastern province demarcated by the British in the nineteenth century be the "historical habitats" of only the Tamils and not of the Sinhalas and the Muslims? Would Mr. Dixit or his successor answer that question?
Vickramabahu has the following to say on Tamil grievances. "One repeated question coming from this camp is: what is the discrimination faced by Sri Lankan Tamils? To me it is such a foolish question that should not be answered." It is not a foolish question that should not be answered but a question that has no answer. That is why he is not answering it. Having said that it is a foolish question that should not be answered he attempts to answer it by quoting the language Act and the "Banda - Chelva" (B-C) Pact. I explained to him at the seminar that Sinhala had been the official language of Sri Lanka even in the so-called Jaffna kingdom and by making Sinhala the only official language Tamils are not made second class citizens. If that is the case then the Tamils should be second class citizens in India where it is not an official language. In Sri Lanka the Tamils can communicate with the government in their language and all the forms, gazzets etc., are available in Tamil as well. The Tamils have their education from year one to the university level in Tamil, a facility not available even in Tamil Nadu. There in some government schools Tamil is not the medium of instruction. In fact, Tamils in Sri Lanka enjoy more privileges and rights than the Tamils in any other country including India. The Sinhala people objected to the B-C Pact as there was provision in that for Rata Sabhas to merge. If that was allowed Northern and Eastern provinces would have become one rata sabha in 1958 itself, and paved way for an Eelam.
Finally the apologist for the LTTE says: "Fascism is thus a political expression of the ruling class in a highly developed industrial society in crisis. What has the LTTE got to do with that? LTTE is an expression of desperate and oppressed Tamil people. Their barbarism and cruelty are products of oppression and discrimination". Vickramabahu tries to defend the LTTE by saying that fascism can become a political expression only in an industrialised country. But in this age of globalism the definitions have to change. The LTTE that is being supported by countries such as Norway is part of the global political situation. It is being used by the western powers, unlike in the case of Vietcong or the other movements that Vickramabahu has mentioned. It has even terrorised the Tamil people who are being oppressed by the LTTE. The sole objective of Tamil racism and the LTTE in particular is to deprive Sinhalathva its rightful place. They oppose Sinhala being made the official language because they do not want to give the Sinhala language its rightful place. They try to erase the history of Sinhalas and replace it with a bogus history of the Tamils to deprive Sinhala history its rightful place. The Tamil racists even wanted the national anthem in two languages and they want the present national flag to be changed. The Tamil racist Chelvanayakam wanted three national flags instead of one national flag! These demands will be made later according the policy of "little now, more later". The barbarism and cruelty of the LTTE are not products of oppression and discrimination but a result of the hatred that the Tamil racists have against the Sinhalas. The peace the LTTE and the Tamil racists want is a peace with Sinhalathva weakened and denied its rightful place. The Sinhalathva has been gradually weakened since 1505. The fight against the LTTE is only a continuation of the fight against colonialism. It is not the supremacy of the Sinhala nation that the nationalists want to establish. They want Sinhalathva to be given all that it has lost during the last five hundred years. The LTTE led Tamil racism supported by the western powers want to deny that. No peace can be achieved until the historical injustices to the Sinhalas are rectified.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>