TWO TYPES OF TERRORISM
If it is still not clear to some Anglophiles that there are two types of terrorism as far as the Christian west is concerned then they must have been brainwashed so much by the education that they had received that during the process of (brain)washing their brains must have been damaged. There is terrorism against the Christian western world that the westerners condemn and go all out to defeat. This could be called type I terrorism. The second kind of terrorism, called type II terrorism, is against the other cultures and has the support of the west. The western colonialism that began in the fifteenth century has not died after the Asian and the African countries won independence. We are now in the third phase of western colonialism, that has been baptised as globalisation. The Judaic Greek Christian Chinthanaya (Judaic Chinthanaya for short) that emerged in Europe in the fifteenth century after a struggle of about three hundred years finally defeated the Catholic Chinthanaya in the eighteenth century and is now the hegemonic chinthanaya in the world. The so called renaissance mark the emergence of the Judaic Chinthanaya and the western modernity and the defeat of the catholic chinthanaya is identified by the western scholars as the reformation. The western modernity did not begin with reformation. It had already begun in the fifteenth century and reformation only saw its triumph in the western hemisphere.
The so called binary oppositions associated with western modernity are nothing but the results of two valued logic of Aristotle to which the Europeans went back in the fifteenth century leaving the three fold logic of Catholic Chinthanaya that is more closer to the Bharat Chinthanayas. Philosophers such as Herecletes, Hegel and Derrida have tried to break away from the two valued logic with their dialectics and deconstructions but have been unsuccessful. Incidentally Buddha did not attempt any deconstruction though some people try to compare deconstruction with anicca dukka anatta. Unlike Derrida or anybody else in the west Buddha did not attempt to construct knowledge with respect to anicca dukka anatta which are not even concepts and it has to be emphasised that dialectics and deconstruction are also constructions of knowledge. There is no postmodernity not only in Sri Lanka but even in the west where it is at best an unsuccessful attempt to break away from the Judaic Chinthanaya and its associated two valued logic. The so-called deconstruction is a construction of knowledge where an attempt is made to "expose" the domination of one of the binary oppositions over the subordinate "other", and in my view, is not even a development of interpenetration of opposites in Hegel's dialectics. Modernity still reigns in the west and the western civilisation is buckled with two valued logic and it cannot think within other logics. (For more details please refer the series of articles on "Ape Akalpa" in the "Divaina" and the current series on "Ape Pravada" in the "Vidusara" and of course "Mage Lokaya" though there may be some readers who would not want to hear about it and "Apohakaye Rupikaya" or Formalism of Dialectics.)
As far as the west is concerned the civilisations are either Christian or not and terrorisms are either against Christian civilisation or against other civilisations. Modern day "evangelism" based on American Christianity as well as on American money that has spread even to the Vedda community in Sri Lanka, is part of globalisation that includes (American) Christian cultural hegemony and would be a threat even to the Catholic church in the not so distant future. Within the Christian civilisation the new "Christianities" from the time of Calvin and Luther attempt to go back to the book thus preaching fundamentalism, if one were to adopt the terminology used by the westerners with respect to the other cultures and civilisations. Modern American "evangelism" is so fundamental that it has even attracted the wrath of the Catholic Church. It is the Anglo Saxon Christian countries that dominate the world, the Scandinavian Christian countries being their running dogs. The Catholic countries are being gradually marginalised even within the western civilisation, though many Catholics in Sri Lanka may not realise it, with the Greek Orthodox countries having no say in the so called international affairs. The "international community" in this period of globalisation comprises only the Anglo Saxon Christian countries and their running dogs the Scandinavian Christian countries. Japan without military power is a non entity when it comes to decision making in international affairs and very often end up on the side of the "international community". I am not surprised when devout Catholics complain that the Catholic Church is being "Protestanised" as it is the easiest route available for "survival". This is not entirely different from absorbing Hindu concepts into Buddhism by the Bharath Buddhists ending up with a Mahayana Buddhism that incorporated the Athma concept and made Buddha a supernatural (not lokottara) being.
Though the Anglo Saxon countries are supposed to have banned the LTTE in their countries they would sit with the representatives of the self same LTTE on the 25th in Oslo. Of course, they could argue that Norway has not banned the LTTE and that countries such as USA and UK are meeting the LTTE representatives not on their soil but in a country where the LTTE is not banned. If that is the case then they should have no problem in meeting bin Laden's representatives in a country such as Sri Lanka where Al Quaeda is not banned. However, we all know that such a meeting would never take place as USA and UK have declared "war" against terrorism of type I. Sri Lanka is being forced to negotiate with the LTTE because we are a poor country. However it is not the economic poverty that has put us in this position of negotiating for a "kalakanni samaya" (wretched peace) but the poverty of the so-called leaders. (I am borrowing the term "kalakanni" from the peace mongers who refer to a "kalakanni yuddhaya". These people should preach Bush on the "kalakanni yuddhaya" against bin Laden and Sadam Hussein.). It is a "kalakanni samaya" as it would lead to a confederation paving the way for an Eelam and a war between two countries.
The PA that invited the Norwegians are now doubtful of the "peace process" that they are supposed to have initiated. Long time ago when Liam Fox came first to this country we said that all the future negotiations would be based on the so-called Fox agreement that was signed between the President and the then opposition leader. We also said that the Fox agreement would be mainly for a future UNP government to continue from where PA would stop. Last week GL Peiris confirmed this when he said that the government would not allow any representatives of the President or the PA in the "kalakanni" peace process and would only inform the President of the outcome of the discussions as stipulated in the Fox agreement. What can the PA do now? They "invited" the Norwegians knowing very well that the latter had been unsuccessful at various "peace" efforts and Solheim who had participated in demonstrations with the LTTE. The present ambassador for Norway should not have been appointed in the first instance as he had been involved with settling of Tamils in Vavunia and other places in his capacity as the chairman of Red Barna. He has recently expressed his opinion on the court verdict given against the murderer Prabhakaran the most wanted criminal in South Asia. This person has been involved with the internal affairs of the country to such an extent that many people believe that if R Premadasa was the President of the country he would have been declared a persona non grata long time ago. Instead the present government has not extended the visa of the journalist Harris for the flimsy reason of writing for a local newspaper. The various media fora of the country appear to have dropped the matter now after some weak statements that they do not agree with the decision of the government. Where are those pickets and demonstrations against the "undemocratic brutal decision of the government to deport Harris" in the Lipton circus and in front of the Fort railway station by the self appointed guardians of the free press?
In any event the PA should come out with the truth now. Who asked them to invite Norway? It is as clear as a crystal, to use Peiris terminology (he is very fond of "saksudak se" in Sinhala. Somebody said that he must be referring to Sakra whom he thinks is white like the Anglo Saxons and not to the "sakgediya"), that the PA did not invite Norway on their own. Let the PA come out with facts. Nobody is against peace, but peace is not an abstract concept and there are various versions of peace. The PA now states that they are for peace but are not with happy with the peace process which could be called a process of capitulation. The peace that results from this process is a "kalakanni" peace and the PA should spell out their policy in more concrete terms.
The west and the non national forces have identified the PA and especially the president as the obstacle to their kind of peace. The present campaign against the President on the extensions of the eight major generals is obviously geared to discredit her. Even Karuna is full of karunava for the eight major generals. The ruling on the extensions in the army is due to President Jayawardhane. According to this rule a Brigadier unless he gets a promotion or an extension has to retire after four years in the rank. In the case of the major generals the number of years has been reduced from four to three. It is the President who has the power to give an extension which has to be done before the relevant officer reaches the age of retirement namely fifty five. In the past efficient officers with unblemished records such as Major General Neil Dias and many Brigadiers who had proved their worth in the battlefield had to retire either without extensions or may be after a few extensions. It is said that when the President wanted to give another extension to Major General Dias there was opposition and after that she is determined now to practice consistently the procedure her opponents wanted to follow then. However now the opponents have taken a different view altogether and they together with Karuna are keen not to lose some of the officers.
Though the government highlights the case of eight major generals it is said that they are immediately concerned with only one officer. Why this concern now? When the government is not concerned with the morale of the army and when there are talks of no "war" again and when ambassadors of Anglo Saxon countries are drawing plans to send our soldiers as peace keeping forces abroad (no longer we take decisions with respect to the army) why all this fuss about the extension of one officer? Is he the officer for "peace" and not "war"? The west, the non national forces with the help of Karuna want to discredit the President as if she is against the protection of the country. I have no brief for the President who "invited" the Norwegians and who started this "kalakanni" peace process, but we should not allow the non national forces to achieve what they want by discrediting her. Having failed with the nineteenth amendment by the three eminent legal pundits the non national forces are busy with drawing plans to curtail the powers of the President as the commander in chief. She should resist all these attempts and extend the services of only those who have been brilliant in "war", and not of those who claim that "Jaffna is not our (meaning Sri Lankan) territory" and question the right of the army to be present in the peninsula. With Fernandos in the Defence Ministry and this kind of officers the army would be withdrawn at the request, no order, of Karuna.
In the meantime the Norwegian ambassador has gone to India to make sure that India participates in the Oslo talks on aid to Sri Lanka. If India agrees it means that it would be sitting with the LTTE at the same negotiating table. In India not only that the LTTE is a banned terrorist organisation but Prabhakaran is a wanted person. It is unfortunate that the BJP government did not live upto expectations as a nationalist force having capitulated to the western powers. Would the Indian people approve a decision by the Indian government to sit with the representatives of the murderer of Shri Rajiv Gandhi? The BJP would be digging its own grave and they should realise that the western Christian countries have no sympathy with their nationalist leanings. The western Christian countries are only encouraging terrorism of type II as could be seen by the support that they give to the LTTE. It was Mr. Ashok Sinhal, the secretary of the Hindu Vishva Parshad who identified the LTTE as an arm of the Church.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>