WILL THE WEST DROP PRABHAKARAN?
As we expected Thamilselvan has replaced Anton Balasingham as the mouthpiece of Prabhakaran and would be the chief negotiator representing the LTTE if the so called peace talks were to recommence. It is immaterial whether Dr. G. L. Peiris would be replaced by somebody else, as the "Sri Lankan government" has no policy of its own. Whoever represents the "Sri Lankan government" does not represent any party as the decisions taken by the so called international community are conveyed to the LTTE through other channels. In a sense it is wrong to say that the "peace talks" have been suspended. The talks between the LTTE and the "international community" have not being stopped and we hope that the "Sri Lankan government" is at least being briefed of the outcome of the talks.
Norway was never a facilitator and from the very beginning Solheim has represented the "international community" in the "peace talks" whether held "officially" in Bangkok and other places or in Vanni, London and Oslo without the "Sri lankan government". When Solheim went to Vanni to meet Thamilselvan last week it was not outside the agenda of the so called "peace talks", though there were neither TV cameras nor Dr. G. L. Peiris to show the latter shaking hands with Thamilselvan. The only difference between the "official talks" and the "unofficial talks" is the presence of Dr. G. L. Peiris, Mr. Milinda Moragoda, the foreign ministry officials and the others to act for the TV cameras and the media personnel, in the former case.
So Solheim has come and gone for the nth time. It is said that he has been told by Thamilselvan who appears to be tougher than Balasingham who has personal relationships with the Norwegians, that the LTTE has no intention of dismantling the Wan Ela camp. It is possible that Prabhakaran wanted a tougher person than Balasingham, as his mouthpiece, and Thamilselvan has fitted into that position. Thamilselvan has told the press that the "war" would be the result if the Sri Lankan army takes steps to dismantle the camp. Now what would be the reaction of the peacemongers to this statement by Prabhakaran's mouthpiece. The peacemongers want peace at any cost and want to avoid "war". If Thamilselvan threatens that "war" would recommence then it is axiomatic that he should be given what he wants in order to avoid "war". The peacemongers would argue that the Sri Lankan government and the international community should forget the matter and allow the LTTE to maintain the camp. However, that is not the only way to have "peace" in the country. The peacemongers could request the LTTE to leave the camp but then the peacemongers would say that it would not be practical as the LTTE would never agree to it. The peacemongers, unlike us are very practical men and women, and know what could be expected from the LTTE!
However, there is "war" in the country as the LTTE continues to kill not only police and army personnel, but their political opponents as well. The establishment of a camp in Wan Ela is outside even the treacherous Memorandum of Understanding signed by Ranil Wickremesinghe and Prabhakaran, as even the Amnesty International has observed, and the Monitors of Westborg had no alternative but to request the LTTE to dismantle the camp. The camp is not for the terrorists to watch birds and everybody including Dr. G. L. Peiris should know that it would be used to attack all the strategically important places close to the camp in and around Trincomalee. The LTTE while trying to get the Eelam, even without going through the normal procedure of introducing a bill for the amendment of the constitution in the parliament, is getting ready for confrontation with the army, if for some reason or other they fail with the former method. They want camps in the so called government controlled areas in order to confront the army if the need arises. While getting ready to confront the army, and continuing the "war" by other means they threaten to recommence "war" if they are not allowed to get ready for a confrontation. This is a heads I win, tails you lose situation and unfortunately the "government of Sri Lanka" could only watch the situation.
Now it is clear that if not for the treacherous MoU the LTTE could not have established the Wan Ela camp, as the armed forces would not have allowed the terrorists to do so. Thus it is the MoU that created the conditions for the LTTE to establish the camp and the "international community" is finally responsible for the Wan Ela camp. If not for Westborg and his men and women there would not have been this particular camp at least, and the Norwegians should not be allowed to forget this issue. Pressure has to be applied and if the LTTE does not dismantle the camp, then there is no choice for the armed forces but to destroy it. I am sure the armed forces are quite capable of doing that and they would have finished this Tamil racist terrorist problem long ago if not for the pressure of the "international community". The "international community" led by USA with Tony Blair as the house boy of the white house, and represented by Norway are working against the Sinhalathva and are only continuing with the western colonialism that was originated in the fifteenth century.
The SLMM is not only powerless but is on the side of the LTTE. Even a powerless outfit like the SLMM could dictate terms to the "Sri Lankan government", which cannot even control the private bus Mudalalis. In this country the UNP, the party of the capitalists according to Marxism, orgainses trade unions. On top of that the Mudalalis who may be financial capitalists are organising strikes themselves. They resort to "trade union action" whenever they have a problem with the "government" or with the public, and the "government" even without blinking an eyelid agrees to the demands of the mudalalis. The usual argument of the "government" is that they have taken steps to give in to the demands of the mudalalis, only temporarily, having taken into consideration the hardships faced by the general public. However, we all know that certain things, though impermanent, are more than temporary like the temporary merger of the northern and the eastern provinces. It is possible that the Wan Ela camp would be allowed on a temporary basis until the LTTE with the support of the "International Community" establishes the Eelam. It all depends on the question of either continuing with or dropping Prabhakaran.
It is significant that Solheim has gone back to Norway to have further discussions on the future of the camp with the Norwegian authorities after having briefed the Sri Lankan "government" of the outcome of the talks between him and Thamilselvan. It is clear that the decisions are taken in Oslo, London, Washington and Vanni and not in Colombo. The Sri Lankan "government" in Colombo is only being "briefed" of the talks that take place elsewhere in the world. The "government" is there only to work out and obtain the commissions emanating from the various deals with foreign governments, NGOs and companies. As we have mentioned a number of times in these columns the "government" is only another NGO with a set of directors "elected" by the people. In other words the "government" has been privatised for all purposes, and no wonder that it always comes out with privatisation as the solution for all the problems that the country faces, with or without the instructions from the world bank and the IMF.
We do not know what the "international community" would decide on the fate of the Wan Ela camp. It is obvious that Solheim and the others in Oslo would consult the US and the UK before taking a decision. However, it is clear that Prabhakaran is becoming an embarrassment for the boys in Washington, with his murders of the members of the EPRLF and the Muslims in the eastern province. Washington is not concerned with the killings of the members of the intelligence unit of the army. The USA has its own agenda with respect to South Asia, and Asia Pacific in general, and is only using Prabhakaran and the LTTE to achieve its objectives. The "international community" headed by the USA supports Tamil racism, as the British have been doing for the last hundred and seventy five years, and has helped the LTTE to achieve its present status as a terrorist unit. The so called injustices to the Tamils in Sri Lanka were propagated by the western media and if not for the west Tamil racists would not have been able to propagate these myths so successfully. There is no Tamil nationalism as such but only a Tamil racism created by the west, whether in Sri Lanka or in India. In Sri Lanka Tamil racism was first created by the Dutch with the commissioning by a Dutch official to write a bogus history of the Tamils in order to make a claim for the present northern and the eastern provinces from the Sinhala kings. "Yarlpanam Vaipava Malai" was the result of this exercise and ever since then the Tamil racists have been busy with "creating" history culminating with the Devanampiyathesam story. However, unfortunately for the Tamil racists and the west there is not an iota of evidence to support these "histories" which are nothing but "his" stories (his could be interpreted as empty following the Sinhala meaning of "his" or as "of the Tamil male racist"). These stories gained currency simply because the west that was waiting for such stories has the hegemony especially in the "business of knowledge".
The Tamil racism during the "British period" was the result of the very high percentage of the Tamils found in the English speaking community, as a result of the educational policies of the British and the American missionaries. The English speaking Tamils wanted the political and the cultural leadership among the Sri Lankans and all the maneuverings in the Legislative Assembly had this as the objective. Attempts have been made to blame Anagarika Dharmapala, and of course the king Dutugemunu, for the creation of Tamil racism, that has been misrepresented as a Tamil nationalism, but they have not met with success. Ponnambalam Ramanathan and his family was not affected by the work carried out by the Anagarika among the Sinhala masses. The Ramanathan family did not ask for the so called reformations in response to the Dharmapala movement. When the Tamil racists wanted a separate seat for the Tamils in the western province, in the legislative assembly, they had in mind the English speaking Sinhalas and not Anagarika Dharmapala and the Sinhala villagers. The Anagarika worked with the Sinhala masses and during that time the poor Sinhala villagers were not a political force. Tamil racism during the British period was against the English speaking Sinhalas and had nothing to do with the Sinhala masses. The English speaking Tamil racists who tried to dominate the centre in Colombo with the connivance of the British changed their tactics when they realised that with the universal franchise granted in 1931 they would not be in the privileged position they were before that. It was SJV Chelvanayakam who finally realised the ambition to dominate the centre was a red herring and turned to the Northern and the Eastern provinces. He was the person who took Tamil racism to the Tamil speaking masses and helped to create a fascist monster in the form of a Prabhakaran.
The "international community" has been using Prabhakaran for some time against the Sinhalathva but he has grown too big for the shoes supplied by the west. The west has to decide now whether to give him bigger shoes or to drop him like a hot potato. The west that financed bin Laden and Sadam Hussein had to turn against them when they were found to be too big for the western shoes. The US state department officials have a history of turning against "dictators" they themselves created and Prabhakaran could be the next. However, the west has a problem. If Prabhakaran is dropped who would replace him? Would the successor of Prabhakaran be more loyal to India? Is the west in a position to chose the successor of Prabhakaran? The fate of the Wan Ela camp will be decided on the answers to such questions and not on the pretended question as to the establishment of the camp contravenes the treacherous MoU or not.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>