MAHA THRUSTHA SPEECH
Much publicity has been given to Prbahakaran's "maha thrustha" speech of 2003. This year it was a somewhat special occasion for him as he had been visited by Chris Patten, the former governor of Hong Kong on the eve of delivering the speech. We live in a strange world where the governors of the last bastions of the british empire that is mainly responsible for most of the problems that the world faces today, visit leaders of "liberation struggles" to wish them happy birthdays and also success. The former governor of Hong Kong could not have fought on behalf of the people of Hong Kong for freedom from the british empire. He was the representative of the queen of england and other places. As far as we know he has not participated in a national freedom struggle except for giving advice to Prabhakaran.
Why are all the former imperial powers and the present global powers very keen on Prabhakaran's so called struggle? When Ms. Chandrika Kumaratunga takes over three ministries under pressure from the nationalist forces but without any vision, why should all these powers become restless and pass motions in their "supreme" bodies denouncing the act of the President? Have they become sympathisers of national liberation movements overnight? Why do not they support bin Laden who according to many is involved in a national liberating struggle against the USA? The western powers have never supported a national liberation struggle. They have only one interest. They want to dominate the world by hook or crook. They may not have resident governors anymore. In this age of high technology, there is no need for governors stationed in the colonies. How many times has Solheim visited Sri Lanka during the last two years? In fact how many governors have come to this country during the same period. With all the technology available it has no significance at all for the governors to stay away from europe and america. They could stay in their mother countries and with the help of the agents in the colonies, neo or otherwise, they could run those countries from abroad. They only have to visit the "trouble spots" once in a while and collect all the relevant data.
There are some people who think that Patten was the first leader from a european country to visit Prabhakaran. As Prabhakaran himself has reminded others in his "maha thrustha speech" the Norwegian foreign minister had met him sometime back. There are others who talk of externalisation of the Tamil racist problem with the visit of Patten. These people who look at the world through the eyes of the british and the americans will never agree that the Tamil racist problem was externalised even before it came into existence. Whether in East Timore or Eastern Europe the west supports those movements that help the western Christian "cause" and the only criterion used by them in deciding whether to support a movement or not is the interest of the western Christian hegemony in culture, politics and economics. In certain cases it is the west that had originated these movements.
One such movement is associated with Tamil racism in Sri Lanka. In India the british failed to precipitate a Tamil racist movement mainly due to the strong Brahimin element among the Tamils there. The British were able to set a Muslim separatist movement that finally led to bifurcation of former India. If the British had been successful with the Tamil movement in India, that country would have split into a Dravidasthan before the partition into a Muslim Pakistan and a Hindu India. In Sri Lanka there was no strong Brahmin element among the Tamils to resist european Christian invasion into the Tamil society and after more than one hundred years of british sponsored Tamil racism the leadership has been passed into the hands of the Tamil Christian ideologues. Prabhakaran is only a street thug who has been inflated by the western media into a so called guerilla strategist and a liberation fighter. If not for India first (Vadamaarachchi and training given to the terrorists in order to "tame" JRJ) and then the west we would have seen the end of Prabhakaran the "strategist" long time ago. We do not know who writes "maha thrustha" speeches delivered by Prabhakaran, but somebody other than the street thug must be writing these speeches. (At the press conference that was held in Vanni sometime ago, mainly for the foreign correspondents it was very clear that Prabhakaran was not able to his express views as Anton Balasingham, the former translator at the british high commission in Sri Lanka dominated the show not only in english but also in Tamil.) However, even for a moment I would not suggest that Patten is one of the speech writers of the thug though the former visited the latter on the eve of the "maha thrustha" speech. Though Patten did not write the speech it is possible that he approved it while he was in Killinochchi having gone there by a helicopter supplied by the ministry of defense under Chandrika Kumaratunga. Even if Mr. Marapona was the minister of defense nothing worse would have happened. There is no point in Ms. Kumaratunga hanging onto the Ministry of defense if she cannot stop a Patten visiting Prabhakaran in helicopters supplied by the government. It has been reported that the Rupavahini, under the chairmanship of Mr. Harim Peiris who is an advisor to the President, has given live coverage to the "maha thrustha" speech. It is clear that though the President took over the three ministries, sacked according to the european commission, to satisfy the nationalist forces neither she nor her advisors have any vision on the future of the country.
I do not believe for a moment that the Tamil racists are good strategists and that they have been able to get their "message" to the world very efficiently. This story of efficient propagation of the "facts" behind Tamil racism is humbug of the first order. The west would not have given publicity to these "facts' unless they approved it, and in the case of Tamil racism it was the west that has constantly kept on an attacking "Sinhala Chauvinism", killing two birds with one stone. The western media has given publicity to the so called injustices to the Tamils while the western academics such as Peter Schalk have been engaged in "research" to "establish" that the Sinhalas have maltreated the Tamils. When the Tamils had no problems in Sri Lanka, the british created a problem by equating the Sinhalas and the Tamils with equal representation in the Legislative assembly for the two groups. It was a case of depriving Sinhalathva its rightful place in the country. The Sinhalas who had built a unique culture in this country over more than two thousand three hundred years were equated in culture and in other aspects with respect to this country, with the Tamils who are mainly descendants of those who were brought by the Dutch from South India for the tobacco cultivation.
It is true that most of the Sinhalas who represented the country abroad in our diplomatic missions were not interested in telling the "world", meaning the so called international community of the west, the facts about Tamil racism, while the Tamils who occupied those positions were propagating the myths created by Tamil racism. However, the so called Tamil view would not have been received even by the initiated (very few people would have followed news concerning Sri Lanka) in the west, if not for the support the Tamil racists got from the western media. The west gave publicity to these stories knowing very well that in their countries the Tamils did not enjoy the rights that the Tamils had in Sri Lanka. Prabhakaran also now speaks of Tamil aspirations and not of grievances. The Tamil racists had known that grievances was only a word for aspirations for decades, though they pretended to be ignorant of this fact. If not for the west (british) there would not have been a Tamil racism in Sri Lanka. There was nothing to be externalised. The british had baptised Tamil racism after externalising the problem. Those who attempt to credit Prabhakaran with the externalisation of the Tamil racist problem are the agents of the british. Having heard and read the "theories" created by the west in subjects such as political science, international relations and sociology these pundits are unable to remove the glasses supplied by the british and the other westerners to look at the world.
In the weekend newspapers some had suggested that Prabhakaran would try to get certain things done through Patten. Prabhakaran the street thug can only fire a shot at small distances, and it is not he who gets Patten to work for him but it is the other way round. The west gets Prabhakaran the street thug to do certain things for them, against Sinhalathva. In his "maha thrustha" speech Prabhakaran has given the agenda of the west. The strategy of the west is to give eelam to Tamil racism as legally as possible. They would prefer the parliament to amend the constitution for this purpose by two thirds majority if possible. The obstacle to this is the antagonism between the UNP and the SLFP and in order to resolve this, if possible, Malik - Mano committee has been established with Mano Tittawela "unrepresenting" the SLFP. If it does not work out the west has the second best formula of "recognising" and "legitimising" the LTTE gradually in the name of a so called peace process. This process is nothing but a process of legitimisation and eelamisation. Prabhakaran in his "maha thrustha" speech has referred to the LTTE as an equal partner with the government. He claims that he was forced to withdraw from the process of legitimisation of the LTTE that began with the treacherous MoU drafted by norway and the others in the west, when they were not invited for aid talks held in america. It is possible that all these take place according to a script written by a group of white boys not necessarily white house boys and now Prabhakaran the modern Oliver Twist is in a position to demand more and more in order to get back to the negotiating table which is nothing but a mechanism set up by the west to legitimise the LTTE.
Prabhakaran, thanks to the western script, is always in a winning position. He gets out of the process of legitimisation, illegitimately called the peace process, threatening "war". The Sinhala leaders who have been brainwashed to assume that there is a genuine Tamil problem or an "ethnic" problem and who have been scared by the bombs of the street thug want to avoid war at any cost, even at the cost of an eelam. The west does not want a "war" at this stage as it would not legitimise the LTTE in the eyes of the non western world. It has to be emphasised that the process of legitimisation is not for the west who have recognised the LTTE as their agent to weaken, if not destroy, Sinhalathva. It is mainly for India and to prevent her from intervening against the LTTE. As long as the LTTE is in the "peace process" that has the blessings of both the President and the Prime Minister India will find it very difficult to intervene. Prabhakaran is only threatening "war". He as well as his masters such as Pattens know very well that an eelam cannot be established through a "war". Prabhakaran is not for peace but for eelam. Whatever the west has to say on Prabhakaran, how good he is etc., the whole non western world knows what he is up to in the eastern province. He is harassing the Muslims with a view of ethnic cleansing the eastern province as well, in addition to the northern province which has been ethnic cleansed already. The west is silent on this ethnic cleansing as it does not go against their interests. Though Prabhakaran is not for peace as such, the master strategists in the west in the form of Pattens would try to prevent him from going to "war". The west knows that, in spite of the rhetoric, the "war" is disadvantages with respect to establishing an eelam. We should not be fooled by the "maha thrustha" speech of Prabhakaran. If there is any leader with a vision he or she should say no to the process of legitimisation of the LTTE and eelamisation, and get on with strengthening the armed forces not only with arms but with morale as well.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>