THE JOINT MECHANISM AND THE FUTURE OF THE SLFP
Peter Harrold has denied that he had made a statement to the effect that there exists a certain kind of state in the northern and the eastern provinces. The so-called country director of an organisation that calls itself the world bank has shown that the so-called international civil servants are no worse than the politicians in denying statements when the statements concerned are opposed by the others. Peter Harrold knows what he told "The Sunday Times" and we all know what he had told the newspaper. If he thinks that he can fool the ordinary people then he is mistaken.
However, it appears that the Marxists of yesteryear could be taken for a ride by the country director of an organisation that they loved to hate. A "former" Marxist editor of an English language newspaper tells the public that the protest against the statement by the country director is much ado about nothing. Once I used to believe that Marxism and Capitalism were opposite sides of the same coin. However, they are products of the same European knowledge system, though there are slight differences in the Chinthanayas on which they are based, and as Marxism advocates cultural colonialism one would not be surprised by the "wisdom" of the Marxist editors of newspapers. To the editor concerned, the sovereignty of a state must be nothing as what is important is the "international" whether it is the third or the fourth, though none of them has any significance in the current world affairs.
In the meantime the "government" is in the process of establishing a "mechanism" with the LTTE in order to engage in relief work in the northern and the eastern provinces. As the so called aid is coming mainly from western Christian countries no doubt that there is pressure from the "international community" to establish this "mechanism" giving recognition to the LTTE. The "MoU" or the betrayal agreement was signed between Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe and Prabhakaran in order to give recognition to the LTTE as a political party and the terrorist outfit as an "army". Though this "agreement" was not signed by the President of the country Ms. Kumaratunga in her capacity as the President has not taken any steps to abrogate it. On the contrary she has strengthened it by agreeing to act within the "MoU" and the establishment of a joint mechanism would be a further step in the direction of recognising the LTTE and the terrorist outfit as a "government".
Why should the Sri Lankan "government" need the support of the LTTE for relief and rehabilitation work in the northern and the eastern provinces. It is known that at present the LTTE has no base in the eastern province and the "government" is in a position to carry out all the work by itself in the tsunami affected areas. It may be that the"government" wants to abdicate power in that province to the LTTE in the near future. However, Karuna faction of the LTTE would make things difficult for the Vanni faction of the LTTE and the "government" will not find it easy to abdicate power either. The leaders concerned in the government are not bothered about the sovereignty of the country, after all they have been socialists of various shades during the past, as they are concerned with the commissions from various "deals" that the "government" makes with foreign bodies. If they can keep the commissions, even without the country, they would be happy. The west is aware that the "third world" is full of commissioners and not of statesmen, and has experience in dealing with both categories.
The western press, their diplomats, the Political Scientists in the west have coined words such as LTTE controlled areas, uncleared areas etc., which our so-called leaders as well as the army use without much thinking. Why do we continue to use these terms when we know that the LTTE is fighting for a separate state in the Northern and the Eastern provinces for the Tamils though most of the Tamils live outside these provinces. The separate state is clearly not for the Tamils but for the LTTE and those behind the terrorist organisation.
Though the words are created by man, they sometimes tend to control him , though not the way postmodernists and some others theorise. There is always a two way relationship between the people and the language. However, sometimes words and terms are coined with a specific intention, and it is clear that the usages such as LTTE controlled areas would lead to definite stands with respect to the nature of the state.
Sri Lanka has only one state and further it is a unitary state. Only that single state has authority throughout the island, whether legislatively, judicially or in an executive capacity. The public servants are paid by the government and even the LTTE accepts the authority of the state. A good example in this connection is the way they "appeal" to the state to safeguard themselves from the attacks of the Karuna faction. The western states should realise this fact though at present they turn a Nelsonian eye to this aspect forgetting that Nelson is honoured in the Trafalgar square not for his peace talks but for the wars he fought on behalf of his king and the country.
We should remember that the LTTE is not in control of any area in Sri Lanka. The correct position as I see it is that the presence of LTTE is felt in certain areas. These areas are confined to the Northern province and small in extent. The correct terminology may be the areas in which the LTTE is present, and not uncleared areas or LTTE controlled areas. What has to be done is to see to it that the LTTE is absent in these areas as well.
The "government" which has authority over the whole country should not be equated with the terrorist organisation in any document or in any work. There cannot be agreements between the state and the LTTE on an equal footing. What would Mr. Puttin do with the Chechniyan terrorists? Would he sign agreements with the latter on an equal footing? There should not be any kind of joint mechanism with the "government" and the terrorist organisation on an equal basis. The "MoU" signed by Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe and Prabhakaran is not an agreement between the "government" and the LTTE, and it could be interpreted as an agrement between the UNP and the LTTE. Unfortunately we cannot expect the "government" headed by Ms. Kumaratunga to do so as she happens to be a pinkish socialist who has no feel for the history of the country.
The SLFP is full of ex Marxists at the top, who do not seem to be following nationalist policies anymore. However, the rank and file of the party still exerts some pressure on the leadership, and it is well known that the ordinary members and supporters of the party are nationalistic unlike the leadership comprising "socialists" of different shades. On the other hand the JVP, though a self confessed Marxist party has been forced to be more nationalistic than the SLFP at least for their survival. This fact which has been ignored by the SLFP would become very crucial in the future as the SLFP becomes more and more anti Sinhala Buddhist under pressure from the western Christian countries. Ms. Kumaratunga whose paternal ancestry is not Sinhala Buddhist has also been influenced by the education she received at western Christian institutes and also by the politics of the party founded by her late husband who cannot be identified as a friend of Sinhala Buddhists. If she continues with her western Christian politics, the SLFP is bound to lose its supporters to the JVP. The "sudu nelum nadaya" (band) of Mangala Samaraweera, Dilan Perera and others who cannot be identified with Sinhala Buddhists are in the long run not serving the interests of the SLFP, and the others in the party should at least think of the survival of a party that has been identified with Sinhalathva since about 1955.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>