RESPECT THE WISH OF THE SINHALA PEOPLE
The vociferous minority has started their campaign for a federal state. Though they may not use the word federal, these people who have access to media, and who call themselves (each calling the others) respected academics, intellectuals, professionals including lawyers and medical doctors invariably of the western kind, and what not, without contributing any concept, theory in their respective fields, are already singing hosannas to the report produced by the majority of the expert panel, and of course to the proposals of Tissa Vitharana, the chairman of the All Party Representative Committee. The respected intellectuals and others think that the report and the proposals mentioned above are balanced or some description to that effect, and we could build a nation of Sinhalas, Tamils, Muslims and may be others, based on the ideas expressed in these reports and proposals. It is very rarely one thinks of oneself as an extremist. It is very unlikely that even Prabhakaran thinks of himself as an extremist. Many of us think of ourselves as decent balanced human beings, and when one talks of some other person as a balanced human being very often it implies that the views of the other person agrees with one's views. Similarly when one passes judgement on others and proclaim that the conclusions of the others are correct, on many occasions it is a judgement on one's conclusions. It so happens that the other person has agreed with the views of the "judge". In Sinhala there is a general saying which goes as "deekirata balalluth sakshi" , to describe these instances. In the present context we could express this specifically as "balaya bedillata federalluth sakshi".
The respected academics, professional etc., may have got some basis to come to their own conclusions. However, their basic premise is wrong. Of course, when I say somebody else is wrong it implies that I do not agree with his/her views. The basic premise of the federalists, whether they talk of federalism or not, is that since independence Sinhala people have not given the due share of power to the Tamils and the other minorities according to Post Manning terminology, or to the other majority (Tamils) in terms of the Pre Manning British policy, or to the other majorities (Tamils and Muslims) in the present UNP terminology. They ignore the pre independence communal politics introduced by the British discriminating against the Sinhalas, especially the Sinhala Buddhists. Their origin is 1948, and not 1832 the year of introduction of the infamous Colebrook Cameron reforms, which essentially destroyed the Sinhala legislature and paved the way for the introduction of western capitalism with the non Sinhala Buddhists at the helm. The respected intellectuals, academics, professionals and others are not prepared to go into the history of the problem, and realise how the Tamils and the others were given privileges by the British at the expense of the Sinhala Buddhists, how the nation that had already being built by the Sinhalas in the days of King Pandukabhaya was ignored by the British, and instead of incorporating the Tamils, Muslims and others into the already existing nation without making them to lose their identities, the British began to build an artificial nation of Ceylonese (Sri Lankans in the present context), which had to fail miserably. They could also realise that a minority (in terms of numbers) who had been given privileges had to lose those privileges with the majority democracy coming into operation and how when the Tamil leaders began to lose their privileges they interpreted them as discrimination against the Tamils. The problem began more than hundred years before 1948, and as long as the respected academics, professionals, intellectuals and others continue to ignore this important fact, there would not be any agreement among the members in different panels and committees. It is very easy to obtain so called majority reports from these panels and committees by packing them with a majority of federalists, and one should notice that the majority views of these committees and panels are invariably at loggerheads with the view of the majority of the country. All that can be told the federalists whether they are respected academics or not is to shift the origin from 1948 to 1832. If the origin is shifted one would see a different picture altogether.
At the last presidential elections, the overwhelming majority of the Sinhala people voted for Mahinda Chinthana, mainly because of its commitment to a Unitary state. A Unitary state is not something introduced by the British in 1815 or 1832 as some respected academics would say, but a state similar to that was established by King Pandukabhaya, and finally cemented by King Gemunu who was instrumental in making it the Sinhala Buddhist Eksesath Rajya. As has been mentioned in these columns previously the Eksesath Rajya of the Sinhala Buddhists was similar to a unitary state legislatively but administratively it was decentralised. The Ruhunu, Maya, Pihiti Rata and the Epas and Mapas have relevance because of the administrative decentralisation and not due to any kind of federalism some respected intellectuals want to associate with. Incidentally a respected intellectual had wanted to know the contribution made by the Sinhalas to the humanity or words to such effect. Even if one ignores everything else, the protection of Theravada Buddhism and of course building a Sinhala Theravada Buddhist culture, which is unique to this country, having being the centre of Theravada Buddhism, especially after Buddhism with its Theravada component disappeared from Andra Pradesh, alone is sufficient to claim a niche for the Sinhala Buddhists in the world history. Of course for some Marxists especially born into non Buddhist families this may not be an achievement worth mentioning. This respected intellectual only follows the British imperialist Ivor Jennings who boisterously had said at a prize giving of Ladies College, that Ceylon was a cultural desert.
The verdict of the overwhelming majority of the Sinhalas cannot be changed by a so called majority of members in an "expert panel" or by a dozen or so "respected academics" and others issuing statements to the press. Neither can it be changed by some federalists from various parties joining the government. It is reported that Rauf Hakeem, the leader of the SLMC has said that they cannot change the policies of the government by joining it. Neither he nor anybody else should be allowed to do so by the Sinhala majority. The respected intellectuals, the NGO pundits and others appear to think that they could solve the so called ethnic problem by ignoring the Sinhala people, and portraying the latter as barbarians who are the worst majority in the world who do not respect the minority communities and enforce injustices on them. The Sinhala people from the days of King Pandukabhaya have respected and tolerated the others, and one could come out with examples from India, Britain, USA, Malaysia and other countries how the numerical minorities have been treated with, by the majorities in those countries. In Malaysia the Muslims do not constitute even fifty percent of the population but they are the "bhoomiputhras" in that country. However, in Sri Lanka the respected academics have no respect for the bhoomiputhra concept, and the Sinhalas though forming seventy five percent of the population are treated as another majority, and some Muslim parties unfortunately seem to forget that their very existence in the eastern province is due to the Sinhala kings who settled the former in those areas.
Anybody who joins the government cannot go against the wish of the people, namely to continue with the existing unitary state. The people not only voted for the Mahinda Chinthana, but are prepared to sacrifice some of their rights, if the government is continuing with its retaliation policy. The LTTE may have withdrawn from some areas in the Eastern province for tactical reasons, but the fact cannot be denied that the armed forces won a significant victory in the Eastern province. The army as at present is in control of the Eastern province. There should be a two pronged approach to the problem, which we have to keep in mind. The respected academics, always think of only one strategy. They think that the two main parties UNP and the SLFP must come to some kind of agreement, and then offer the agreement as a solution to the "ethnic problem" to the LTTE. With all due (mostly undue) respect for the respected academics, one has to state that this is a wrong approach to the problem. If the respected academics think that there is an ethnic problem in the country then they may introduce various solutions involving devolution. However, these solutions should not be offered to the LTTE. If the government offers these solutions to the LTTE, then it is crystal clear that the solution offered to the LTTE would be the bottom line as far as the LTTE is concerned. They would demand more and would try to drag until they end up with Eelam.
The government may offer a solution even assuming that there is a so called ethnic problem, but it has to be offered to the people, and not to any political party as such. Let the people decide at a referendum on how much power has to be devolved within a unitary (better eksesath) state. Simultaneously there should be a military solution to the LTTE that understands only the language of the guns. The military solution to the LTTE and the other solution to the people should be complementary, and it should not be proclaimed that the military solution would one fine day weaken the LTTE and would break the backbone of the LTTE, thus forcing them to come to the negotiating table. This is only rubbish, and there should be no more talks with the LTTE, even if the west threatens of economic sanctions. However, some kind of devolution within the unitary state, even for administration and development could satisfy the Tamils, and the government should identify the areas in which power could be devolved. What is meant here is that even with a different perception of the problem, one could come out with a solution that would satisfy the Tamils, though not necessarily some of their leaders. In any event any solution should be ratified by the majority of the people and one should stop accusing the Sinhalas for the so called injustices caused to the Tamils and their aspirations, even by implication. All manoeuvrings to reduce a numerical majority to a numerical minority should be stopped, and recognition should be given to the Sinhala Buddhist culture, which is a unique culture that the Sinhalas have built in spite of the influence of first the Brahmin Baharat and then Hindu India.. All ethnic groups could be proud of the fact that the Sinhala Buddhist have built a unique culture, and every effort must be made to protect and develop that culture.
The respected academics as well as those UNPers who would be joining the government should be more democratic and try to adopt the policies as approved by the people, without attempting to invoke their ideas to the public through manoeuvrings. It has to be pointed out that none of them has the right or the authority to change from the unitary state to a federal or even a quasi federal state. The people who voted for the Mahinda Chinthana thought of only one issue and that was preservation of the unitary state. Today having voted for Mahinda Chinthana the people do not protest against the increasing cost of living for the simple reason that as far as they are concerned the main theme of preserving the unitary state is being carried out by fighting against the LTTE. The UNPers and others who join the government, and of course the respected academics and others should learn to respect the wish of the Sinhala people for once.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>