Presidential polls: what the South expects and Sri
Lankan Tamils want
By Professor Karthigesu Sivathamby
The date for presidential elections has been announced. It has heightened the
internal divisions within the anti-UNP forces. As we write, one is also not certain
whether the presidential poll is to be held alone or coupled with parliamentary
elections.
To most Sri Lankan Tamils, the recriminations flowing back and forth between the
factional leaders in the anti-UNP camp are entertaining to witness. However, there is
the other side, the side which demands Tamils not to only take a ‘Tamil’ view, but a ‘Sri
Lankan Tamil’ view, of the goings-on. This is because in electing a president, it is the
whole country that is called upon to participate, both politically and spiritually.
It also depends on whether the electoral process in Sri Lanka is open enough to
accommodate the Tamils so that they are in a position to take such a Sri Lankan
perspective – all the more so because there is a persistent cry in southern politics for
the establishment of a ‘ekkiya’ (unitary), ‘bedimanathi’ (devoid of separatism) country.
There has been the never-ending refrain both in the Sinhala and English media that
the LTTE has been, and continues to be, the stumbling block for the resumption of
peace talks. Further, the daily accusations that the Tigers are violating the ceasefire
agreement (CFA), goes to present a picture of near-anarchy in the east.
The LTTE apart, TNA members of parliament too have brought to light the deep sense
of grievance persistent among the Tamils about how their day-to-day lives are blighted
by the intervention and interference of the security forces. They claim that even
though these matters have been reported to the SLMM, who are trying to take as
objective a view as possible, there have been no references to these in the
mainstream Sinhala media. On the contrary, what is mounted is the total rejection of
Norway’s role as the mediator and the SLMM as a ceasefire monitor.
There is also the larger and more crucial question as to what extent the
pronouncements the government and the state media have been making has created
an environment for peace. What we hear over the print and the electronic media is a
continuing diatribe, both direct and veiled, against the Tamils. Thereby the media, the
government and the Sinhala-based parties have succeeded in establishing a vibrant
public opinion among the Sinhalese that “enough is enough,” implying that the next
step should be the resumption of hostilities. The JVP and JHU might not openly make
this assertion and the government, for reasons of international consumption, continue
to state that they are for peace talks. But there has not been a single instance over
the past one-and-a-half years where the UPFA government has made peace talks a
domestic political issue and requested the JVP and JHU too, to create a suitable
atmosphere for dialogue to resume.
The gap between Sinhala and Tamil perceptions is easily visible to anyone who cares
to do a comparative study of the state and privately-owned Sinhala and Tamil media.
That they speak the same thing in two different languages is understandable, but they
describe the contents in two different ways as well. Another truth this exercise will
reveal is that the ranting of the private media has created a worse Tiger psychosis in
the south than what the state media has succeeded in achieving. They point to the
tragedy that Sinhala public opinion-making is consciously working against the need for
peace.
Therefore, now that a presidential poll is imminent, we can see a certain degree of
frustration in the Tamils beginning to surface. Their plea is that only an atmosphere
conducive for peace talks would instil a feeling of confidence in the southern public
that there is hope for negotiations. But this is not happening. Though the average
Sinhala voter does not want war, he or she is not at all worried about, or made to
worry about, the need for peace talks.
Coming to the PA’s presidential candidate, Mahinda Rajapakse, the prospects are
daunting. The Tamils are very keen to see his less-belligerent side. But given the
published texts of the agreements he has signed with the JVP and JHU, is it possible
for Sri Lankan Tamils to feel comfortable with the political forces Rajapakse, (though
he himself might be a very benign man), is trying to cobble together to be elected
president? There is of course the problem as to what part of Rajapakse’s mobilisation
actually helps his election. Minister D. E. W. Gunasekere, in a half-humorous
reference to Rajapakse’s acceptance of the ‘ekkiya rata’ concept of the JVP and JHU,
said the prime minister was sincerely confused between ‘ekkiya rata’ and ‘eka rata’
(united country). It appears that when asked about signing of the agreements, the
prime minister had given to understand presidential circles that he had taken ‘ekkiya
rate’ to mean ‘eka rata’ (BBC’s Sandeseya programme).
The presidency was included as part of Sri Lanka’s constitution because it would be to
elect an executive head for the entire country. Fortunately or unfortunately the country
includes the Tamils and the Muslims as well. The question from the Tamil point of view
therefore is quite simple: given the type of friends he has gathered around him, what
can a Sri Lankan Tamil expect from Rajapakse?
What Rajapakse would do is quite clear. He will try to win the elections by visiting a few
Hindu temples and offering poojas, Premadasa style, to give the impression that he
believes and worships Hindu gods. Is that not enough for the average Tamil in
Colombo, Kandy, or perhaps Kurunegala? But the vital question is whether it would be
sufficient to convince the Tamil citizen of the north and the east.
An argument like this would be immediately construed as crypto-UNP propaganda. But
before rushing to conclusions it should not be forgotten that the Tamils cannot erase
from their minds that peace talks held during the last UNP-dominated government
(2001-2004) could not achieve anything much. And although one cannot disregard
President Chandrika Kumaratunga’s belligerent intervention by taking over the three
ministries within days of the LTTE submitting its proposals for the ISGA and thereby
crippling any discussion between the then government and the Tigers, it was also true
that the histrionics of Professor G. L. Pieris and his ability to play with and around
words were used to defer any substantive move towards meaningful peace talks.
Even during the UNP regime greater efforts were taken to demonstrate to the Sinhala
people that what was being offered to the Tamils was not a sell out, rather than
actually satisfying the Tamils. Similarly, when the issue to allocating resources for post-
tsunami rehabilitation and reconstruction came up, the UNP very keenly advocated it
because, if not, foreign governments would have proceeded to help the northeast
directly. Therefore, this Tamil-bashing strain has been equally consistent within UNP
circles as it has been with the PA/UPFA.
The problem for the average Tamil voter therefore is to distinguish between the known
Wickremesinghe and getting-to-be-known Rajapakse. Of course the former has the
credit of signing the CFA and bringing the war to an end. But beyond that, what has
been his response to the political aspirations of the Tamils?
The Sri Lankan Tamils are therefore in a quandary. They are being told on the FM
band that they are part of a unitary undivided, multicultural Sri Lanka. But both on the
medium and short waves the broadcasts are different. To choose between them poses
dilemma for the Tamils that is worse than Hamlet’s.
[Courtesy: Northeastern Monthly - October 2005]