5 December, 2020

Blog

The Case Against Devolution – II

By Izeth Hussain

Izeth Hussain

Izeth Hussain

The most cogent case for arguing that India bears the major responsibility for helping us to get out of the ethnic imbroglio consists of the developments that took place in 1987. I dealt with this case some time ago in a detailed article, so that I will do no more here than set out the essentials. According to the authoritative historian K.M. de Silva’s Sri Lanka and the defeat of the LTTE (2012) our troops led by Major General Cyril Ranatunge were well on the way to defeating the LTTE rebellion through the Vaddamarachi operation and its expected aftermath. That was prevented by the diktat of the Indian Government. It therefore undeniably bears part of the major responsibility for the continuation of the war for a further twenty two years, during which period 25,000 of our troops and 75,000 Tamils perished.

The other part of the major responsibility was borne by President Jayewardene who made himself the willing accomplice of the Indians. He virtually acquiesced in the lie that there were near-famine conditions in Jaffna and that death by starvation was imminent, whereas in fact there were severe food shortages which could have been easily corrected. There was no reason therefore to abandon the Vaddamarachi operation. He could have insisted that the continuation of that operation was possible without causing avoidable death and suffering, and that the SL Government was doing no more than carrying out its primordial duty in putting down an armed rebellion by force of arms. That argument would most certainly have been accepted by the international community and India would not have dared intervene. Instead he invited the IPKF to come in and the rest alas is history.

I am trying to establish two points at this juncture. I believe that Rajiv Gandhi acted with the best of intentions in intervening in Sri Lanka in 1987. In his political naivety he probably expected that the IPKF would quickly tame the Tigers, after which a political solution would follow without much difficulty, and then he would be praised by all sides for having avoided all the death and suffering that would have ensued from the Vaddamarachi operation. Instead, gory horror followed for twenty two years. He probably ignored the advice of his Foreign Office. I recall meeting the Indian Ambassador in Moscow after the LTTE broke the ceasefire on April 19, 1995. He had been the Foreign Office’s Advisor to Rajiv Gandhi, in which capacity he had headed five rounds of talks with Prabhakaran. He had become convinced that Prabhakaran was a psychopath, and that there could never be any political solution as long as the latter headed the LTTE. I recall also that RG’s former Foreign Secretary Venkateswaran observed about the Peace Accords, “They will bow up in our faces”. I believe that it was the political naivety of RG and his associates that led to the 1987 intervention, not a sinister neo-imperialist drive. If it had been the latter, India would not have agreed to the withdrawal of the IPKF forces with nothing to show for the 1,200 men who had been killed here.

The second point I want to establish is that the Peace Accords of 1987 had no moral legitimacy behind them. They were not backed by the people who were not consulted through their representatives. The most important determinant behind Parliamentary decisions, in any case, were the undated letters of resignation which could be used by President JR to compel Parliamentary votes just as he desired them, regardless of the wishes of the people. To this day the widest segment of the people regard the Peace Accords as something that was imposed on us by foreign powers, and the resultant Provincial Councils as not much more than a criminal waste of the people’s resources. The moral grounds for rejecting 13 A are very compelling.

What can India now do to help us surmount the ethnic imbroglio? The imbroglio takes the following concrete form: the Government and the TNA could come to terms over a modified form of 13 A but thereafter the Government may find it impossible to deliver on that. To help us out, India could jettison 13 A on two grounds. Firstly, 13 A has no moral legitimacy as I have argued above. Secondly, the international community does not recognize any right of self-determination outside a colonial context, neither a right to set up a separate state nor to a measure of devolution.

What would be the position of our Tamils if 13 A is set aside? Apart from the problems that have to be resolved consequent to the war, the position of the Tamils would be no different from that of our Muslims. As I have shown in the first part of this article, the problems confronting the Muslims are not of an intolerable order, not of an order that compels emigration. They are problems that can be resolved within a unitary state, without any devolution at all. My model for dealing with ethnic minorities is what has proved eminently successful in the West and elsewhere: a fully functioning democracy together with adequate safeguards for the legitimate interests of the ethnic minorities. Our Tamil expatriates are living quite happily under that dispensation, without any devolution at all, in several countries abroad. I see no reason why that should not be possible in Sri Lanka as well.

There are other arguments that can be adduced to show that Sri Lanka is peculiarly unsuited to devolution as the solution to its ethnic problem. It is surely wrong to think of devolution as the panacea for all ethnic ills, because it should be obvious enough that the devolution that may be successful in one place may prove to be disastrous elsewhere. In the case of Sri Lanka I have in mind what might be called a situational factor. We have the seeming anomaly of the conquered, the Tamils, demanding a wide measure of devolution from the conqueror, the Sinhalese. This anomaly is possible only because India has come to play a decisive role over our ethnic problem. Our Tamils are a minority in the Sri Lankan context but regionally – taking count of the seventy million Tamils in Tamil Nadu – they are in the majority, and behind that majority is the potential power of Delhi. That potential power can sometimes be deployed decisively in favor of the Tamils, as happened in the aftermath of the 1983 pogrom. Our Tamils could continue to hope that the huge asymmetry of power between the Tamils and the Sinhalese will count in their favor some day. It is a situation in which a wide measure of devolution could whet the appetite for more and more, until there is a confederal arrangement that would amount to a de facto Eelam.

Another reason why Sri Lanka seems to be peculiarly unsuited to devolution on an ethnic basis is that both of our major ethnic groups, the Sinhalese and the Tamils, seem to be peculiarly prone to racism. By racism I mean essentially the drive to treat the Other as inferior. Practically all ethnic groups can be expected to produce their quota of racists; they are usually a minority in numbers; and the majority in numbers in each ethnic group manages to contain and control them. The peculiarity in Sri Lanka is that the racists who seem to be no more than a lunatic fringe move to center stage at moments of ethnic crisis, and it is they who call the shots thereafter. It is a process by which every attempt at ethnic accommodation in Sri Lanka has been defeated over the decades. We might expect the same process to take over in forthcoming months. The way out is to move from ethno-democracy to citizen democracy in which the individual has an unmediated relationship with the State and the ethnic factor is downplayed. It is the model that has proved successful, by and large, in containing ethnic problems in the West. Very probably emphasizing ethnicity by allowing devolution on an ethnic basis will aggravate our ethnic problem, not solve it.

My essential argument in this article has been as follows. India bears the major moral responsibility for helping Sri Lanka move away from the ethnic imbroglio. This can only be done by jettisoning 13 A, and indeed the very idea of finding a political solution through devolution. The best way forward would be through the adoption of the Western model of a fully functioning democracy with adequate safeguards for the ethnic minorities. If, on the contrary, India insists on the full implementation of 13 A and even federalism, and the ethnic problem gets endlessly protracted, the question will arise whether India is acting in terms of a hidden agenda. Our ethnic problem will then have to be situated in the context of the fate of small nations in a new world order which could have as its obverse side a new imperialism. (Concluded).

Part I – The Case Against Devolution

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 9
    3

    IH – Readers would prefer if you write about one of the topics below;

    Topic 1 – Stupidity of belief of Muslims that World Trade Centre NY was attacked by CIA and Mossad

    Topic 2 – Why do Even Minor Attacks by Israel attract Muslim Protests in Sri Lanka while ISIS atrocities Not.

    Topic 3 – Why do Lankan Muslims do not Protest against ISIS Atrocities All Over the world!

    Topic 4 – Is Democratically elected Israeli Government better than Un-elected Governments of gulf Countries?

    Topic 5 – Eastern Muslim Atrocities against Eastern Tamils!

    Topic 6 – What would be the Situation in SriLanka when Muslim Population reaches 20%?

    more….to come

    • 3
      2

      Lemuria
      Don’t ask Izeth Hussein to write on any of the topic you have suggested Not only he cannot offend his benefactors but he cannot write anything that is not racilly abusive to the Srilankan Tamil community. Racism is in his blood they say. What is the saying ” you cannot teach old dogs new tricks”

      • 4
        1

        Another pathetic attempt by this lunatic imbecile racist to please Sinhala racist by his anti-Tamil posture and take off the attention of Sinhalese on Islamic racists in Srilanka. Any one with the slightest intelligence know that without justice to Tamils there will be no peace or reconciliation in Srilanka.

        Tamils are not asking for anything new, but the lost soveriegnty and land of their ancestors. Tamils even had ruled the entire country for 50 years. To compare Tamils with Muslims who are in the country for 1000 years in south and west and only 500 years in north and east shows his mentality of an incorrigble man.

        The case for devolution is strong for the following examples:
        1. Building houses for those damaged by the war was taken by the government. It is found that these houses are environmentall not suitable and people are protesting. Despite it the government is hell bent to carry out. Will this happen if the task of building houses were given to provincial councils where the council is answerable to their voters.
        2. Siting of Commercial centre for northern province- Decision on the place to build it was taken by a minister of the government without consulting provincial council. When people objected to it, minister wanted it taken to Medawachchiya, which is outside the province. Could this have occured under devolution.
        3. Non-action by police – Police seem to be not taking action in crimes by fellow police officers on Tamil citizens as well as against Sinhala and Muslim encroachers of Tamil properties despite getting court order in some instances. If the police was under provincial council could these happen.

        If the Sinhalese are interested in peace and reconciliation they must grant autonomy to Tamils to manage their own affairs without any interference. People like Izeth Hussain are having a hidden agenda to disrupt any meaningful solution to keep the problem to continue and save Muslims from Sinhala racist onslaught.

    • 0
      0

      [Edited out]

    • 3
      1

      Izeth Hussain RE: Lemuria

      Lemuria has some good suggestions, but, the topics must be selected as to what positive impact it will have for the Muslims and the Non-Muslims alike, going forward.

      Anyway, Amarasiri would like, the following Topics, by Izeth Hussain or any other Muslim, that will discuss the following topics.

      1. Wahhabism, Salafism, ISIS, ISIL, Talibanism and its Clones? Are they following Satan, Devil , Iblis or the God, Allah, as per the Quran and the Bible? The Hadith of Najd?

      2. What is Muslim inbreeding doing to the Health and Intelligence of the Muslim populations? Why is it sanctified by Muslims?

      3. Why is that the average intelligence of the Muslim countries are lower than comparable populations with comparably genetics? Inbreeding, an cousin marriages, over multiple generations? Believing that Revelation is above Reason, and lose the critical thinking skills? Do they believe that blind faith is a virtue?

      4. Why is that the Ulama, Mullah and other “Islamic” clerics say that Philosophy, Mathematics, and Science (Natural Philosophy) is the work of the Devil, Satan. Iblis?

      5. Why is that in many Muslim societies, including Sri Lanka, there is not lower limit for the age of the Bride? In Sri Lanka, the lower limit is 12, but the age can go lower based on the Qazi Judge, as per the Sri Lanka Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act?

      6. Why is that in Sri Lanka, as per the Sri Lanka Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act, the bride is considered, Chattel, Slave of the Wali, owner, a male “guardian”, and the bride does not sign the marriage certificate, without duress, with two witnesses? Is this Arab tribal law or Islam?

      7. Why is that the Ulama and Mullah, and the so-called “Muslims” while claiming that they follow the Prophetic Traditions, IGNORE, the Prophet’s First Tradition of his first wife who was 10 to 15 years older than him and was a widow? Why do they Always, cite the Child Bride Aisha,when they marry children?

      The list is very long, the above 7 issue are good for a fresh start. It should rattle the Wahhabiis, Salafis and their clones as well as many Ulamas and Mullah, and their blind followers as well.

      This this what Ibn Rash, Averroes, said:

      Philosophers have Reason and (functioning) brains, whereas the Theologians ( Ulama, Mullah etc.) have no (functioning) brains”

    • 7
      0

      Lemuria

      You have raised some valid and relevant questions to which I doubt any confused Arab/Muslims can answer.

      I made it a point that I don’t comment on what foreign Arab/Muslim terrorists doing or not doing outside this island, which has been an international issue shaped by many international input (pull and push forces) to it until I heard that three Sri Lankans have been killed by home grown Bangladeshi – Arab/Muslim terrorists linked to middle eastern Arab/Muslim terrorists.

      I doubt IH has the intellectual honesty to own up his always one sided typing and then condemn the the Bengali terrorist who killed Sri Lankan.

      The moral of the story is how dare these foreigners kill our own people when we are more capable and have a very good track record (from 5th April to 9th Jan 2015) of doing it ourselves.

      A warning to foreign terrorists, stop killing our people – you are depriving us the number of targets in this country. You have no rights to kill our people when we are better at it. Go away.

      • 1
        0

        Native Vedda

        RE: Foreign Islamic/Arab Terrorists

        “You have no rights to kill our people when we are better at it. Go away.”

        Yes. Our scale of killing our own people are much lager, unlike yours, in 2s and 3s.

        Furthermore, we hate our own people, more than you hate our people.

        We are Sinhala “Buddhists”, and Tamil “Hindus”, generally known as Para-Sinhat and Para-Tamils, in the Land of Native Veddah Aethho.

  • 5
    2

    Izeth
    Is this clarification of Part 1

  • 4
    1

    only devolution can stop separation of the north.There may be a question mark on the east but it too could follow the north.Izzeth’s remedy is too little ,too late.If far sighted politicians had from independence followed that advice,then it may have worked.Now too much water has flowed under the bridge for any other way other than devolution to keep this country together.In fact it was the kandyans who first asked for federalism when they found they were getting outnumbered and ignored by the low country sinhalese.This is a complex country that had 5 kingdoms at one time and then two got swallowed up and there were three.So provincial councils is the correct way to go for this country,otherwise it will start to tear apart again like in precolonial history.To reduce the expense we should reduce the size of the central government,not get rid of the provincial councils,which is like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

    • 5
      0

      The east is ancient Tamil land that was always occupied and ruled by Tamils. The Trincomallee district was part of the Jaffna kingdom and the rest ruled by Tamil Vanimanai chiefs it is true some parts of the east at times came under the loose rule of the Kandyan kings but it makes no difference to the Tamil position in regard to the inhabitancy of the Eastern province. The Tamils would have had and yet have no objection what so ever to the benevolent and accommodating rule of the Kandyan kings whether they were Kalinga or Nayakkar, and see no inconsistency in the Tamil claim to the Eastern province even under the Kandyan rule. Most of these kings spoke Tamil and also patronised Hinduism so to the Tamils of the east they were Tamil Hindu kings.
      The current position in the east, the ascendance of the Muslim immigrants to the east, who only arrived there three centuries ago as refugees, to their current position at the expense of the indigenous eastern Tamils who are still the largest community in the east. is due to the large scale settlement of Sinhalese in the east on ethnically cleansed Tamil lands by all Sinhalese led government including the current one that is still continuing to do it. Most of these Sinhalese only arrived in the east around 40 years ago. Especially in the Trincomallee district. They would not have dared to come to the Tamil east without the support of the government and the Sinhalese armed forces. This changed the demography of the east within the last 40 years. The Tamils were the overwhelming majority in the east and the Sinhalese only around 4%. Now the Tamils 40% and the Sinhalese 23%. Large scale ethnic cleansing and many Tamils from the east fleeing to Tamil Nadu as refugees also helped this demographic change. If many of these refugees return the Tamil position will drastically change.
      This is what has made the Muslim in the east very powerful as they have now opportunistically seen the chance to join hands with the very same Sinhalese illegal settlers and hardliners in the east, who torment the Muslims down south, in order to marginalise and steal the east from the Tamils. It is ironic that a people who came to the east a few centuries ago seeking refuge from Portuguese persecution in the west and then Sinhalese persecution in the Kandyan areas, have joined hands with the very same persecutors who caused them to flee the Kandyan areas where they first claimed refuge from the Portuguese, to persecute the Tamils of the east who gave them refuge and women to start families as they were fellow Tamils. Now in the name of Islam they want to steal the land from the very same Hindu Tamils who gave them refuge despite following Islam.
      Many of the Muslims in the island do not want devolution and self for the ancient historical Tamil north east that had always been Tamil land, as they feel this be the end of an Islamic homeland in the east, t from stealing the east from its rightful Tamil owners. This is why you see the likes of Izeth coming here and decrying against devolution. What he really is against is devolution for the Tamils present, as this will be the north and east minus Sinhalese majority Amparai electorate and the Gomarankadawela division in Trincomalee that will have around 99% of the Sinhalese population in the east.
      What he and his ilk really want is the devolution sabotaged and delayed until the Muslim hold in the east becomes solid and the marginalisation of the eastern Tamil complete under the joint hands of the occupying racist Sinhalese armed forces/illegals Sinhalese settlers and the Muslims. Then you will see Izeth and all the Muslims will start screeching and demanding for devolution of a Salafist Islamic eastern homeland.
      If there is a referendum in the east these illegal Sinhalese settlers in the east should not be allowed to vote. All of them arrived there using the might of all racist Sinhalese government since independence and the might of a racist Sinhalese only armed forces. There were settled on ethnically cleansed Tamil lands and villages where many Tamils were forcibly removed from their lands using government force. The vast majority of them arrived in the last 40 years. People who arrived within the last 40 years illegally and settled using the might of a racist government and armed forces, have no right to vote and decide on the lives and fate of a people who have lived there for thousands of years in their land. Unlike the Tamils and Muslims down south who had arrived there legally and purchased properties and setup businesses ETC using their own funds.
      Only the eastern Tamils, including the refugees from the east languishing in the refugee camps in Tamil Nadu and the Muslims who have lived there for three centuries should be allowed to vote in the referendum in the east. Not the Sinhalese who were deliberately settled there illegally using government force in order to deliberately change the demography of the east, so that a future referendum for self rule for the Tamils in the east at least can be defeated, should not be allowed to vote.

      • 1
        3

        Mr Paul

        Muslims are Tamils whose religion is Islam and those in the upcountry plantation sector are Tamils who arrived during the British. International community cannot and will not get involved in finding political solutions to different sectors based on Religion or date of arrival.

        I guess you are a Christian by your name. You consider yourself as a ‘traditional’ Tamil while those who practice Islam are not?

        Mr Paul, much is talked about a referendum among the “Tamils” for a political solution. Who (what percentage) will be entitled to vote? In the registration process for the referendum how you will identify them?

        Soma

        • 1
          2

          soma

          “I guess you are a Christian by your name. You consider yourself as a ‘traditional’ Tamil while those who practice Islam are not?”

          Initially, Only the Tamil Hindus in the North and the East were considered Tamils. Then some Tamils became Muslims, but they were considered Tamils or Tamil Speaking too. Then the European Imperialism arrived, and some Tamils converted to Catholicism and Christianity. They were considered Tamils. Then the Up country Tamils came, who were mostly Hindus, and they were considered Tamils too, but of a Lower grade by the Jaffna Tamils.

          Pre-independence G G Poonnabalam, lumped them all together and called all of them Tamils, and wanted 50/50 Representation for “Tamils”.

          Then these Northern Tamils voted to disenfranchise the Estate Up Country Hindu Tamils, and G G Ponnabalam and the Vellahalas voted for it. Only the Leftist parties from the South Voted against it.

          They considered the Muslims to be Tamil Speaking People. They wanted to use the Tamil speaking Muslims and the Up Country Tamils and the low-caste Tamils so that the Valhalla Hegemony can be maintained, during the Tamil Separatist war.

          They Expelled the Tamil Speaking Muslims. They tried to recruit the up country Tamils to help the Vellahala maintain their hegemony.

          So, who is Tamil Definition has changed over the years, based on the political objectives and whims of the Tamils.

          So, who are the Tamils? They are Paras just their their Sinhala, who are also Paras, in the Land of Native Veddah Aethho.

          • 1
            2

            Thank you Amarasiri. I saved it for my reference.
            All Tamil racist donkeys here should remember that Tamils voted for the disenfranchising.

            Soma

            • 1
              0

              soma

              “All Tamil racist donkeys here should remember that Tamils voted for the disenfranchising of Indian Tamils”

              If you research it, you will find that the Racist Tamils Voted to disenfranchise the Indian Tamils along with the Racist Sinhala. Only the non-Racist Sinhala parties voted against it.

              Disenfranchisement

              Main article: Ceylon Citizenship Act
              See also: Soulbury Commission and Donoughmore Commission

              The first prime minister, D.S. Senanayake of the conservative UNP, reacting to the possibilities of losing power to leftist political parties, commenced the task of weakening the leftist parties and their associate organizations. Indian Tamil labour had overwhelmingly supported these organizations. According to opposition parties he was also influenced by segments of the majority Sinhalese population who felt their voting strength was diluted due to Indian Tamils. He introduced the Ceylon Citizenship Act of 1948, the Indian-Pakistani Citizenship Act of 1949 and amended the Parliamentary Elections Act and disfranchised the Indian Tamils along with many persons of Indian and Pakistani ancestry.

              As they had no means of electing anyone to the Parliament they ceased to be a concern of parliamentary politicians. The plantation workers were thus forgotten from 1948 to 1964. They were unable to profit by any progressive legislation. The housing, health and education of the plantation workers was neglected. Infant mortality was highest in the country. Although since the introduction of universal franchise in 1931, strong traditions of social welfare in Sri Lanka have given the island very high indicators of physical well-being. Impressive national statistics tended to hide the existence of deprived pockets within the population and the most deprived population group has been the plantation labour, which had been economically, politically and socially deprived.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Tamils_of_Sri_Lanka

          • 5
            0

            Amarasiri

            “Then these Northern Tamils voted to disenfranchise the Estate Up Country Hindu Tamils, and G G Ponnabalam and the Vellahalas voted for it.”

            According to Sumanthiran MP GG Ponna didn’t vote for the disenfranchisement of upcountry hard working Tamils. He said this in a Youtube clip. Sorry I am unable to confirm what he said was true. It is for you to trace the source of the Ponna’s story and enlighten us with truth.

            The rumour was spread by the Federal Party spin doctors according another source.

            • 0
              0

              NV,

              “The third Act passed by parliament was the Ceylon (Parliamentary Elections) Amendment Act, no. 48 of 1949. This act laid down that, persons who were not citizens could not have their name entered or retained in any of the registers of electors, concretizing the reality that those who were not successful in getting Ceylon citizenship were also effectively disenfranchised.

              These acts thereby established and legalized the rigid conditions of citizenship envisaged by the conservative Sinhala leadership for the Indian Tamils, and resulted in the latter’s exclusion from political life.

              The collective shame of excluding a minority must also be borne by the Sri Lankan Tamils where before they had championed cause of the Indian Tamils, the Tamil Congress led by G. G. Ponnambalam had by this time joined the coalition with the UNP and supported the legislation disenfranchising the Indian Tamil community. This was a triumph for D S. Senanayake, as it meant that he had succeeded in separating the two communities-the Sri Lankan Tamils and the Tamils of Indian origin which previously had acted together for a common goal. Jayawardene (1986, 76) explained this voting pattern on the basis of class differences. Caste prejudices may also have contributed to ultimately separating the two communities, given that the Sri Lankan Tamil leadership was predominantly from upper caste groups and that traditionally tho Sri ankan Tamils have kept themselves apart from the Tamils of Indian origin partly on the basis of caste status.

              Meanwhile, signifying that indeed there still existed support and sympathetic links between the two Tamil communities, some members of the Tamil Congress broke away in protest at the citizenship laws and went on to form the Federal Party (FP), which in later years took center stage in giving leadership to the Sri Lankan Tamil community”

              Source – Citizenship and Statelessness in Sri Lanka by Valli Kanapathipillai. (Page 43)

          • 1
            1

            Dear Amarasiri

            I quote you viz: “Then some Tamils became Muslims, but they were considered Tamils or Tamil Speaking too….” Remember these are your words – not mine.

            When the largest number of Muslims came to the Island from the Indian Southern littoral in periodical waves within the past 300-400 years they had already converted to Islam before their arrival here. That they were originally from the Untouchable castes in India is now disputed here but the fact they were original Hindus is not.

            As to the Tamils in the island who converted to Christianity and Catholicism after the arrival of the European colonialists, they faithfully remained Tamil by religion. Since Muslims, on the other hand, try to eat the cake and have the cake, they are in all sorts of trouble. Here they say they are not Tamils but, during times of communal trouble in Sri Lanka, they rush to Tamilnadu and plead with leaders there to save them crying they are Tamils. The usual thoppi-pirattal – a game that has now lost steam.

            Nettabomman

            • 0
              1

              Nettabomman

              “When the largest number of Muslims came to the Island from the Indian Southern littoral in periodical waves within the past 300-400 years they had already converted to Islam before their arrival here.”

              Why did the Racists Northern Tamils Vote to disenfranchise the Up Country Tamils along with Racist Sinhala South, when the Sinhala Leftist South opposed it? Vellahala Hinduosm, Castism and Racism?

              Most of the Muslims came from around 800 AD up to the Portuguese Period, 1505. They were mixed race of Malabars, Arabs, Persians, Northern Indians etc. You can see those genes in Today’s Muslims. Perhaps the Eastern Muslims have a higher proportion of Tamil Blood. The Muslim of Sri Lanka are not pure Tamil, biy an admixture of the various ethnicity. During the Western Colonial Period there were some new arrivals, but they were small, because there was incentive to come to Sri Lanka when it was under Western Christian Colonial Occupation.

              The claim by the Tamils, that the Muslims are Tamils, is not fully correct. They are not fully Sinhala either.

              However, the claim may be made the Sinhala are Sinhala Speaking Tamils and Vice Versa the Tamils are Tamil Speaking Sinhala, and both are Para, Para-Sinhala and Para-Tamils, just like everybody else, except the Native Veddah Aethho.

              Mitochondrial DNA history of Sri Lankan ethnic people: their relations within the island and with the Indian subcontinental population

              Journal of Human Genetics (2014) 59, 28–36; doi:10.1038/jhg.2013.112; published online 7 November 2013

              http://www.nature.com/jhg/journal/v59/n1/full/jhg2013112a.html#aff1

              Through a comparison with the mtDNA HVS-1 and part of HVS-2 of Indian database, both Tamils and Sinhalese clusters were affiliated with Indian subcontinent populations than Vedda people who are believed to be the native population of the island of Sri Lanka

              • 1
                0

                Dear Amarasiri

                “Most of the Muslims came from around 800 AD up to the Portuguese Period, 1505. They were mixed race of Malabars, Arabs, Persians, Northern Indians etc. You can see those genes in Today’s Muslims”

                The usual unadulterated deception from the Lankan Muslim side. Tell that to the MH Mohamed-Nagoor Meera, NDH Abdul Cader and other distinguished Lankan Muslim families from the South and they will laugh you off your Palayakat sarong.

                Remember the Pakistanis, beginning from President Musharaff, swore to US/Western Intelligence Osama Bin Laden was not in Pakistan. So the story of Mullah Omar – the Afghan terrorist, who bribed the Pakistanis for a safe home within Pakistan.

                It is the month of Ramadhan – of peace and fraternity – at least among those of the Islamic faith. Why are they killing each other with so much of ferocity in Baghdad, Dhaka, Medina, Jeddah and almost everywhere where Muslims live – of all times, in this month of prayer. As Fareed Zakaria asks in his current “Why do they hate us series” so critically “Is hatred, extreme violence and savagery in Muslims influenced by the teachings in the Qaran?”
                I seek answers from an academic point of view.

                Nettabomman

          • 1
            0

            As-Salamu Alaykum.Mohamed Amarasiri
            Is there no end to your ignorance?
            You keep repeating lies after lies about the Jaffna Tamils, endorsing your guru and imbecile racist Izeth Hussein.
            You wrote “…..Then these Northern Tamils voted to disenfranchise the Estate Up Country Hindu Tamils and G G Ponnabalam and the Vellahalas voted for it. Only the Leftist parties from the South Voted against it.”

            For your information here is what wikipedia says on Ceylon Citizenship Act No 18 of 1948.
            “Shortly after independence on 4 February 1948 the new Sinhalese dominated government of Ceylon introduced the Ceylon Citizenship Bill before Parliament. The outward purpose of the Bill was to provide means of obtaining citizenship, but its real purpose was to discriminate against the Indian Tamils by denying them citizenship.[1] The Bill stipulated that anyone wishing to obtain citizenship had to prove that their father was born in Ceylon i.e. that they were at least third generation immigrants. This was an impossible task for most Indian Tamils. Few were at least third generation immigrants because they tended to return to India to give birth.[1] Those who were at least third-generation immigrants rarely had the necessary documents because they rarely registered births.[1] Therefore, they could not prove the requirements for citizenship.
            The Bill was opposed fiercely in Parliament by the Ceylon Indian Congress, which represented the Indian Tamils, and the Sinhalese leftist parties. The bill was also opposed by the All Ceylon Tamil Congress, which represented the Sri Lankan Tamils, including its leader G.G. Ponnambalam.”
            So moron amarasiri can you read this and comprehend.

      • 0
        2

        paul

        “The Trincomallee district was part of the Jaffna kingdom and the rest ruled by Tamil Vanimanai chiefs”

        bah.paul the historian who uses the powerful internet to mislead others.

        That is the problem with this powerful tool of the 21st century.

        https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/Sri_Lanka_geopolitics_-_after_%22Spoiling_of_Vijayabahu%22.png

        • 2
          0

          shanker

          Please read prof H L Seneviratne’s “Buddhism, Identity and Conflict” which is accessible on Noolaham.org:

          http://noolaham.net/
          project/62/6133/6133.pdf

          I only go by renowned scholars/historians research.

          Any Tom, Dick and Harry could upload anything on the web, which means nothing. You too can type anything and upload on Wiki.

          • 0
            3

            native last veddha

            nothing in it stating east was part of the jaffna kingdom.

            here is the english version and point me to the page stating so.

            http://noolaham.net/project/62/6133/6133.pdf

            if you have anything better than wiki to prove east was part of the jaffna kingdom as claimed by paul,then please be my guest and so us yours.

            If you show me yours,i will show mine.David don’t get jealous.

            • 2
              0

              shankar

              I posted the link below

              http://noolaham.net/project/62/6133/6133.pdf

              You posted the link below:

              http://noolaham.net/project/62/6133/6133.pdf

              What is the difference between the two?

              Did you really read the English version of Professor’s paper? If you haven’t read it there is no point in exchanging bull.

              I do think you are a big bull s****.

              Please don’t get into sachoooooooooooooo’s mode.

              • 0
                1

                native mixed veddha

                you don’t seem to even know what you posted.go back and check your original comment.

                I did read the good professors book,because i do speed reading and can read it in about 20 minutes whreas it would have taken you 200.out of the 28 pages let me know in which page he mentions east was a part of the jaffna kingdom.

                don’t try to bluff us on the internet.sadly it is a great tool but in the hand of charlatans it becomes a worthless.

                • 1
                  0

                  shankar

                  “you don’t seem to even know what you posted.go back and check your original comment. “

                  What did I post?

                  I am not even sure if you are talking about the same Prof and same book.

                  Please do summarise in your fast typing mode whatever you have read.

                  Had you read it you would not have typed a stupid response.

                  • 0
                    0

                    my dear mixed and assimilated native veddha

                    go back to your original comment.You have broken it up into two lines and given the link.Trying to be too smart no.When you click on your link you get only the tamil noolaham page.Then you ptetend that it is the same link that i have given.What a pathetic display of impersonation of a readr of scholarly reseach..In my link it clearly mentions the professor;s name and gives 28 pages.Read all 28 and tell me on which page the east is mentioned as a part of jaffna kingdom.Instead of reading everyone else ask the person here and get it from the horse’s mouth,okay.The present regent of the jaffna kingdom.

                    http://www.jaffnaroyalfamily.org/welcome.html

                    less than 10% of the east was a part of the jaffna kingdom.Also a small part of puttalam where pearl fisheries was done was also part of it.

        • 1
          0

          Trincomalee district north of Mahaveli river was under Jaffna Kingdom, while that south of the river was under Kandyan rule. When Jaffna kingdom fell to the Portuguese, Trincomalee that was under Jaffna rule came under Portuguese rule. That is why the Portuguese were able to destroy Koneswaram temple, and Robert Knox who landed in Trincomalee did not have any problem but was arrested by Kandyan guards only when he crossed Mahaveli river into Mutur which was under Kandyan kingdom. Jaffna kingdom at the time of defeat to Portuguese contained parts of Anuradhapura district as well as parts of Puttalam district up to Deduru Oya, which was known as Demala hatpattu.

  • 0
    0

    [Edited out]

    • 3
      0

      m.mokkan

      “[Edited out]”

      Brilliant.

      Thanks for keeping it brief.

  • 9
    1

    Izeth Hussain,

    Stop spitting venom on Tamils and devolution:

    Why don’t you write about your Muslim ISIS terrorists doing in Dakka now?

    Soon it might occur in Sri Lanka too, as the US has warned that ISIS is present in Sri Lanka.

    Please do something to stop this ISIS barbarism – it is more urgent than your anti-Tamil nonsense.

    • 0
      0

      [Edited out]

    • 0
      0

      [Edited out]

    • 0
      0

      [Edited out]

  • 1
    1

    Izeth Hussain

    RE: The Case Against Devolution – II

    Dr. Rajan Hoole said it. How the Tamils Leaders who messed things up for Tamils and the rest of the country pre-independence.

    It has been downhill since then, with the Vadukodi Restitution and the end of the Separatist War.

    “The most cogent case for arguing that India bears the major responsibility for helping us to get out of the ethnic imbroglio consists of the developments that took place in 1987”

    “The other part of the major responsibility was borne by President Jayewardene who made himself the willing accomplice of the Indians. He virtually acquiesced in the lie that there were near-famine conditions in Jaffna and that death by starvation was imminent, whereas in fact there were severe food shortages which could have been easily corrected.”

    The Indians must have recognized the stupidity of Tamils and Sinhala. Then they became wiser.

    Wonder, what role the bi-modal IQ distribution of Tamils played in this fiasco. It is rather unfortunate the Tamils,and the others had to suffer because of the Stupid Tamils and The Stupid Sinhala.

    No wonder the average IQ is 79, and same for both Tamils and Sinhala. Deja Vu, seen before.

    The Story Of Two Graphs drawn by A Tamil Man: By Mahesan Niranjan Onion Prices and Tamil IQ Distributions

    https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/the-story-of-two-graphs-drawn-by-a-tamil-man/onioniqdistributions/

    https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/the-story-of-two-graphs-drawn-by-a-tamil-man/

  • 3
    1

    Mr. Izeth Hussain,
    Good imagination! Your reference to India and the recent history from 1987 of IPKF does not make the stake of Tamils in North and East lower than that of the majority Sinhalese. It is now known to the whole world and India too the full history of Tamils and Sinhalese of Sri Lanka. Are you aware of Sri Lanka cosigning the UNHRC agreement and are you not expecting anything to happen towards reconciliation and remedial measures towards conflict resolution? Outside of your coverage here, there is progress being made by the Leaders on both sides of the divide and the International community of which India is a major player to bring reconciliation. For readers like me you look a stranger playing the part of a “Dog in the Manger” and not a real player or even a spectator wishing well for the Country. It is strange you don’t even know the difference in the situation of Tamils living in the West and the indigenous Tamils of Sri Lanka! Looks like you want to bring down the status of the indigenous Tamils to your status in Sri Lanka which is the same as the status of Tamils living in the West.

    • 5
      0

      You are correct he is cunningly trying compare the status of the island’s indigenous Tamil from the north and the east to the status of the Muslims in the island, who are not indigenous but ethnic Tamil immigrants from South India. Ironically from the very same Tamil Nadu that he loves to rundown and then Tamil Kerala. This is the same status as the Tamils in the west where they are immigrants. However Tamils are indigenous to the island’s north and east have a very ancient history there and have the same right as the Sinhalese. He is deliberately trying distort history by comparing the Tamils living in the their home land in the north and east of the island with Tamil immigrants in the west. He is a nasty evil anti Tamil who thinks just because his largely low caste Indian Tamil ancestors converted to Islam a few centuries ago, he is not a Tamil anymore. Does not realise ethnicity and religion are tow different things. People from the same family or ethic group can belong to many religions and people who follow the same religion belong to many races language groups and ethnicities. Unless they are ethnic based religions like Sikhism Judaism

  • 4
    0

    Who cares about devolution? The political baba, Izeth is thinking if he keeps writing about devolution, then Tamils are going to forget the Vaddukkodai convention and come after him to defend the devolution. That is an imbecile thinking. Further he is cannot understand that 13A is only decentralizing EP power through governors. The Governors do not have the power on their own other than just to implement what the EP is saying.

    “The second point I want to establish is that the Peace Accords of 1987 had no moral legitimacy behind them. They were not backed by the people who were not consulted through their representatives. “

    This man is a poor soul. He does not know who are the Tamils, the Sinhalese and worst of all, who are the Tamil Muslims (another religious sector of Tamils, whom have been advantageously separated by Muslims ministers and writers for political perks) are. In that condition he does not have the mental capacity to decide what moral authority is and what is not. Something is suggesting that here, he is probably dreaming of British referendum these days. There is no legitimate government in the Island of Ceylon from 1948 to have a binding authority on anything on Tamils. British had no moral authority to collect, by arms, Tamils’ sovereignty hand it over to Sinhalese. Tamils have never accepted the Soulbury constitution (or any other two of the republican constitutions- Sinhalese has no moral authority to hold Tamils by deploying army in North and East), unlike Sinhalese leaders accepted the India – Ceylon Accord. The rogue Sinhalese leaders accepted Soulbury’s condition for freedom and cheated. Latter came back and told British did not have the moral authority to impose or tell them conditions. They did that (wrote pacts) with SJV two times and told the people acceptance was not obtained to implement them. That is the same dupe they did to dupe to India and said that India accord was done by duress and they have repudiated by one side. Long after that history, Izeth is pretending like that he has made new Invention, that India has imposed an Accord on him. Such a funny writer he is. He is stealing from his own masters to do his job and get paid for it by the masters. Now they are doing it in the UNHRC too. This Chameleon is becoming to be the witness for that by trying to be a big pundit. Before this political baby start to preach this, SJV had established at Vaddukkodai that there is no moral authority to the Sinhalese to rule Tamils. That is why Leader Pirapakaran refused to accept the Rajiv signing for Tamils. But JR signed for Sinhalese, so it is binding on them only. Now comedy Izeth may argue in any ground, but the norms are, as Lanakwe forces had lost to Indian force, there was no need to call for a referendum to get people opinion to accept the condition Indian forces were imposing on Lankan forces. Further, these dead issues are no excuses to comply or question the moral authority of the UNHRC, that the matter the question of the day and Izeth is trying to sideline.( Izeth, after working as foreign diplomat has no capacity to write UNHRC resolution or to predict the direct it would take in future – so he avoids it). Izeth may avoid that subject, but his government, who without any duress accepted to sign UN charted, has to implement what is decided by UNHRC. That is the one Tamils count on, but not the India- JR accord. They need to comply to the resolution without hiring more Chameleons to the witness to falsify the resolution or Lankawe membership to UN has to cancelled calling it as most rogue and cheating nation in the world and not fit to be in UN like organizations.

    “The most important determinant behind Parliamentary decisions, in any case, were the undated letters of resignation which could be used by President JR to compel Parliamentary votes just as he desired them, regardless of the wishes of the people”. That is much better than womanizing Muslim ministers getting caught in crimes and ending up in supporting any Sinhala rogue government in power for life time, just to save their heads.

    “To this day the widest segment of the people regard the Peace Accords as something that was imposed on us by foreign powers, and the resultant Provincial Councils as not much more than a criminal waste of the people’s resources. The moral grounds for rejecting 13A are very compelling.” That is not a ground to take back Tamils sovereignty at that was regained in 1948. This a fruitless augment. Further he cannot mix up why Tamils opposed to 13A and why Sinhalese opposed to 13A. Tamils opposed 13A because Sinhalese still holding Tamils’ sovereignty, but Sinhalese opposed because it as it is bring a relax on their wish to coercively rule the Tamils. In any case Sinhalese cannot use Soulbury constitution which was forced on Tamils by British without a referendum or 13A which was forced on Tamils where only Sinhalese were the signing party not Tamils or any other Izeth “argued, reasoned, established or another dupe wording” to rule Tamils. It is clearly established, argued and reasoned out in Vaddukkodai that Sinhalese are not a race to live next them. To this day the widest segments of the people regard the devolution as something that was imposed by foreign power. So, Tamils do not want to stop for a minute and think for the change of their path from Vaddukkodai Convention.

    My model for dealing with ethnic minorities is what has proved eminently successful in the West and elsewhere: a fully functioning democracy together with adequate safeguards for the legitimate interests of the ethnic minorities. Our Tamil expatriates are living quite happily under that dispensation, without any devolution at all, in several countries abroad.
    We established, proved, argued, reasoned out …. That there is no western power that is not protecting its democracy not strengthen by Federal Systems. If they have not done that, their democracies would not have survived until now. Further, though Lankawe has stateless minorities like Malays and Burges who have no grounds to ask for a separate state or Sinhalese have no fear of them going separate, but the Tamils who have established by Vaddukoddai convention to go spate is concern to address. Izeth “Muslims” are equal to Tamil is a false theory as there no legitimate Muslims division and need not be concerned about it in any political solution. The Tamils and Sinhalese are State holding races in Ceylon. So the Unitary government which was established with unitary parliamentary model failed in Ceylon. Beyond that the basic foundation of democracy, the universal franchise is not capable of taking foot in Lankawe part of Ceylon, after all the Appe Aandue is putting a claim on 99% of the citizens are educated.

    What this dictator minded imbecile writing is, on his own, without taking a poll from Diaspora, that they happy to live in foreign land leaving Tamil Eelam because there is democracy in the west. He is not seeing they are the only people bringing the IC into equation. I would expect him to give his own explanation for this phenomenon. Tamils in the Mother Eelam are held by 6th amendment and the Diaspora which was transplanted in the West is keep showing their unhappiness through intervening in their mother land plights. Tamils, in the western major towns, where only they can hide their visibility as one with in as many as over 200 different races living never forgot their home land and rest from working for it. Living within 200 races and losing their ID is not what Tamils are fighting for in their mother land. They look for democracy only to establish their cultural life on their mother land. So establishing , arguing, reasoning out and proving that Tamils are happy and that is because of the unitary nature of the western democracy is an extremely falsified contention of a person who lived as a foreign diplomat but could not see the people life out there in the open world. That is an extremely poor grasping ability. This is not arguing, establishing, proving or reasoning out that Tamils aspiration is solvable by converting the Wildlife Sanctuary Lankawe into in to a human habitat. Tamils, unlike imbecile Izeth claim, not happy and have not cut off from their mother land. Of cause they are well doing there than they were in their mother land under the oppression of the occupying rapist army and Sinhala only law. (They never contended that that is all what they can achieve in their life and that is all what they wanted. There is nowhere in the world people living as just human being losing all their ids, though it would be ideal. Western democracies like to tolerate others IDs but have not lost theirs. ) It appears this imbecile does not know the difference among, “Happy, Satisfied, and Well Doing”. Democracy is a basic need for life. This fool is arguing something like this: “Just because Tamils are feeling satisfied eating Aappa for hunger, give them some more Aapa for a political solution too “. Tamil never argued, reasoned, established that they are ready to sell their Tamil Eelam to basic need of food, In fact FP, TULF and TNA and now TGTE has always insisted that they not for perk to sell off their Port City.
    He is trying to keep comparing the situation of a religious sector of Tamils (the Tamils Muslims), to the universal Tamils of Island Ceylon. That is where his imbecile theories are clearly explaining his only intention of writing of these series is to back up Ganasara, Mahindhapala… to create continuous racial disharmony, nothing to contribute the Island’s political question. He is seeing that succumbing to the Sinhalese Masters and splitting the Tamils as Hindus, Christians and Muslims will give him more space to gain personal profits. Other than that the basic points he is trying to show the similarity between the two religious groups is not based on the actual one existing in the real world. His hope is if the Tamils Muslims stay with the Sinhalese, they can aggressively convert the Sinhalese too. That is how they want to create a religious minority in Sinhalese too. This will create a big unrest between the universal Ceylon Tamils and Sinhalese, and then he hope to get presser on Sinhalese government through OIC countries.

    ”As I have shown in the first part of this article, the problems confronting the Muslims are not of an intolerable order, not of an order that compels emigration. “

    The artificial religious difference he created to compare one religious group with the rest of the Tamils is making him to swallow his own theory, here. He is trying to accept that the rest of the Tamils’ problem is more acute than the Muslim Tamils and it is forcing them to migrate to West. But that is not the whole picture of the Ceylon migrations. Muslim Tamils are used by Sinhalese governments for their ability of using of Tamil, to crush the rest of the Tamils. This is where the Muslims were used to bring in standardization. Though government used these techniques and Muslim Tamils were used so far their mischievous deeds, they too have to emigrate to get jobs in Middle East. Why they don’t go to West, where the Tamils like to go to seek relief, and where democracy is flourishing and equal job opportunities are established, is only the anti-West nature of the Lankawe Muslims like Izeth. The places, the Lankawe Tamil Muslims go to seek relief, the Middle East, unfortunate the largest refugee producing region on the earth and they do not keep anybody in there other than Arabian Muslims. This disadvantage, Izeth hide from accepting, is used by Izeth to dishonestly crate a false theory of that Muslim Tamils and the other religious Tamils have same problem but the other religious Tamils are migrating because they only want the Western democracy and Muslims go to Middle only for job seeking. That is not the true case. Muslims Tamils seeks jobs in Middle East to reconnect their religion in Middle East. This is from where the current anti-humanistic culture of Jihadism, Wahhabism Women Slavery, refusal sports and education for Women all has come to Lankwe. In contract Tamil who went to West are trying to bring the Western Civilization, (not the blind copy of their culture, ) the democratic developments appearing in the West, competition, capitalism, gender equality, modern education of science, arts and economics rather than reimporting a 1500 year old one single book into to many different opportunistic ways. This is not to condemn Tamils as they just want democracy. That is only a narrow minded anti-Tamil propaganda. Tamils wants their land.
    Palestinians may want to give up their land to Israel, which knows to run a democratic country, but no Muslims out in the world, but Tamils who own their land is not going to trade off their land to Sinhalese’s democracy, which is yet to be established as what it is, from 1948.

    • 0
      0

      Mallaiyuram
      You are with me in that Muslims are Tamils who practise Islam as religion. Taken together with the plantation Tamils I consider more than 50% of Tamils are occupying Sinhala areas. What is your solution to this problem of ours.

      Mr M, who and who will be entitled to vote in the referendum being talked about in some Tamil quarters?

      Soma

      • 0
        0

        Soma,

        If you have questions in future on the comments posted in threads that they are falling into past, you may want to bring it under a comment of mine of to a new one. There, I may notice it. I do not have the habit of checking the old ones back. – Thank you for your cooperation in advance.

        “Taken together with the plantation Tamils I consider more than 50% of Tamils are occupying Sinhala areas.” You defined Sinhala area in your way. But everything has to be based on principles.

        I am not a supporter of Federal Solution. If two countries have problem about their population, it has to settle with International Treaties as per the UN laws. So I do not have to reply anything on that for you. But as that status has not come yet, I assume a Federal situation and give you some suggestions.

        1. Who can live where is decided by ancestral land ownership. So Tamils live and own lands in the North and East. It is not based on your line marking. Any Land captured after freedom has to be released to Tamils.

        2. Who can move where is based on need. Upcountry Tamils moved there only on the need of employees to develop upcountry. Up country hills were there but never they were developed by the Tamil and Sinhala Kings ruled that area. You may have heard the American needs Mexican immigrants to do job the average American do not want to do. But Trump make a good political gain on bashing Mexican. This kind of game does not not settle the immigrant disputes. Trump need to know that there NFTA is in practice too. Anybody has come to do the dirty jobs that Sinhalese did not wanted to do has to treated equally with the Kerala Mercenaries who converted as the Sinhala Intellectuals. Of cause income levels can differ, not the fundamental rights. Up country Tamils, they worked and live there, going to live there under international laws. Here we are not talking about the 150,000 army occupying the North as employment need. It is occupying and consuming occupied peoples’ resources and getting into their girls’ Sari ceremonies.

        3. How an expanding community is accommodated will based on agreements like, Chelva- Solomon West Ridgeway Dias pacts. In Tamil area, only Tamil can be allowed to settle, where there is no need based settlements. So any upcountry Tamils who needs to be settled beyond their estate employments has to be bought to North and East. They have to be taken care of by the provincial administration.

        This based on after freedom. If you want to go beyond that, then those days laws is a country is owned by the Kings and Kandy is owned by Tamil kings. So the European who took from Tamil king has to return it to their generation that is Tamil Nadu Kshatriya families. So the Sinhalese have to vacate the land Tamils ruled.

        If you have additional problems and you could not allow the upcountry Tamils who lives on their employment site, you better vacate the Puttalam Negombo Ja-Ela because you converted the Tamils lived in that area and now they are sinhalese and they have to move to Sinhala Soil. Now that area has to rehabilitated with Tamils as those are Tamils ancestral lands. The up country Tamils can move there when they lose their employment sites. If you want go even beyond European times and go up to Mahavamsa, let the Tamils to trace what were the path Dutugamunu travelled and who were the 32 Tamils Chieftains he killed so that those Tamil lands can be returned to Tamils.

        These genuine and earnest land claims suggest that we have enough lands to settle Tamils and Muslims in the North and East, if the up country Tamils leave their employment sites and any Muslims who consider who is a Tamil and come to live with Tamils.

        But as I have suggested in the past in CT, Central, Uva and Sabaragamuwa has to be re-created and the Tamils area has to be consolidated. This will help Sinhalese to live with Sinhalese and Tamils to live with Tamils. When The Tamil Eelam is created it will be like North, East and Central three and independent states.

        • 0
          0

          Mr M
          Regret to say that you are trying to get the Sinhalese convinced to this “North and East for us and the rest is for all of us concept.

          I will appreciate an answer to my query ” Mr M, who and who will be entitled to vote in the referendum being talked about in some Tamil quarters?” Specifically will those who practise Christianity, Islam and those arrived during the British will be included?

          Soma

          • 1
            0

            somaasss

            “Specifically will those who practise Christianity, Islam and those arrived during the British will be included?”

            Of course you will be included if your habitat falls within the area despite the fact that you are being a Sinhala/Buddhist ghetto builder.

            What is your agenda?

  • 5
    1

    Unavoidable and unwelcome like the plague, Izeth Hussain is here again this week – again writing much zilch but really saying or teaching nothing new.

    As readers stridently complained regularly, the man keeps repeating himself – purely to keep his date with The Island to fill his weekly column. Of course, he manages to satisfy his sadistic prejudice against Tamils and India in the process of his now familiar weekly verbal diarrhea.

    I will deal, however, with an issue or two in this article that needs correction.

    Hussain once again misleads when he says “The second point I want to establish is that the Peace Accord of 1987 had no moral legitimacy behind them. They were not backed by the people…” Glory be! Is Hussain trying to hide the fact JRJ’s 1977 government had a 5/6th Mandate – and he (JRJ) secured legitimacy acting on this massive popular mandate. No Government in the world go to the people every week on every issue, do they?

    One cannot but see Hussain flip flop from his last week’s foolish insistence India abandon the 13A to a more earthly suggestion this week they “modify” the Accord – a point that I made when I confronted him.

    Like several other Analysts, Hussain often writes of “India’s hidden Agenda” and repeats it here. I suspect this mischievous comment is aimed more to catch the eye of the Sinhalese extreme than a serious one. If there indeed is such a sinister Agenda why does he not identify it specifically – so that this can be subject to popular debate.

    Clearly, the ageing Hussain is progressively losing his marbles.

    Backlash

  • 0
    0

    [Edited out]

  • 1
    0

    “The second point I want to establish is that the Peace Accords of 1987 had no moral legitimacy behind them………..”
    Einstein theorised and it was left to other scientists to establish the validity. Here is Izeth Hussain claims to have “established” half baked suggestions.
    Izeth is trying hard to establish Sinhala Hussain just like the 1956 Post Minister CAS Marikkar called himself Sinhala Marikkar.

    “It is a situation in which a wide measure of devolution could whet the appetite for more and more, until there is a confederal arrangement that would amount to a de facto Eelam”
    Look across Palk Straight Izeth. The Indian federal states never asked for more and more and importantly no state wish to separate. Look at Switzerland, Canada.

    India has a right to show concerns over the political developments relating to Tamils. At one stage there were nearly a million refugees in Tamil Nadu and the number today is about 300,000. In TN, the plight of Eelam Tamils was and is a humanitarian issue. Last week a mosque in Myanmar was torched. Did you or the Lankan Muslim ministers do anything? No you are too selfish. Have you heard of Rohingyas?

    Have you ever wondered as to why GoSL is not taking position similar to yours?

    Izeth clearly does not want the Lankan predicament sorted out because the privileges enjoyed by Lankan Muslims will cease.

    By the way, the gist of “The Case Against Devolution” I & II are identical. Another thing Izeth: How come you criticise JR but not Mahinda? Do you know the patron of BBS?

  • 0
    0

    Dear Mr Hussein

    Thank you for your view, in my mind an accurate one.
    Very few have identified the problems caused by India in 1989.

    However the solution you have proposed is not such a realistic one. Remember that it is not practicality or justice but who wins the elections that decides on the fate of this country.

    So we are on a huge game of Snakes and Ladders on a national scale.

    • 0
      0

      [Edited out]

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.