25 May, 2017

The Politics Of Genocide

By Pitasanna Shanmugathas

Pitasanna Shanmugathas

May 18th 2009 marked the end of a twenty-five year civil war in Sri Lanka which devastated the country and cost the lives of thousands of civilians. A segment of the Sri Lankan Tamil community has used the term “genocide” to label the atrocities which were committed against Tamil civilians by the Sri Lankan government. However, in the process, a segment of the Tamil community uses the term genocide to disregard the crimes committed by the LTTE against Tamil civilians and the LTTE’s own role in stifling genuine political solutions to end the ethnic conflict, such acts by the LTTE played a significant role in the violent end to the civil war.

The term genocide, as argued by Noam Chomsky, has become “politicized and vulgarized to the extent that it has almost become meaningless.”

The second session of the Permanent People’s Tribunal on Sri Lanka held in Bremen, Germany comes to the conclusion that the Sri Lankan state committed genocide against Tamils, and that such a genocide is currently ongoing, while the Tribunal completely ignores the LTTE’s own atrocities against Tamil civilians and the LTTE’s own role in stifling the government’s implementation of political solutions to the ethnic conflict such as the Indo-Lanka Accord and the August 1995 proposals which, if fully implemented, would have significantly addressed the grievances of the minority communities.

A significant measure in the Indo-Lanka Accord to redress the imbalance in the relationship between the different ethnic groups in the country was the devolution of power to Provincial Councils by the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. This scheme envisaged the devolution of legislative and executive authority to eight provincial councils which were constituted within the country.

If the Sri Lankan state were bent on committing a genocide against Tamils, as the Tribunal asserts, it is indeed puzzling why the Sri Lankan government agreed to adopt the Indo-Lanka Accord which, in addition to proposing devolution of powers to the provincial councils, also declared that Sri Lanka was a “multi-ethnic, and multi-lingual plural society” consisting of four main ethnic groups—the Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, and Burghers. The Sri Lankan government, as a result of the Accord, furthermore recognized that the Northern Province and the Eastern Province “had been areas of historical habitation of the Tamil speaking population.” The ideas embodied in the Accord were significant in framing policies of bilingualism, the provincial council scheme, and the temporary merger of the northern and eastern province as the unit of devolution. However, the LTTE opposed the Accord and stifled the government’s ability to fully implement the Accord, despite the unprecedented rights it gave to the Tamils.

The framers of the Indo-Lanka Accord hoped that they would present the political groups in the North and East and the South of Sri Lanka with a “fait accompli” and that they would progressively build a consensus around the main concepts and ideas embodied in the Accord. The Accord was met with opposition by both the LTTE and the JVP. The LTTE felt threatened by the Accord mainly because it was negotiated between the Indian Government and the Sri Lankan government, and excluded the LTTE from being a negotiating partner. Rajiv Gandhi, by refusing to make the LTTE a negotiating partner of the Indo-Lanka Accord, would not buy into Prabahakaran’s narrative that he was the “sole representative of the Tamil-speaking people”—an undemocratic position Prabhakaran would ruthlessly achieve by killing off leaders of rival Tamil factions. A condition for the cessation of hostilities and the implementation of the Accord was that the Tamil rebel groups would lay down their arms. Despite the fact that most Tamil factions agreed to lay down arms, Prabhakaran ultimately refused and in order to fully implement the Accord, the Indian government tried to forcefully remove the arms from the LTTE. The LTTE engaged in a war with the Indian Peacekeeping Forces (IPKF) where human rights abuses were committed by the IPKF, the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE, resulting in the death of many innocent civilians. Premadasa would also covertly fund the LTTE with weapons to go on a killing spree to rid Sri Lanka of the IPKF.

A mistake in the negotiation process of the Accord was that, instead of negotiations being conducted between only the Sri Lankan government and the Indian government, the negotiation process of the Accord should have been broadened to include other parties, such as all the Tamil parties (not just the LTTE). Nevertheless, Prabhakaran’s decision to engage in a full scale war with the IPKF was disastrous for Tamils as it stifled the full implementation of the Indo-Lanka Accord, namely, as it pertains to the devolution of powers to the provincial councils which, if implemented, would have been beneficial in addressing the grievances of the ethnic minorities. The Tribunal, however, ignores such actions by the LTTE and disregards India’s contributions to providing Sri Lankan Tamils with significant constitutional rights or India’s initial attempt to peacefully implement a political solution in Sri Lanka, and instead, the Tribunal labels India as being “complicit” in the “genocide.”

The Indo-Lanka Accord did have some flaws. A flaw of the Indo-Lanka Accord, as argued by Neelan Tiruchelvam, was that “while the Accord called for a redefinition of the Sri Lankan polity, it did not bring about a change in the unitary character of the Sri Lankan state….The Accord did declare that Sri Lanka was a multi-ethnic, multi-lingual plural society consisting primarily of four main ethnic groups: the Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, and Burghers. However, no change was envisaged in section 2 of the Sri Lankan Constitution which entrenched the unitary state.” The problem with Section 2 of the Sri Lankan constitution, Tiruchlevam argued, is that it “entrenches a unitary state and this conception of the unitary state has influenced the outlook of the bureaucracy and the judiciary in the resolution of center-provincial disputes. The executive presidency inevitably leads to a concentration of power and authority in the center, and constrained the meaningful devolution of powers to the provinces.”

In 1994, Chandrika Kumaratunga was elected President of Sri Lanka and won an overwhelming mandate with more than 62% of the vote running explicitly on a campaign of negotiating with the LTTE to peacefully end the civil war.

A peace process between the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE was in effect. The Kumaratunga government was able to establish a cessation of hostilities with the LTTE. Throughout the peace process, the government was focused on developing a political solution, a constitutional reform proposal, which if implemented, would fulfill Chandrika’s mandate in bringing a peaceful end to the civil war.

On April 18th 1995, after eight months of no hostilities, the LTTE broke the ceasefire, citing the government’s failure to implement its pledges in lifting the ban on certain items from entering LTTE controlled areas. The LTTE’s violation of the cessation of hostilities was a devastating blow to the prospects of peacefully ending the civil war. The Tigers sank two navy gunboats (a fourth of the Sri Lankan navy’s entire gunboat fleet), wiped out a military camp killing at least 30 soldiers, and destroyed a police post killing another six.

Despite the fact that the LTTE broke the ceasefire established during the 1994-1995 peace talks, the Kumaratunga government released its constitutional reform proposals on August 3rd 1995 in hopes of resuscitating peace talks.

The August 3rd 1995 proposal, otherwise known as the GL-Neelan package, corrected the mentioned flaws within the Indo-Lanka Accord, and, to date remains Sri Lanka’s boldest attempt to redress the imbalance in the relationship between the different ethnic groups through devolution of power to the regions. The August 3rd 1995 proposal, as argued by Dr.Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, was “federalism in all but name.” Saravanamuttu argued that under the GL-Neelan package, Article 2 and 76, dealing with the unitary state, “would have been amended by the adoption of the federal principle of power sharing and partnership in governance.”

It is indeed puzzling why the Sri Lankan government, bent on committing “genocide” against the Tamil people, as the Tribunal asserts, would propose a political solution that would provide Tamils with unprecedented devolutionary powers and a political solution that would change Sri Lanka into a governing system which was “federalism in all but name.”

The August 3rd 1995 proposals, as articulated by Tiruchelvam, envisaged a “fundamental reconstruction of the distribution of power by the Centre to Provinces. They further envisage more effective mechanisms for ensuring that the Center does not intrude or encroach upon the powers of the Provinces. More effective arrangements for settling of disputes between the Center and the Provinces and a measure of assured finances for the Provinces are also being proposed.” Each Region, President Kumaratunga asserted, “would have a Regional Council with the legislative competence within the devolved sphere and a governor and a Board of Ministers who will exercise the executive power of the region. The governor will be appointed by the President with the concurrence of the Chief Minister and the Governor shall act on the advice of the Chief Minister and the Board of Ministers. The Governor will call upon the person who commands the confidence of the majority in the Regional Council to form the Regional Administration.”

During the peace process, in a February 5th 1995 interview, as it pertains to devolution, Anton Balasingham asserted, “We are told that the government is working on a substantial set of proposals. Once the proposals are given to us we will study it and respond accordingly—we will have to find out whether it satisfies the aspirations of our people.”

However, once the proposals were released, the LTTE reportedly condemned the proposals without even having read them and then killed the individual, Neelan Tiruchelvam, who played a key role in its formulation.

The LTTE, as in the case of the Indo-Lanka Accord, once again, blatantly rejected a political solution to peacefully end the ethnic conflict, in favor of prolonging the civil war. The ensuing war between the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE would result in the death of thousands of civilians.

Since Chandrika won the Presidential elections with an overwhelming mandate (more than 62% of the vote) to negotiate a peaceful end to the war with the LTTE, if the LTTE agreed to negotiate with the August 1995 proposals, the Sri Lankan public would have put immense pressure on the UNP to negotiate with the PA government on its August 1995 proposals and find common ground.
However, the Tribunal ignores the repeated reluctance on the part of the LTTE to arrive at a political solution with the Sri Lankan government to end the ethnic conflict.

The Tribunal asserts that the Sri Lankan state by killing members of the Tamil group through the orchestration of several massacres ranging from the June 1956 (Inginiyagala massacre) to June 2008 (Puthukuddiyrippu bombing), the government’s indiscriminate shelling and hurdling civilians into No Fire Zones, and the government’s killing of leading Tamil figures like Kumar Ponnambalam, Nadaraja Raviraj, Joseph Pararajasingam, has met a component of genocide.

However, the Tribunal fails to acknowledge the LTTE’s own massacres against the Muslim people, the LTTE’s own massacre of Tamil civilians by using them as human shields during the final stages of the war, and the LTTE’s own killing of leading Tamil figures like Neelan Tiruchelvam, Kethesh Loganathan, Rajini Thiranagama, V.Yogeswaran, S.Yogeswaran, and Appapillai Amirthalingam.

The Tribunal asserts that the Sri Lankan state, by causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the Tamil group, has met another component of genocide against Tamils. The Tribunal discusses the egregious acts of sexual violence committed by the Sri Lankan state and the Tribunal also discusses the “mass displacement of the Tamil people throughout the whole period of the war, spanning well over 30 years. Forced starvation, food and medicine embargos, restrictions on livelihood and basic humanitarian needs also greatly contributed in creating appalling conditions in those areas….The Tribunal also finds that the continuous displacement and endless trauma caused by protracted war had a devastating impact on the minds of the younger Eelam Tamil generations.”

I agree with the Tribunal that serious bodily and mental harm has been caused by the Sri Lankan state against the Tamil people; however, I criticize the Tribunal for not mentioning that the LTTE’s actions against Tamils also resulted in serious bodily and mental harm.

A serious form of trauma against the Tamil people was caused by the LTTE through their forced recruitment of Tamil children to fight in armed combat, as noted by Human Rights Watch.

Human Rights Watch, in its report, documented instances where the LTTE forcibly recruited children through intimidation and torture, utilized acts of collective punishment against child soldiers, forcibly recruited more than one child per family, and re-recruited children who previously served. During the ceasefire, the LTTE continued to recruit large numbers of children. What is arguably most significant is that the LTTE’s forced recruitment of children had a generational impact as it exacerbated the educational decline of Tamil youth. Now that the war is over, Tamil children may get a chance to further their level of education.

Incidentally, Human Rights Watch (HRW) is also a source cited in the Tribunal’s report—however, the Tribunal, evidently, has selectively chosen only to use HRW reports which discuss atrocities committed by the Sri Lankan government against Tamil civilians and to ignore reports which discuss atrocities committed by the LTTE against Tamil civilians.

The LTTE also caused serious mental and bodily harm to the Muslim people, through its forced expulsion of the Muslim people from the North, the subsequent displacement, homelessness, and economic impoverishment of an estimated 72,000 Muslim civilians, and orchestration of the Kattankuddy Mosque Massacre which killed 147 Muslims, and the Palliyagodella massacre where the LTTE killed up to an estimated 285 Muslims. These atrocities committed by the LTTE against Muslims are regarded by the Muslim community as ethnic cleansing; however, when I interviewed the Prime Minister of the TGTE, he said the LTTE’s actions against the Muslims were not ethnic cleansing. The Muslims were oppressed by both the LTTE and, as recently evidenced, by radical Sinhala-Buddhist fanatics. Both the LTTE and the Sinhala-Buddhist fanatics oppressed the human rights and distinct identity of the Muslim people.

The Tribunal cites that “the genocidal process reached its climax from September 2008 to May 2009 – the Mullivaikkal extermination with a reported 146,679 victims unaccounted for and more than 70,000 people feared dead (some sources have higher figures).”

However, the Tribunal fails to disclose that the LTTE, through their use of civilians as human shields, during the final stages of the war, contributed to this figure.

Human Rights Watch asserts that during the final stages of the war: “The LTTE shot at and injured or killed many of those trying to flee from the war zone to government-held territory. LTTE forces also deployed near densely populated areas, placing civilians in increased danger of attack. As the fighting intensified, the LTTE stepped up its practice of forcibly recruiting civilians, including children, into its ranks and, to hazardous forced labor on the battlefield. Government forces repeatedly and indiscriminately shelled densely populated areas, sometimes using heavy artillery and other area weapons incapable of distinguishing between civilians and combatants. As the LTTE-controlled area shrank, the government unilaterally declared “no-fire zones” or “safe zones” on three different occasions, calling upon civilians to seek shelter there; nevertheless, government forces continued attacking these areas.”

Thulasi Muttlingam, an aid worker stationed in the North, when I asked her whether the LTTE used civilians as human shields, asserted that, “Every single last person in the Vanni who [was] caught in that last time frame they all tell the same story. And these are people who were part of LTTE’s most important martyr families themselves. Here it is common knowledge, and that level of betrayal for them, they expect [that] the army would do this, the government will do this, but when the LTTE did that to them [using Tamils as human shields], the shock of that betrayal…they have been heavily traumatized by that.”

The Tribunal rightfully points out the egregious crimes committed against innocent Tamil civilians under the Rajapaksa government. However, the Tribunal fails to mention that it was the LTTE, by boycotting the elections in the North, and forcing civilians in the North not to vote in the election, which secured Rajapaksa’s narrow victory against Ranil Wickremesinghe in the 2005 Presidential elections.

Prabhakaran wanted to reenergize support for the separatist movement. Prabhakaran thought that by electing a Sinhala-Buddhist hardliner like Rajapaksa, he would get more sympathy for his separatist cause from the international community. Ranil Wickremesinghe, Rajapaksa’s opponent in the 2005 Presidential elections, throughout the Norway-backed peace process, was viewed more favorably by the LTTE delegation (including Anton Balasingham) in comparison to Chandrika Kumaratunga. Wickremesinghe was more open to the political aspirations of the LTTE, even announcing his intention to setup an interim administration for the Northeast in which all political parties represented in the region would have a place—providing a clear nod to the longstanding Tamil demand.

Allegations regarding a secret deal between Mahinda and the LTTE leadership to boycott the election, where a certain sum of money was requested and paid by Rajapaksa to the LTTE, have long surfaced in the Sri Lanka media. Ranil Wickremesinghe even referred to it in Parliament. Mark Salter asserts, “If it is in fact the case that Mahinda, a man who destroyed the LTTE, came into power on the backs of a deal with the LTTE, then there is serious reflection that needs to be done among LTTE supporters as to whether the LTTE are also to blame for the fate of Tamil people in the final stages of the war. If Ranil was voted into power, it could have been a very different trajectory.”

However, the Tribunal fails to take into account the LTTE’s catastrophic decision of boycotting the election which had deadly consequences for the Tamil people.

The co-chair of this Tribunal is a man I have great respect for, his name is Denis Halliday. As a result of the UN sanctions against Iraq, spearheaded by the United States, which resulted in the killing of over 500,000 Iraqi children, Denis Halliday boldly condemned the UN sanctions as “genocidal” and resigned from his 34-year career at the United Nations. However, despite Halliday’s bold and courageous past, I argue that the conclusion by the Permanent People’s Tribunal on Sri Lanka is immensely disingenuous in its use of the term genocide to describe the atrocities against the Tamil civilians.

It is without question that the Sri Lankan government’s atrocities prior to and during the civil war violated human rights, and the government’s atrocities during the civil war of aerial bombing, torture, rape, the White flag incident, and effectively, numerous violations of the Geneva Conventions, are egregious human rights abuses. There must be accountability in this regard.

The Sri Lankan government was not the only party committing atrocities against Tamils, the LTTE were committing atrocities against Tamil civilians as well. However, a segment of the Tamil diaspora, by labeling the Sri Lankan government’s atrocities against Tamils as “genocide,” effectively disregard the LTTE’s role in stifling genuine political proposals engaged with by the Sri Lankan government to peacefully resolve the ethnic conflict such as the Indo-Lanka Accord, and the August 1995 proposals, which, if fully implemented, would have significantly addressed key grievances faced by the Tamil people and the minority communities in Sri Lanka. In addition, a segment of the Tamil diaspora, by using the term genocide, undermines the LTTE’s own atrocities against Tamil and Muslim civilians. Furthermore, the label of genocide is effectively being used as a tool by LTTE supporters to call for a separate state while stepping on the very graves of the Tamil people the LTTE killed.

Print Friendly

Latest comments

  • 3
    0
    Pitasanna Shanmugathas RE: The Politics Of Genocide————————————- The Politics Of Genocide of the Paras by the Paras in the Land of Native Veddah Aethho!—— yet no accountability———————Only many dead and missing Paras, many innocent, some not innocent…..———————–and many Para war criminals still at large———-
    • 3
      2
      The worst genocide in the history of Srilanka is the elimination of Veddhas who are the rightful owners of the land, both by murder and forced assimilation into mostly Sinhala and few Tamil ethnicity. The next worst genocide is the killing of people of Kuveni and usurping their land by Vijaya and his gangsters. The deportation of one million Tamils of recent Indian origin under the Srima-Shastri pact could also be considered as an act of genocide. An explanation as to why the numbers of Tamils in Srilanka has dwindled may answer the charge made. In the international context, genocide is said to have been committed when a large percentage of an ethnic group is eliminated. What happened in Srilanka to Tamils may not be classed legally as genocide, but morally what had been happening in Srilanka since Independence to reduce Tamil population by killing them and forcing them indirectly to leave the country by discriminatory policies and state sponsored violence could fall into the term genocide. Certainly changing names of places and demography by design is an act of cultural genocide.
      • 0
        0
        [Edited out] Comments should not exceed 300 words.Please read our Comments Policy for further details.
      • 0
        0
        >numbers of Tamils in Srilanka has dwindled Ever considered assimilation, Tamil to Sinhala. How many would know that the following cricketers are Tamil. Russel Arnold, Roy Dias, Vinothen John (Vinothen Bede John Jeyarajasinham), Angelo Mathews, Ravindra Pushpakumara (Karuppiahyage Ravindra Pushpakumara), Ravi Ratnayeke. Ponnambalam Arunachalam’s grandson goes as Fernando. And these are just the high profile lot.
        • 0
          0
          If people migrate to a country, they should assimilate to the main culture. If not problems would certainly occur. That is why Sri Lanka faced a war. If they do not like assimilation to the main culture then they should stay in their ethnic ghettos.
      • 0
        0
        “”to reduce Tamil population by killing them and forcing them indirectly to leave the country by discriminatory policies and state sponsored violence could fall into the term genocide.Certainly changing names of places and demography by design is an act of cultural genocide.”” But you also say that the sinhalese have a 28% Bengali DNA and that Tamils have a 21% DNA – international citation please? If they are of similar DNA then the only possibility is just adamancy on a language issue.? The UAE prince never uttered a word of English in public at India. The Saudi prince spoke both in English and Arabic today at Saudi on Trump visit.
      • 0
        0
        Infact what we are seeing is the genocide of Sinhala people in their homeland. Brits and other colonials brought people from other countries, expecially India and filled Sinhala homeland. This is the gradual loss of Sinhala homeland. This is infact a genocide. Tamils always have Tamil Nadu as their homeland. It is the Sinhalese who has lost their homeland. We have to rewrite the UN charter and amend international humanitarian laws taking this into consideration as well.
  • 2
    1
    Dear CT Editor why was “HLDM’s article on Vellala the Missing LInk….” s it due to Edwin Rodrigo aka Retired General Sham Perera polluting the site?
    • 1
      0
      Though 100 years of British Constitution is written in Latin which is considered a classical language it was taken off the textbooks in 1968. Even the former romans speak Italian not Latin. Why are northern tamils insisting on its continuation to the detriment of society at large? Is it not a money making avenue like faith and patriotism?
  • 3
    4
    Is this writer Pitasanna Shanmugathas is an Eelam Tamil. I am shocked . Has CT editors duping we Eelam Tamils by misrepresenting Genocidal Sinhalese with Tamil Name. This article is highly offesnsive for Eelam Tamils. Also the picture of the eternal leader of Tamils, Our Thalaivar is that helpless situation surrounded by genocidal vultures. Pitasanna Shanmugathas has offended Eelam Tamils and Eelam Tamil pride, How dare a young kid wetting his pants ( or panties ) to criticize the heroic fighters of Tamil Eelam, and the glorious leader of we Tamils. A good loyal Tamil is one who obey and follow Thalaivar. As Thalaivar said it often others are traitors who should be whipped out like mosquitoes. I suggest this writer has been brainwashed by genocidal Sinhalese at some point of time and we Eelam Tamils should view him with sympathy. ( By saying so, i dont mean to contradict our leader’s position on traitors , but even our leader would have made some exceptions) Pitasanna Shanmugathas should receive counselling from Eelam Tamils . Genocidal Sinhalese do not stop brainwashing a young promising Tamil boy lightly . They have corrupted him. As we know most young Tamil soldiers who were arrested by genocidal Sinhalese were sodomized, sexually assaulted. I called upon Tamils of Eelam and our transnational government to launch a compulsory rehabilitation program for Eelam Tamils who had been brainwashed by genocidal Sinhalese. This should be taken up at next session of TGTE.
    • 0
      0
      How about the photo published, that showed Pabakaran was watching in the TV that his own demise in Sri lanka. In otherwords, this is just a fat LTTE soldier and not Pabakaran. He should be in Tamilnadu or some where in Africa, probably Erythria.
    • 2
      2
      eelam mani Wasting your time on this mirage of Elam. Find a day job.
      • 0
        0
        You got blood on your hands like them lot and loot to boot. Sincerely, Iguana eusense like you should be thrown in the gas chamber for posterity and prosperity.
    • 1
      1
      @Eelam Manifesto. You are exactly right. i am feeling angry to see young Tamil kid defacating on Thalaivar’s honor . But true, there are lots of scums these days, even among Tamils. Sinhalese are brainwashing Tamils , at the point of machine guns . As you said rehabilitating those scums should be a priority for future Tamil Eelam government. if they cant rehabilitate, they should be dispatched to live with traitors like Mahattaya, Neelan Theruchelvam. Sooner we can do rehabilitation of those scums are better, but it should be voluntarily now. It is difficult to impose a compulsory rehabilitation on Eelam Tamil traitors at the moment. that is possible only we get our precious Eelam, which at the current rate I think possible by 2030.
    • 4
      2
      your thalaiwa is a coward , a child snatcher ,a facist, a serial killer a psyco….he deserves this sort of death because we was the main reason for the deaths of hundreds of innocent Sri Lankans(sadly out of them , most are tamils )
  • 3
    0
    A good piece it is.
  • 0
    0
    In this photo Pabakaran looks alive and naked. He is covering his face with the hand.
  • 2
    1
    Pitasanna seems to be literate but is either very dishonest or is a “learned imbecile” – [“Paditcha Madayan” in Tamil]. Any dictionary will define “genocide”. The noun has been used as a verb, adjective and so on. Noam Chomsky never challenged the dictionary meaning but probably in desperation might have said that the term “genocide” has become “politicized and vulgarized to the extent that it has almost become meaningless.” On top of this, here Pitasanna is buggering the term. He mentions “Permanent People’s Tribunal on Sri Lanka held in Bremen, Germany comes to the conclusion that the Sri Lankan state committed genocide against Tamils, ……………….. completely ignores the LTTE’s own atrocities………… “.Pitasanna will never ever mention that “Road to Nanthikadal” is lopsided. Pitasanna effectively says that assassinations are “genocide”. Lasantha, Sivaram ? To cut a long story short: Pitasanna is an abjectly dishonest journalist.
    • 3
      2
      I made no such conclusion that “assassinations are genocide.” If you actually fully read the article, you would know that. Noam Chomsky has actually spoken quite frequently on how the term genocide has become politically vulgarized to the extent it has become meaningless. Chomsky also wrote a foreword about this in Edward Herman’s book entitled, The Politics of Genocide. Quite often people use the term genocide when referring to a large number of killings but in the process the people often disregard their own crimes which contributed to the large number of killings, in this case, of Tamils. More generally speaking, the definition of genocide, coined by Raphael Lemkin, Chomsky argues, is extremely vague. For example, Lemkin asserts that genocide is the planned or deliberate destruction of a people IN WHOLE or IN PART. Such instances of vagueness in the term, Chomsky argues, allows people to apply it carelessly to the extent that the current use of the term genocide “is an insult to the victims of the Nazis.” I’m not “buggering” the term at all…the term has become completely “evacuated of content” and “buggered” by people like the pro LTTE propagandists who assert the large number of killings of Tamils was genocide but they seek to completely disregard the LTTE’s responsibility in the mass killing of Tamils…that is the conclusion I come to in the article as to why the Tribunal use of the term is disingenuous if you actually bothered to fully read my article.
      • 1
        3
        I think Mr. shanmugathas has not read about UN and western countries, I think USA, asking Tamils to stop bickeing with the word “Genocide”. Tamils are tamilizing the North. right now they have changed thier langiage to Thamiz from Tamil. Now, they have started changing the area names in the north to Thamiz too. NPC is also encouraging that when NPC wanted to change NAGADEEPA to Nainatheevu, Central govt NO. So stopped it. Try to pronounce some of the new names they have given after the name changes. I don’t think even the Tamils would pronounce those. What Tribalist WE Thamiz -Tamils doing is, even if the govt do some work in the north, they say it is some kind of Genocide and so they have different types genocides such as structural – geonocide, cultural genocide, religion genocide, which are the only words I remember. Tamils simply re define the word Genocide.
        • 4
          1
          You are a racist who does not know the facts. There is no “T” in Tamil but only “TH”. There are three “L”s. There are no letters in English alphabet to denote these three in different manner. English “l” is used to denote the small “la”, English “ll” is used to denote big “la”, and the third “L” which is found only in Tamil language is being denoted by English “Z”. In the word Tamil, it is the last “L” that is used. Hence the correct way Tamil should be written is “Thamiz” as Tamil is an anglicised form. Similarly Sinhala and not anglicised form of Sinhalese. Therefore there is nothing wrong for NPC to use it correctly. When Sinhala people are changing names to get rid of anglicised forms, no one is complaining.
        • 1
          0
          jimsofty “NPC wanted to change NAGADEEPA to Nainatheevu” correction “NPC wanted to change “NAGADEEPA” back to its original name “Nainatheevu”
          • 0
            0
            In all historican records, Nagadeepa is mentioned as Naka diva and not Nainathivu
        • 2
          0
          jimsofty the dimwit ———————-“I think Mr. shanmugathas has not read about UN and western countries,” ——————- Have you? Tell us all what you know about UN and Western countries it wouldn’t take more than three lines.
          • 0
            0
            Native Vedda, All three ethnic moderators, charity coup have their own agenda like zombies looking for brains because only truth is right and no one knows the truth because it keeps moving and comes back to the same old thing. For to reason with a fool is a difficult undertaking and you stay cool;) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Sinhalese (this is in good order for the present- let the world at large know that llte doc(gov. scum JMO of jaffna) at london should take time off and inform some great men at BMA because to me all these men women are crooks like the writer Shan – honest sergent kandiaha) Good luck you are enjoying it while I am in the tech world- hey google has just unleashed `smart reply` on gmail.idea from Gmail engineer Bálint Miklós
      • 3
        3
        Pitasanna Shanmugathas: “by people like the pro LTTE propagandists who assert the large number of killings of Tamils was genocide but they seek to completely disregard the LTTE’s responsibility in the mass killing of Tamils” first of all you are assuming that any Tamil who talks about genocide is pro LTTE propagandists . I am not surprised this coming from the mouth piece of DBSJ The you say and I quote “…they seek to completely disregard the LTTE’s responsibility in the mass killing of Tamils..” you idiot . Not only mass killing of Tamils but destruction of the Tamil identity is going on since Sri Lanka gained independence. LTEE is a product of the Genocide programme of the successive Sinhala Govt. LTTE was born only in the 1970s. But the Sinhala genocide programmes is going on since 1949. So get some political education form you mentor DBSJ about the history of Sri Lanka state violence before you were born. And if you want to discuss Noam Chomsky and Raphael Lemkin lets have it as a different subject matter instead clouding your arguments with a half brain.
        • 3
          2
          It is pointless having a conversation with you because as evidenced by the ignorance in your comments, you have not FULLY read the article. First fully read the article and then comment.
          • 1
            2
            It is pointless reading your article……judging by your previous articles we know what is coming….and the headline states it all “Politics of Genocide” and you don’t know the meaning of Genocide.
        • 4
          0
          Rajash ———– Please bear with Pitasanna Shanmugathas as you would have noticed he appears to be a combination of Dayan (name dropping) and Malinda Seneviratne (typing without saying anything).
          • 6
            0
            NV, Agree
      • 2
        1
        Pitasanna: A dictionary definition of genocide is “The deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group”. What the hell was the pogroms of 1958, 1977 and 1983? People were killed if they spoke Tamil. What do you call this? In 1971 Yahya Khan killed nearly 3 million Bengali speaking people. Several learned people have said that this is in the genocide category – albeit buggered. You are making use of Chomsky’s angst to justify your contention. By the way the Hiroshima bomb killed lots of Japanese. I suggest this was not genocide.
      • 1
        1
        @Pittasana. You spoiled brainwashed brat. F.uck Chomsky . Why dont you say what our leader and your leader Great Thalaivar said about Genocide.He has proved it beyond any doubt that we Eelam Tamils have been genocided by genocidal Sinhala race since the independence of island of ceylon. Are you disputing that you scumbug. Dont try to rewrite Tamil Eelam history. Thalaivar is watching you. if he is alive, i doubt very much though some eelam Tamils belive, he would have whipped your sorry ass in to red with his belt
  • 3
    3
    The article is an insult to the Tamils who lost their kith and kin, their unborn children, their pregnant wife, their aging parents, their brother, sister their close friends to the state sponsored terrorism against the Tamils since independence. The article is an insult to the Tamils who lost their homes, their jobs their businesses their hard earned assets to the state sponsored terrorism against the Tamils since independence. This article is an insult to the International Community and organisations who are pressing the Sri Lankan govt to own up to war crimes and genocide against the Tamils . The author is deliberately repeating himself that it’s only a segment of the Tamils who are using the word “genocide” “…A segment of the Sri Lankan Tamil community has used the term “genocide”… “However, in the process, a segment of the Tamil community uses the term genocide” “However, a segment of the Tamil diaspora, by labeling the Sri Lankan government’s atrocities against Tamils as “genocide” “In addition, a segment of the Tamil diaspora, by using the term genocide” The author is cunningly trying to dismiss the Genocide allegation by deliberately attributing it to a “segment of the Tamils” This is not the first time this author has written such rubbish on CT.
    • 3
      3
      In the article, if you actually bothered to read it fully, I list the crimes committed by the Sri Lankan government from shelling hospitals, white flag incident, to the government’s blatant disregard for the welfare of civilians during the final stage of the war, and in effect, numerous violations of the Geneva Conventions by the government. I explicitly state the Sri Lankan government atrocities against Tamil civilians. My argument is that quite often people use the term genocide when referring to a large number of killings, but in the process, the people often disregard their own crimes which contributed to the large number of killings, in this case, of Tamils. The atrocities committed by the Sri Lankan government are horrendous but it does not give justification to a segment of the Tamil community to disregard the crimes committed by the LTTE against Tamil civilians which contributed to the “pregnant mothers who were killed” due to, for example, the LTTE’s use of civilians as human shields
      • 2
        3
        Pitasanna Shanmugathas: if you bother to read my comments AND understand it you won’t be repeating the same bullshit. So I repeat it again: The article is an insult to the Tamils who lost their kith and kin, their unborn children, their pregnant wife, their aging parents, their brother, sister their close friends to the state sponsored terrorism against the Tamils since independence. The article is an insult to the Tamils who lost their homes, their jobs their businesses their hard earned assets to the state sponsored terrorism against the Tamils since independence may I add “Tamil genocide is not confined to what happened in Mulliavalaikaal 8 years ago” Tamil Genocide started when your mother was breast fed by your grandmother ….thank god that she survived to give birth to you.! Not sure that Tamils will thank her
    • 3
      2
      The government did offer political solutions such as the Indo Lanka Accord and the August 1995 proposals which recognized the identity of the Tamil people and sought to devolve powers to them but the LTTE under its false notion of being the sole representative of the Tamil people rejected such proposals and thereby made the situation more disastrous for Tamils as it pertains to peacefully solving the ethnic question
    • 2
      0
      Rajash ————“The article is an insult to the Tamils ” ————Tamils are an insult to Tamils, Sinhalese are an insult to Sinhalaese, Muslims are an insult to Muslims, …….. What else do you expect from an under developed feudal society? Since you live in the UK you would have noticed there is a vast between you and your children. They are bit sophisticated than you are unless you had imbibed your narrow nationalist thoughts on them. I take pleasure in talking to those second third generation living in the west. Their world view is completely opposite to their parents. It equally applies to all people, Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, ……. Note I haven’t met all second third generation diaspora. ——————- In the mean time I hear that there were two lot of remembrance day in London town. One in front of 10 Downing Street and in the middle of nowhere (Hyde Park). Tell me why? My friend old the codger tells me, one is a normal annual event and the other one is organised by Gota’s boys in London and those LTTE Benamies. Do you have any information/gossip on the events? An general observation made by my friend the old codger, the Tamil Diaspora funded the war for over 30 years where as it is unable to or unwilling to deal with the consequences of war. Why? ———— No Lazy Analysis Please.
      • 1
        0
        Native Part 1 —> you seems busy on a Saturday morning sitting in front of the laptop with a cup of coffee. Tamils are an insult to Tamils, Sinhalese are an insult to Sinhalaese, Muslims are an insult to Muslims….and they are all insult to the country you are painting me as a narrow nationalist that is not warranted. I don’t want to drag my children on to CT. However they are well aware of the history of Sri Lanka and as you say they sophisticated being educated in the UK do their own research and reading come to their own conclusion. I do not brainwash them with an y bias. Unfortunately I was away out of London on work related matters all week and just returned Friday night. I will do a round of telephone calls to find out more on the events at 10 and HP.
      • 1
        0
        Native Part 2– the Tamil Diaspora funded the war for over 30 years where as it is unable to or unwilling to deal with the consequences of war. Why? The Tamil diaspora funded the war in the comfort and safety of their chosen country of abode. The funding hit the peak soon after the 1983 riots during which lots of Tamils lost their property. It was an emotional reaction to teach the bastard a lesson. Do you think they would have returned to Eelam, no hell in chance. But to be fair every Single Tamil was effected by the war whether its forced recruitment by LTTE or violence in the hands of Sinhala Thugs etc.. just imagine you had a son or a daughter or sister or brother or friend who joined LTEE , by which ever means, and after 30 years all you know is he/she was either raped or tortured and shot at gun point. How will you deal with this? I cant still deal with losing my mum and dad by NATURAL death many years ago! lets talk about “..unwilling to deal with the consequences of war..” first of all Thank god that the country was not split. second the Sinhala rulers have not learnt their lessons. third there is now a bullying attitude among the Sinhala people and politicians. fourth loss of their kith and kin for a lost cause fifth los of their hard earned assets for a lost cause and Tamils are in a worse situation now that before the war or during the war There is an emptiness Sad but truth sometimes hurts
  • 1
    3
    Those who cry “genocide have become US$ multimillionaires.
    • 3
      0
      Johnny Boy ———– “Those who cry “genocide have become US$ multimillionaires” —————Those who committed war crimes too have become Dollar millionaires, helping to stabilize American real estate market.
  • 4
    1
    Pitasanna The worst behaviour is not having a due last respect for the dead . It did not happen at Mullivaaikaal. There is no evidence to show the internment of the dead were performed with human dignity. The relatives were not allowed. religious priest were neither called or allowed to perform the last rituals. There was no respect for the religion. or human dignity. What is civilization. From the time immemorial there was respect for the dead. Even animals do that. Even animals do not kill the defeated rival. plunder in the dead and ruins. Raping the dead and half alive can not be ruled out. The red cross not telling the truth . All the NGO s of the world and the Govt s of the world responsible for this Genocide. It never happened in the human History. in what We have failed to do, That I have greatly sinned, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done and in what We ( Pittassana, NGOs, counties) have failed to do, through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault; Now non existence LTTE is the scapegoat for all the crimes committed by all the militias ans intelligence agencies . Why can’t you ask for an honest inquiry for the so called crimes committed by LTTE. Reepeater of a lie also equally lying.
  • 4
    0
    Every transport ship from Trinco to KKs was done with human shield. iF NOT FOR a few passengers from the public as human shield 1300 soldiers would have perished in the Bay of Bengal. at least a few survived soldiers may know this and some of them may come out with truth in future.
  • 3
    2
    This guy’s earlier articles shows Jeyarajah’s working. In this middle path game he is trying to mimic Thiruvarangan. One with Appe Aanduwa’s and two with LTTE, they claim their middle path. Their Middle path is if thief had stolen and owner struck at him, and then gives verdict against owner as it was owner who started the violence. We had explained the middle path cannot argue when a thief steal, the verdict going as owner and thief entitled to have the theft 50:50 as the middle path. Very first thing, these guys writing essay after essay but never ready to insist of one word in them that “we see both parties have committed atrocity, so here the middle path has to be UNHRC passing the case to UN and it be investigated by ICC”. Why couldn’t they take the middle path up to that level? These guys are outright liars. I have repeated this many time why could not these guys agree for agree for an Independent investigation? Is that because this type of framing doesn’t work there (at ICC) but only works in a country (Lankawe) which’s journalism is rated as 174th out 179 countries? In that rating, these pretenders should be ashamed of themselves to call that they are Lankawe’s journalists. Nowhere this guy is offering any proof but citing as someone else is accusing LTTE. Still that should be fine as long as they take that proof and can go to UNHRC. Will they do that if there is 1% truth in their journalism?
  • 2
    1
    The biggest gimmick this guy presenting about HRW is when even UN was expulsed from Lankawe whatever HRW put out was from the Rajpal Abeynayake’s novels published in Lankawe’s Daily News. BBC had completely wiped out those who worked with Rajpal. Jeyarajah cites Michael Robert, Michael Robert was citing Thero De Silva and Thero de Silva citing Jeyarajah. So they could not call for independent investigating in their middle path. If this guy ready to accept the current HRW’s position and wants to ignore Permanent People’s Tribunal, it should fine to make such a request at UNHRC to ignore verdict given in that court (In fact UNHRC never is not quoting anything from Prepayment People court as its evidence) . Then why is the resistance still to ICC inquiry? Isn’t it there nothing true in their words? This guy presenting like his middle path but his bosses middle path is: 1. Rejected IIGEP 2. Rejected 2009 Canadian resolution. 3. Rejected another three subsequent resolutions. 4. Rejected the UNSG’s expert panel 5. Rejected the report of UN Internal Investigation. 6. Rejected OISL report in March 2015 when it accused 42 persons as war criminals. 7. Rejected OISL report in September 2015 when a milder edited version was presented. To them the only people can tell truth is Michael Robert, Jeyarajah & Thero De Silva. I think it is time for these four to go and get a life.
  • 2
    2
    The author in his utter ignorance of world politics compares Tiger atrocity with the massacre of Tamil civilians by their own Government.. There are multitude of examples of insurgencies against oppressive governments. The revolts in US,France and Russia were also insurgencies like the LTTE movement. The latter fought against government discriminations against a minority starting from Disenfranchisement, Deprivation of jobs by Sinhala-Only language Act and Standardization to mention a few.The government of Srilanka bombed the No Fire Zone,Killed those who surrendered with white flags and carried out tortures and abductions of civilian minorities. These are inflicted on the citizens of a government because they belong to an ethnic minority.
    • 0
      0
      [Edited out] Comments should not exceed 300 words.Please read our Comments Policy for further details.
    • 1
      1
      Both the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government massacred Tamil civilians. I state this in the article. The Sri Lankan government post-1948 through the Standardization Act, Sinhala-Only Act, did indeed discriminate against Tamils and this resulted in serious economic hardship and political marginalization of the Tamil people. This is true. The Sri Lankan governments, for narrow political gains, would listen to the Sinhala extremist hardliners and seek to undermine the rights of the Tamil people. During the civil war, however, the government did present genuine political solutions such as the Indo Lanka Accord and the August 1995 proposals which recognized the distinct identity of the Tamil people, and sought to devolve significant powers to the ethnic minorities of the country, especially Tamils. The Indo-Lanka Accord recognized that the North and East were historical habitation areas of Tamil speaking people, and both proposals sought to devolve significant powers to the regions… It is indeed puzzling, in the Indo-Lanka Accord alone, why a Sri Lankan state, bent on committing genocide against the Tamil people, as the Tribunal asserts, would make Tamil an official language, recognize the North and East as historical habitation of Tamil speaking people, and seek to devolve power to eight provincial councils constituted within the country. However, the LTTE rejected both the August 3rd 1995 proposal and the Indo Lanka Accord in favour of prolonging the war, the rejection of such proposals and the prolonging of the war would have devastating effects on the Tamil people. To say genocide occurred would be to say that the State sought solely to eradicate Tamils from the island, however, on numerous occasions, the government engaged with genuine political solutions to address ethnic tensions and resolve the conflict peacefully. But the LTTE rejected them in favour of prolonging the war.
  • 4
    2
    To all about the Mullivaaikaal. Gathering in mass number and in thick concentration concentration is a Natural Phenomenon. This when happen when an a group is in immense danger. You can read these thins has happened in human History. I every continent every land. It is universal and applicable to every living species, including plants. The same Phenomenon happened at Mulli Vaaikaal. I have observed it when I was a Child. Also you see it in some David Attenborough’s documentaries. When in danger from Whale or Dolphins the Schools of sardine and other fishes gather in thick concentrated ball and sphere shape and exhibit a rhythmical orderly manner. The predators forge allegiance and device gunning methods and devices and get help from other predators to break the defence of the helpless . Birds, hyenas etc. And then mercilessly kill and savor them. That phenomenon was what exactly happened in Mullivaakaal. The helpless , defenseless poor Tamils Gathered in Mullivaakaal. The predator forged alliance and got intelligence and advice from other sources used heavy artillery guns to break the Tamil gathering and to scatter them.. Pitasana I know there is no conscience in your brain. Know that The Mullivaikaal Gathering of helpless defenseless tamil people was a natural phenomenon not a tactic of human shield. Understand it. Every one except you Security people were the one using human shield and killing indiscriminately. positioning a camp among the living area it self a human shield . It has been Happening through and also happening in the post Mullivaaikaal era too.
    • 1
      1
      In the article, I explicitly acknowledge the atrocities committed by the Sri Lankan government. If you bothered to actually fully read the article you would know that. I criticize the government’s shelling of civilians in No Fire Zones, I acknowledge the government’s numerous violations of the Geneva Conventions. However, I criticize the Tribunal for its failure to acknowledge their crimes committed against the Tamil people by the LTTE and the LTTE’s role in its stifling of genuine political solutions such as the Indo-Lanka Accord and the August 3rd 1995 package which, if implemented, would have significantly addressed the ethnic tensions. It is people like you, who by refusing to acknowledge this, “do not have a conscience” in their brain.
      • 1
        0
        Pitasanna Shanmugathas criticising government is different, what you are doing is trying to deny that there is a genocide against a Tamils of Sri Lanka. Carpet bombing helpless Tamils, who took refuge in the no fire zone, on its own is not an act of genocide. But it is a calculated and deliberate act, by the Sri Lankan’s government as part of its genocide agenda to destroy the Tamil race. The Sinahalalisation of NE is part of the Genocide…and here there is no killing ..but destruction of the Tamil culture, destruction of Tamil identity destruction of all evidence of Tamil Kingdom for your kind information here is the definition of Genocide. The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group”.
        • 1
          1
          The mass slaughter of Tami civilians by the Sri Lankan government, during the final stages of the war, was a blatant disregard for the welfare of the Tamil civilians. Furthermore, you are correct that such an atrocity itself does not constitute genocide. In addition, it must be pointed out, as cited by the UN, that the LTTE, in a deliberate manner, contributed to the slaughter of Tamil civilians during the final stages of the war through their actions. To assert that genocide was committed in Sri Lanka is to assert that the Sri Lankan government wanted to eradicate Tamils from the island. This is not quite true. You talk about the “destruction of Tamil identity”…well, the Indo-Lanka Accord, the government agreed to, explicitly recognized the North and the East as the historical habitation of the Tamil speaking people. Furthermore, the Accord made Tamil an official language. Furthermore, the Accord sought to devolve power to provincial councils constituted throughout the country. In addition, the August 1995 proposals, worked to address the flaws in the Indo Lanka Accord such as weakening the unitary structure of government. The LTTE rejected both proposals, in favour of prolonging the war, which if implemented fully, would have given significant rights to Tamils. Why would the Sri Lankan government seek to adopt such constitutional measures, recognize the North and East as the historical place of Tamils, adopt devolutionary measures which would have given unprecedented rights to Tamils, if GOSL were bent on committing a genocide against Tamils? A significant reason which led to the violent end of the war, as I stated in the article, is due to the LTTE’s role in stifling genuine political solutions which would have significantly address the ethnic tensions and brought a peaceful end to the civil war.
        • 0
          2
          As previously discussed, the vagueness of the term “genocide” has allowed the term to be used carelessly to the extent, as Chomsky argues, that the use of the term “is an insult to the victims of the Nazis.” For example, Lemkin’s definition of genocide, which was adopted by the UN, which you just mentioned in your comment, says the destruction of a people “in whole or in part.” The “in whole or in part” phrasing is immensely broad and such broad wording has resulted in the application, the overuse of the term genocide, to such a careless extent that it is an insult to the victims of the Nazis or the Aboriginal people who are genuine victims of genocide. The term genocide, due to its over usage, has been evacuated of content. For reasons I mentioned above, the atrocities committed against the TAMIL people by the Sri Lankan state are atrocious but do not meet established cases of genocide such as what happened to the Jews. The Jews, during Nazi Germany, unlike Sri Lanka Tamils, were never recognized as distinct people in Germany, Hebrew was not made an official language, and they were not presented with constitutional proposals to negotiate with by the Nazi government…. instead, they were rounded up and gassed to death. The Government, through its political proposals, proposed to give Tamils unprecedented rights, unprecedented devolutionary powers, and the GOSL accepted Tamils as historical inhabitants of the North and East, but the LTTE rejected such proposals in favour of prolonging the war.
          • 1
            1
            You are not an International Crimes lawyer to tell if an event is genocide or not when it was defined in the UN Charters. Appe Aanduwa paid coolies does not deserve that duty. There is always a confusion of terminology in practical law; these matters always argued and decided in courts. There is nobody allowed to argue that outside court and have passed judgements outside a court. A judge has to declare the definition is too ambiguous(too wide is not an argument- then it is only a argument a criminal asking to grant exemption only for him/her from that crime) but the defined law proceeds. You are not authorized to decide if one event was genocide or not as you a party involved in that crime and attempt to produce defense argument for your side. OISL did its accusations based on 6000 witness. ICC has to decide depending on the witness and their reliability whether it was genocide or not. Lankawe must present itself in front of ICC and explain why the witnesses should not be considered? Further it is not prevented Noam Chomsky be present and argue in favor of Lankawe case that the definition is too wide so the Genocide term may not apply but a lesser war crime may apply. We show a lot of flashing from DesMond De Silva but when Sumanthiran files a case against him UK, he has gone silent. We need to see Noam Chomsky coming to ICC and present his arguments if they specifically apply to Lankawe’s case. Let him be questioned by the prosecution. There is nowhere it is defined that ICC must investigate Genocide. ICC is willing to investigate individual human right violations too. Government, which is known for Sinhala Jury, should release all individual human right violations to ICC.
            • 0
              0
              The UN, although asserting that there is evidence of significant war crimes committed by both the government and the LTTE, has not found evidence that such atrocities amount to genocide. Sri Lanka is not a party to the Rome Statute and Sri Lankan war criminals cannot be tried by the ICC, unless referred to by the UN, which will never happen. International Courts, like the ICC, Chomsky argues are immensely flawed as even evidenced during the Nuremberg trials where the Allied forces responsible for horrendous crimes were not held accountable and only the Nazis (Axis forces) were. Many nations have lost faith in the ICC because it mainly holds trials for leaders in African nations, in other words, the most vulnerable of nations while vindicating leaders of the super powerful nations from being held accountable. “There is no where it is defined that the ICC must investigate genocide”?? A mandate of the ICC is also to hear crimes which amount to genocide. I do not believe, however, it is realistic that Sri Lankan war criminals will be tried by the ICC. Instead, I support an independent investigation into war crimes committed by both sides and what is most realistic is an independently administered TRC under UN mechanisms where war criminals from both GOSL and LTTE can come forward and admit to the victims of their crimes to the atrocities they have committed.
          • 1
            0
            If Noam Chomsky’s arguments are valid, by due course, UN will have changed its conventions’ and resolutions’ terminology. Aanduwa declaring 240 Individuals and few organizations which are registered in democratic foreign lands, as Terrorist Organization are quoted by Appe Aanduwa as under UN resolution 1373-counter terrorism. But no country has accepted that Anduwas is lawfully using that resolution. Instead of talking whether Lankawe did a genocide or not under your own terminology, start to talk about why Appe Aanduwa is violating resolution 1373. There no history of a Sinhala army convicted for crimes against Tamils. The reason government sought to over throw Privy Councils judgments is Kodeeswaran case. That is the reason for Sirimavo sought to get 2/3 majority to remove Privy Council. Don’t keep fooling JR government was willing to solve Tamils problem with 13A. JR wrote the 1978 constitution only to take power in his hand manage Tamils by that. Read Thero de Silva arguments for why the JR’s EP shouldn’t be changed, though he vehemently opposes JR in all other issues. He is openly talking that is the way to Maintain strong unitary & thus control Tamils. JR brought 6A not to solve Tamils problems, but to suppress Vaddukoddai Convention. Any action without removing 6A was only to suppress Tamils aspirations”, not to get Tamils opinion and solve it. It doesn’t matter whether LTTE objected 13A or not, there was never ever any elected Tamil party supported 13A. They opposed in Parliament and those are in records. But the Tamil Parliamentarian were not considered even equivalent to house dogs. JR went to a level and impeached his opposition leader. There was not history in that time for it, in the world. Are you pretending like JR was only government?
          • 1
            0
            Genocide is not defining if what had been done to make a genocide not genocide.
            It defines if what is committed to it to become Genocide. It has no connection to the official Language. Nuremburg never decided it was Genocide because that Hebrew was not an official Language that is why it was genocide. Genocide definition tries determining what happened to the race. Hebrew is not an official language in many countries. They hate Jews- or practice anti-Semitic but not accused of Genocide. India has allowed Kashmiri to use its own language. But India is accused of war crime and Genocide in Kashmiri. Tamil was made an un-implementable official language In Ceylon only to slow down much larger genocide crime of Sinhala Only. “Sinhala Only” alone is considered as “Language Genocide”. Lankawe mainly target Tamil- Hindu-Vellala. So Appe Aanduwa has been constantly buying out Non-Tamil-Hindu – high Caste. Historically Chinese communist Shanmugathasan has been closely working with Sirimavo on her crimes against Tamils. Muslims leaders, writers and spies have been working closely working with Athulathmuthali and Old Brother Prince. They are Tamils, used by various governments to commit genocide against Tamils. Muslims are Tamil speaking community. Hakeem went to UNHRC and has declared of better living standard for Muslims in Lankawe after the Tamil Genocide. Cambodia Genocide and Sudan Genocide could not have been thawed by making official a language for use in office. Recognizing or rejecting a Language is not an issue in deciding Genocide.
          • 1
            0
            For example, India- Pakistani citizenship was bought in only to start genocide against Tamils by deporting a large number of them without allowing take all their properties through customs. . But German government did not bring a law like that. Tea and Rubber Industries were nationalized only swindle the industries Tamils were working. If they had been still owed by British companies, Tamil Labor could have been brought under International labor laws and Tamils life would have been better. There is nothing parallel to that in Germany. Kanangra nationalized schools only to destroy Tamil schools and thus Tamils’ education. Now Tamils’ schools are the worst in the country. There is no parallel law implemented in Germany for that. India did not make Hindi Only a law. But separate Language based states so to implement states’ Languages. Lankawe brought Sinhala Only, only to destroy Tamils employment. This resulted in Tamils employment level from 75% to less than 1 -2%. There is no parallel law in Germany for that. Standardization explicitly told Tamils should not enter Universities. Now North and East are the last provinces in education. There are no Parallel laws to that in Germany. In fact the crime committed in Lankawe is not like one man Hitler action. It was well planned when DS took government from Britain. This is an upgraded Genocide. This is a genocide plot over for 3/4 quarter of a century. It is not the commander and the committed case like in Germany. This is a plot carried with many thousand consultants. In fact UN has to consider this as an upgraded Genocide and arrest all who in were power from 1948 and who consulted the government in this Genocides.
        • 1
          0
          If LTTE was committing Genocide on Tamils as per this guy, 1958..1983 are three or four times larger genocide committed by SWRD and JR JR There were three times larger murders were committed by SWRD’s government or by JR government than LTTE. Sirima and Richard P. Committed many thousands more of Sinhala Youth. It never can be established that LTTE committed Genocide of Tamils or Sinhalese or Muslims. Everybody knows even to proscribe Tamil democratic organizations these guys are using UN resolution 1373 illegally. If that can be proved these guys will not be just waiting without doing it.
  • 1
    0
    This writer is evidently not a lawyer. It is a fact that the LTTE killed with abandon. That does not mean that their killings provide a defence to the killing of Tamils by the state’s forces. Also, the LTTE is a phenomenon that came into existence after the genocidal programme of the Sinhala governments had started beginning in 1958 and before. If there is a paid brief, at least do a good job. The LTTE’s killings of civilians can never be condoned. They were in violation of norms applicable to the conduct of civil wars. There does not appear to be any leader to punish. All of the existing ones are with the Government both of MR and Sirisena. They must be brought to trial. But, the fact that they are not, does not in any way condone the genocide of the Tamils. It would be a strange argument in logic if it does.
  • 2
    0
    When an individual JR was bringing 13A and under the shadow of 6A there was no sincerity in solving Tamils problem in that notorious racist. When Tamils were completely destroyed in South in 1983 and remaining lives were send to homes, JR said if he strive Tamils only Sinhalese will be happy. That is the JR’s sincerity you are talking in solving Tamils problem? This man’s no action will ever supported for sincerity to solve Tamils problems. He is the one walked for Kandy and caused SWRD’s murders too. He is the in 1944 proposed Sinhala Only First. JR’s very clearly expressed his ideas to wipe the Tamils completely from Ceylon. There is no doubt in that in that with all his above action. 13A is nowhere consisting to have any form at any level to devolve power to Tamils. Read Satyendra’s book on that to know what 13A is. That time he was the most eminent Constitutional lawyer in Parliament. But he was not consulted to draft 13A. That discarding of him is worse than LTTE killing Neelan, another constitutional lawyer. No Tamils were part of Indian – Lanka accord. Rajiv had openly expressed his idea of attaching Lankawe to India. This was expressed during Thimbu talks and this had been let to know by LTTE. Neither Rajiv nor JR was trying to fix any Tamils’ problem by that accord. Tamils were not part of the accord. Tamils were not given a share to implement the accord. It was not for Tamils. It was an accord to manage Tamils. That pact’s status is nothing different from Banda-Chelva or Dudley-Chelva pacts. It was only in writing but not in action. While pact was in operation, Lankawe government purposefully sold Hangbangtota Harbor to China. It purposefully brought Chinese submarines to discipline MR. Modi.
    • 1
      0
      In the article, if you actually bothered to read it fully, I explicitly point out what you state. A flaw in the negotiating process of the Accord was that it was negotiated only between the Indian government and Sri Lankan government, it should have included all Tamil parties (not just the LTTE.) The Accord was presented as a “fait accompli” and that was a mistake. Although it was a mistake not to include Tamil parties, I assert that the decision for Prabhakaran to wage a full scale war with the IPKF was a mistake because it stifled the full implementation of the Accord which would have given Tamils significant rights. I then talks about the 1995 proposals which was a genuine proposal, and the Government wanted to negotiate it with the LTTE, and the proposals corrected the flaws of the Indo Lanka Accord, which Tiruchelvam mentioned was the Accord’s preservation of the unitary structure, the 1995 proposals weakened the unitary structure significantly. But the LTTE rejected the 1995 proposals in favour of war.
      • 0
        0
        Accord was presented as a “fait accompli” and that was a mistake. The accord and 13A are two different subjects. Don’t play games pretending like that you only simply confusing between the two. If the country was going to be treated as one unit by India, there is no need for Tamils to be in accord. But the LTTE should have been in the 13A to be obligated to contribute of implementing it. As there was no intention of implementing 13A, LTTE was banned in formulating 13A. Your main point in the essay was that JR was extremely sincere in drafting and implementing 13A. 13A was born by the Indian intervention when JR was out to completely wipe out Jaffna Tamils. Is that JR was sincere when pressed by India, but asked help from Thatcher and Regan to deal with India? Please accept that you were more insincere, when you are suggesting that 13A was there to solve Tamils problem, than JR, who drafted it. There is nothing to fix in 13A. That is again your story. If you have been reading the news these days, you will understand that to give Tamils even a minimum right the 1978 constitution has to be repealed and government has to go people by referendum to get the mandate from people. If you don’t understand don’t say “ I then talks about the 1995 proposals which was a genuine proposal, and the Government wanted to negotiate it with the LTTE, and the proposals corrected the flaws of the Indo Lanka Accord, “. The wording you are using there is showing you’re not even anywhere near to understand what a constitution is. If the Sinhalese don’t vote “Yes for Tamils” for a referendum, then there is no constitution of “By the people, for the people”.
      • 0
        0
        Never in the history had the Sinhalese voted to “yes for Tamils”. Chandrika won Srima Dissanayake, but Chandrika’s husband Kumaratunga’s USA faced a serious defeat in the earlier presidential election. It tells if somebody advocate Tamils course like Vijaya Kumaratunga they will lose but if Chandrika oppose unknown Sirima she can win. Nobody’s sincerity reach to Vijaya’s level and it was rejected by Sinhalese. It was unanimously accepted, outside Sinhala JR chauvinist gang, that 13A was not implementable. I repeat, read Satyendra’s book on that to understand how technically JR had drafted that 13A in and un-implementable form. Stop saying “Solving Tamils problem, 13A, and implementing 13A.” Those three has no intersecting area in between them. If you falsely connect those three then your sincerity is questioned. MGR-Mrs.Gandhi faction wanted to promote LTTE. Suppressing LTTE and Promoting Varadhar Ani was a decision taken by Rajiv-Karunanidhi faction. Anybody can understand when IPKF asks to hand over the arms because to promote EPRLF LTTE is not going to do that. That may not about only 13A implementation as you frame. IPKF did not ask Lankawe Rapist army to hand over the arms. IPKF did not forge clean peace between the Tamil armed groups. IPKF was supporting EPRLF. Then, it was asking to hand over the arms of LTTE. If you understand, none of the LTTE fighters, even through white flag negotiations, surrendered to Lankawe rapist army. You may guess why was that? If your intelligence level can bring you up to that, then you have got that there was no question of LTTE handing over the arms to IPKF. a). 13A is not the India – Lanka accord. b).13A was from JR, to fool Rajiv, not to solve Tamils problem. c). IPKF did not undertake responsibility to implement an un-implementable 13A.
      • 0
        0
        IPKF was sent out by Richard P as per his election promise of sending back IPKF in 24 hours of becoming president. IPKF left Lankawe not because it failed to implement 13A by LTTE actions. It all coined propagandist people like you. There is nothing true. IPKF left for two reasons: 1).It had entangled in the civil war so President Richard P wanted them to leave; 2). V.P.Singh was a minority supporter, did not wanted to oppress minorities with IPKF. India was not party of 13A. Do you know anything happened that time? How India get in Lankawe? When JR was completely wiping out Jaffna, India got in using that opportunity. There was nothing of 13A for India to implement that time. 1).June 1987 JR was killing Jaffna Tamils. Rajiv responded to that. 2).End of July IPKF deed was signed and allowed to come to Lankawe. 3). November Lankawe Parliament brought 13A. So the IPKF arrival was much before any 13A tabling. You are convulsing with your lousy argument that Tamils, who were only ones, rejected the solutions, and it was in 1987 and 1995. To substantiate that logic you confer Sinhalese became sincere suddenly from 1987, which is the time you are able to spot LTTE’s present for a convenient blame. You do not want to walk into the past aggression like Indian Pakistani Citizenship act, Sinhala Only act, MMDA act, Standardization…. Or even the fake reversal attempts of those aggressions like Banda Chelva, Dudley Chela pacts…, as your theory will automatically be questioned, in case you go beyond 1987. You have no reason to believe or to cite but declaring from 1987 the Sinhalese have become sincere, but the Tamils were the crooks. You argument goes like that JR was suddenly turned out to be sincere 1987 when India pressed, and so supported Tamils, but he was not sincere in 1957 as India was not, so he went to Kandy walk to support Sinhalese. Can I ask you could to show me an official document that says one of the IPKF’s duties was to implement 13A?
  • 1
    0
    Unfortunately Srilanka lacks leadership. They simply follow the masses keeping in mind the’ Next Election’. No Sinhala leader has the capacity convince the masses that federalism is not a division of the country but only a division of power. The Tamil leadership ship too have failed in their’ feeble effort’ to go to the Sinhala masses and explain- though difficult without Sinhala leadership support. Leftist leaders Like Covin, NM and Peter too changed their stance to get votes. I can only think of one sincere leftist among the Sinhalese at present- Mr. Wickremabahu Karunaratne who has not changed. But support from Tamils to this leader was lacking which is unacceptable.
  • 3
    0
    so Pitasanna Shanmugathas another anniversary of war heroes day or remembrance day has come and gone. Sinhala Sri Lanka celebrated War Heroes Day. Tamils remembered their loved ones who died in the 60 years of Tamil genocide either as innocent victims in the hands of Sinhala thugs or as combatants during the civila war. For another year the ceremonial army and will retire and the pompous ceremony will be put on the shelves. and for you ….I guess.. you may perhaps go into hibernation, and then by this time next year , get a kick on your back side , by your paymasters, to write the same old rubbish about “Politics of Genocide ” in between I guess you may get some brain washing by DBSJ and his paymasters and drop some of their shit on CT.
  • 0
    1
    [Edited out] We are sorry, the comment language is English – CT
  • 6
    0
    Pitas anna ” it is indeed puzzling why the Sri Lankan government agreed to adopt the Indo-Lanka Accord ” Have they implemented Indo-Lanka accord? Before IL accord SL Govt also signed Dudley Selva pact. SL Govt also signed Banda Selva pact. Go and read a good history book.
    • 1
      1
      In the article, the author explicitly says the Accord was stifled from its full implementation due to the actions of the LTTE. Maybe you should first learn how to read.
      • 3
        0
        Joseph – its 8 years since LTTE was defeated and since then successive Sinhala Govts did not have the appetite to let the Tamils mourn their lost ones or for that matter implementing the Indo Lanka agreement or for that matter curbing the racist Buddhist monks
        • 1
          1
          You’re right about that. It is crucial the government fully implement the Accord (currently, it has only been partially implemented) and Tamils need to be allowed to mourn the loss of their loved ones. But it is without question, had the LTTE accepted the Indo Lanka Accord or the 1995 proposals, which proposed to give Tamils significant constitutional rights, Tamils would be in a better place today but the LTTE chose war instead
        • 0
          1
          Tamils are free to mourn their lost ones. It has been the case since 2009. But it is illegal to mourn the fallen leaders of a separatist terrorist organisation. In germany it was banned to even display the swasthika for decades. Indo Lanka agreement has been implemented years before and that is why you can have a racist in the place of a CM in NPC
  • 3
    0
    This is what DBSJ wrote in 2007 “What is now happening in the East is a monumental crime against humanity with genocidal attributes. “
    • 0
      2
      The government’s actions during the final stages of the war were done with a blatant disregard to the lives of Tamil civilians. But unlike DBS, I am more cautious about using the term genocide. Furthermore, I guess my difference of opinion with DBSJ should debunk the myth I am his mouthpiece, especially since I have never met with or even spoken to the man. You may want to read this article…one of the authors is Rajan Hoole–we seem to share the same opinion as it pertain to the assertion a genocide was committed by GOSL
      • 3
        0
        “I am more cautious about using the term genocide. ” One need not be cautious. Tell what happened and what is happening Prof Boyle (an international legal expert) says what happened in SL is Tamil genocide http://tinyurl.com/leuj8jg
      • 3
        0
        At the Mullivaikal Genocide (Sri Lanka) Remembrance Day 2017 held at the Hyde Park, London on the 18th of May 2017, organised by the British Tamils Forum, several British politicians called for an end to the continuing genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka. This year BTF launched the “Stop the ongoing genocide” campaign based on the following four themes, (1) STOP THE CULTURAL GENOCIDE, (2) STOP THE IMPUNITY TO COMMIT GENOCIDE, (3) STOP OCCUPYING PEOPLE’S LAND, (4) STOP DESTROYING TAMIL PEOPLES’ IDENTITY. BTF hopes all diaspora organisations around the world takes up the above themes and campaigns for it internationally to stop the ongoing genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka. Following British politicians gave speeches which stressed on the need to fully implement the UNHRC resolution 30/1 immediately. They endorsed the campaign launched by BTF, to stop the continuing genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka. Mr. James Berry, Chair of All Party parliamentary Group for Tamils (APPG T), Mr. Wes Streeting, Deputy Chair of APPG T, Mr. Lee Scott, former Chair of APPG T, Ms. Hannah David Prospective Parliamentary Candidate, and Mr. Matthew Scott Prospective Parliamentary Candidate all gave speeches which stressed the importance of stopping the continuing genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka.
    • 1
      1
      Colombo Telegraph has unfortunately not allowed me to post the link to the article–one of the authors is Rajan Hoole–I mentioned. But Google the article. This a quote from the article: Genocide is a word loosely used for political rhetoric, too often by politicians who themselves have blood on their hands. It is a fact that the war was waged by all sides without any concern for civilian well-being. The LTTE continuously trapped the people in a destructive war and consciously worked towards scenarios where the Army would kill large numbers of civilians. It created conditions where civilians will be forced to identify with it in one form or another to make sure that when that Army enters, they will all face the wrath of the Army. That fear itself forced the people to join the movement or to move with them. Have we forgotten the Exodus of 1995, the chasing away of Muslims in 1990 and many other atrocities unleashed in the name of liberation?Could we say that the LTTE was involved in genocide against its own people by quoting all the massive killings it carried out at various times from trapping people again and again into wars they did not want and forcing them along a suicidal route? Could the chasing out of Muslims and massacring them in Mosques be legitimately raised as genocidal acts of the LTTE? There are many sides and narratives to the conflict. It is very sad that the University which needs to create space for people to re-evaluate the past and critically analyse what went wrong that allowed suicidal politics to ensnare the community, is now again blindly promoting the same politics which destroyed our community.”
  • 1
    1
    Pitasanna Shanmugathas “I am more cautious about using the term genocide. …” I beg your pardon! no offence but who the hell are you? whose interest are you representing here?
    • 1
      1
      The fact that people aren’t cautious about using the word has led to its political vulgarization. Genocide is the highest crime known to man and therefore to use the word carelessly does a grave injustice to the victims of the Nazis and the Aboriginal people who are legitimate victims of genocide. My interest has always been to voice the grievances of Sri Lankans who are victims of injustice–that includes victims of injustice by both the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE. Furthermore, I have written and will continue to write plenty of articles criticizing the GOSL’s treatment of Tamils.
      • 1
        0
        Pitasanna Shanmugathas “…Genocide is the highest crime known to man and therefore to use the word carelessly does a grave injustice to the victims of the Nazis and the Aboriginal people who are legitimate victims of genocide. ..”—-> so what you are saying is relatively speaking .there is no Genocide against the Tamils.—.Genocide is not a relative term. Its an absolute term. And then you go on to imply that the word Genocide is used “carelessly” in the case of Tamils. The more you try to defend yourself the more you are digging your own grave. Please go and do some research on whether the Dehiwela Zoo should be closed to prevent further cruelty to the caged animals.
        • 0
          1
          In the case of the Tamils, as I have already argued, the term genocide is politically vulgarized and used solely to refer to the crimes committed by the Sri Lankan government against Tamil civilians while completely disregarding the LTTE’s own crimes against Tamil civilians and the LTTE’s own role in stifling genuine political solutions such as the Indo-Lanka Accord and the August 1995 proposals, which, if implemented, would have provided the ethnic minorities, namely Tamils, in Sri Lanka with unprecedented rights and powers. During the civil war, there were genuine political solutions put forth which recognised the distinct identity, the language, and the historical habitation of the Tamils in the North and East, and also sought to devolve significant powers to the ethnic minorities, and sought to significantly weaken the unitary structure, but the LTTE rejected such proposals in favour of prolonging the war which had a devastating toll on Tamil civilians. Your assertion that what happened to Tamils–egregious crimes committed by both the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government– is genocide, is an insult to the victims of the Nazis. The more you keep talking, the more obvious it is how much of a hypocrite you really are.
          • 1
            1
            Let me keep talking until I dirve this point in to your thick brain……. LTTE was born out of the Genocide agenda of the Sri Lankan Govts since independence against The Tamils. ………………………The Sri Lankan Genocide agenda to wipe out Tamils and all evidence of existence of Tamils from the face of Sri Lanka is not finished yet and still going on……it is a long term strategy ……and .you may be dead by the time it’s accomplished……….The more you respond to the comments here in CT it is evident that your agenda is to paint every one (supporting the Genocide agenda) as pro LTTE and LTTE rump…..your thinking is clouded by your anti LTTE stance and you are unable and unwilling to see through this cloud instead you see everything through an anti LTTE telescope that magnifies your anti LTTE agenda to your satisfaction
            • 1
              1
              Sri Lanka must be the only place where population rises when that ethnicity is subject to a genocide LOL
              • 3
                0
                Sach, We are not talking about population increase or decrease. Do you know the definition of GENOCIDE? Answer is NO. Please read the article written by a Sinhalese Dr Jude Fernado Link is given in this comment https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/the-politics-of-genocide/comment-page-1/#comment-2106517
              • 3
                0
                Population of Tamils in SL would have been much higher than what is now if 1/3 of the Tamil poulation was not forced out of the country. This started in 1958 and reached it peak in 1983 (black july).
            • 0
              1
              The more you keep responding the more you keep politicizing the word genocide and devaluing it of all its content. Google an article co-written by Rajan Hoole and other Sri Lankan human rights activists.This a quote from the article: “Genocide is a word loosely used for political rhetoric, too often by politicians who themselves have blood on their hands. It is a fact that the war was waged by all sides without any concern for civilian well-being. The LTTE continuously trapped the people in a destructive war and consciously worked towards scenarios where the Army would kill large numbers of civilians. It created conditions where civilians will be forced to identify with it in one form or another to make sure that when that Army enters, they will all face the wrath of the Army. That fear itself forced the people to join the movement or to move with them. Have we forgotten the Exodus of 1995, the chasing away of Muslims in 1990 and many other atrocities unleashed in the name of liberation?Could we say that the LTTE was involved in genocide against its own people by quoting all the massive killings it carried out at various times from trapping people again and again into wars they did not want and forcing them along a suicidal route? Could the chasing out of Muslims and massacring them in Mosques be legitimately raised as genocidal acts of the LTTE? There are many sides and narratives to the conflict. It is very sad that the University which needs to create space for people to re-evaluate the past and critically analyse what went wrong that allowed suicidal politics to ensnare the community, is now again blindly promoting the same politics which destroyed our community.”
              • 0
                1
                All your arguments are to protect Appe Aanduwa from being investigated for Mullivaaikkaal. There is a need arise to politicize, when the incident is denied. Here, it is irrelevant what happened in 1958 or 1990 or 1995. UNHRC is following four commissions’ reports only on Mullivaaikkaal, namely LLRC, UN SG’s expert Panel, UN internal investigation and OISL. None of these reports have used the word Genocide. UNHRC has limited the focus Period only to the one set up by Old King. Now they have to go to independent investigation and prove that the Genocide Word, which is not used by UNHRC so far, is a vulgarized word (If you know the meaning of “Vulgarize”). Those who supported LTTE’s “separate country” are supporting impartial Investigation. Government and acolytes who have the Genocide in their hand fearing for that as the case is for sure ended up genocide, irrelevant of what definition accepted in the proceeding. Further LTTE or any Tamils factions were neither part of India-Lankawe Accord nor of 13A. If you buy the fish with prickly bones you cook it, if I buy it I cook it. Then only we can co-exist. I cannot cook the fish you bought. Don’t blame me for that. LTTE’s object was not implementing 13A. It rejected from the start. Neither India nor JR invited LTTE to discuss for modification before they gave shot to implement. Satyendra’s, who is not from TULF, TNA or LTTE, but from another organization which competed with LTTE one time, has written fully about 13A from the point of constitutional side. Political side is, you know Jayalalitha was accused not in Tamil Nadu but in Karnataka; that tells no one single past & present politician will be spared if Provinces get Police and justice. So, Federal state never will come in Lankawe!
          • 4
            0
            First of all thank you for responding to our comments. “In the case of the Tamils, as I have already argued, the term genocide is politically vulgarized and used solely to refer to the crimes committed by the Sri Lankan government against Tamil civilians while completely disregarding the LTTE’s” What do you mean by politically vulgarized? We say Genocide based on evidence. “The LTTE did not come into being or grow into a world-class terror outfit in a vacuum. Without the Sinhala Only, the Tiger may have remained unborn. Without the Black July, the Tiger may not have grown exponentially. If the B-C Pact and the D-C Pact did not miscarry (thanks to the midwifery of Sinhala extremism), the LTTE, even if it was born, would have remained a fringe group. The Tiger was born out of Tamil discontent and alienation; it fed on Tamil fear and anger. ” Tisaranee Gunasekara Please read the full article by Dr Fernando – Representations of Mass Atrocity in Sri Lanka: Challenges to Justice and Recovery http://www.untref.edu.ar/documentos/ceg/32%20Jude%20lal%20fernando.pdf
  • 1
    1
    You say LTTE should not be in the accord. Yet are accusing LTTE opposed the accord implementation. Why shouldn’t LTTE oppose a pact in which it can’t participate? What you are doing is pinching the baby and rocking the cradle. If your idea that LTTE is only a petty so it needed to have been included, you are wrong. LTTE was in control in of few areas. LTTE was not in control in Jaffna at all. 13A was not implemented even the rest of the 7 provinces where LTTE was not present at all. You purposefully ignored the fact that the police power was not given even to Western province. You know almost all big towns like Colombo are enjoying having their police force. It was done in that way because if a truce achieved then to prevent giving police power to Tamil provinces too. Your essay is incomplete when you recommended including Tamils enemies like Shanmugathasan, EPDP et al in negotiation but only LTTE be excluded, but you are not opposing the 1995 negotiation which was only with LTTE. Further, in the 1995 initiations, you say LTTE did not accept what Aanduwa enforced on Tamils. There you are missing the point that the LTTE only can come for a common ground, or otherwise there is no need to stop fighting and coming to table. Sinhala Government did know LTTE’s position. Government asked for truce and agreed for negations. Government once again tried enforcing another 1978 constitution on LTTE, but no negotiation.
    • 0
      1
      Where did I say LTTE should not have been involved the Accord? In the article I explicitly criticize the Accord for not including the LTTE. It should have included all Tamil parties. That was my position. Read my article in its entirety before you comment

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 300 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically shut off on articles after 10 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.

leave a comment