HomeTamil grievances
The following is in response to a letter from Prof. C. Suriyakumaran titled "Ravi Karunanayake and his problem on Tamil grievances"
My mentor, my guru, my friend and guide, the late Mr. Lalith Athulathmudali, taught me always to remember that it is not what is said but how it is said and not who is right but what is right that matters. It is in this context that I address my reply to Prof. C. Suriyakumaran.
Professors seem to be a confused lot of people these days. Prof. C. Suriyakumaran in particular has tried to make a "mountain out of a mole hill". Despite his eloquence, the learned professor has failed to comprehend the core of the basic question which I have asked. What are the unique problems that the Tamils face which other communities do not face? I thought it was only the Tamil politicians that distort facts, but now Prof. C. Suriyakumaran too seems to have unfortunately joined the minority of Tamils who provide obdurate dissertation, instead of addressing the heart of the issue. It is precisely because we have resorted to subterfuge, spreading half truths and deliberately misrepresented facts, that our country is in such a pathetic mess today.
It seems that you have attempted to draw me into responding in the belief that I will tread on extremism. No, Sir, I hate to disappoint you but I have no intention of being insensitive to the feelings of any race, religion or caste but to play the ball with a straight bat and let the facts speak for themselves.
The Sri Lankan social fabric is interwoven with the coexistence of Sinhalese, Moors, Malays, Burghers, Christians, Borahs, Parsis, Indian Tamils and even Chinese who live very happily with each other. Why is it then that it is only the Tamil community that has this problem? (The majority of the Tamils very categorically state that they have no problem and are quite content to live happily among the rest), so why is it that a minority of this minority Tamil community is trying to create a problem for the majority of this minority Tamil community? Unlike you, Sir, I am fighting for all Sri Lankans and not only a subsection of the Sri Lankan population.
Although I have never met you, I know who you are, Sir and it is only your age that draws respect from me, certainly not the misinterpretation of facts set out in your letter of January 10, 1998 and January 16, 1998, respectively. Permit me therefore to take you through the pages of history citing concrete examples not hypothetical and personal experiences, as given by you, and I believe that at the end of the journey you will have enough evidence to console yourself, so that you would never ever need to resort to the untenable concoction of facts which only increases further polarisation of our nation instead of defusing it.
In your article you state that the opinion you have arrived at is formed by reading certain newspaper reportings on a lecture I delivered at the USIS. I wish you had been present at the discussion so that you could have arrived at and found the truth of what was said, instead of forming opinions based on erroneous facts. This is precisely the same manner in which you and the minority you belong to, claim the North and East as the Tamil homeland by using Mr. Cleghorns minutes out of context.
Let me begin by dealing with the question I had posed requesting advice on what exactly the problems are that the Tamils face, which are unique to them and which are not faced by any other community. Once again, let me stress that it is the Tamil problem as a whole that I am asking you to elaborate on. You unequivocally answered the question of the Tamil problem in a personal context and did not deal with the specific issue. It is analogous to a patient going to the doctor to say I am sick. You have to be very specific, if not the doctor is unable to diagnose the issue. By the same token, therefore, if you are unable to advise us of your own Tamil problem, professor, who are we and how are we qualified to provide you with one? However, as you have gone on a frolic of your own to prove certain points, I wish you would respond to the following incidents that I give below:
A) 1983 racial riots
The killings of 13 armed forces personnel in 1983 led to a racial outbreak. These dastardly acts are condemned unreservedly. The Sinhalese, since then have very unfairly been branded as 'pariahs' in the eyes of the world. Subsequently, there have been many provocative acts committed by the terrorists, (A1) primarily the attack on the Dalada Maligawa. Against the backdrop of such primeval violence and outrage have the Sri Lankans not proven that they are not what they are made out to be? That they do not react emotionally?
A1) Attack of specific places:
1. Oberoi Hotel Room in the 2nd floor was bombed on the 21st
January 1984.
2. Air Lanka plane bombing on 03.05.86.
3. Central Telegraphic Office (CTO) Bomb on 05.06.86.
4. Central Bus Stand, Pettah, exploded a bomb on 21.04.87,
killing 120 civilians, 2 policemen and an army soldier. 298
others were injured.
5. Maradana - Bomb explosion on 09.11.87 inside a vehicle,
opposite Zahira College, killing 23 persons and injuring 106, 29
vehicles damaged.
6. Joint Operations Command (JOC) Headquarters. On June 22, 1991
the JOC Headquarters were blasted with a death toll of 100
persons.
7. Maharagama - A car bomb exploded on 10.04.92, causing the
death of 8 civilians. One PC and 23 civilians injured.
8. Western Province Chief Minister's Office, Colombo 7. Timing
device hidden in a cart exploded on 07.08.95, killing 21
civilians and injuring 44 civilians.
9. Janadhipathi Mawatha, Colombo. Opened fire and activated a
vehicle bomb on 31.01.96, in front of the Central Bank building,
resulting in the death of 86 civilians, injuring 1338 and also
damage to several buildings.
10. Railway Station, Dehiwela. Two bombs were exploded on
24.07.96, inside two compartments of the Colombo/Aluthgama train.
63 civilians killed and 366 civilians injured.
11. Hotel Galadari Car Park. Opened fire and activated a lorry
bomb on 15.10.97, in the vicinity of the World Trade Centre and
Hotels Galadari and Hilton resulting in the death of 13 civilians
and injuring 94, including 33 foreign nationals.
12. Sri Dalada Maligawa. The most sacrosanct shrine of Buddhist
worship in Sri Lanka which houses the Tooth Relics, bombed on
25/01/98.
B. Attacks on innocent border villages (to be concise I have taken one example per year).
1. Dollar and Kent Farm on 30.11.84, 33
Sinhalese killed.
2. Sri Maha Bodhi on 14.05.85, 29 Sinhalese killed while
worshipping.
3. Andakulam massacre on 04.06.86, 17 Sinhalese killed.
4. Arantalawa - Ampara on 29.05.87, 30 Bhikkhus killed.
5. Saidimanradu on 22.03.88, 20 Muslims killed.
6. Bogamuva on 02.02.89, 112 Sinhalese killed.
7. Eravur on 11.08.90, 116 Muslims killed.
8. Putur on 06.07.91, 17 Muslims killed.
9. Paliyagodela on 15.10.92, 172 Sinhalese killed.
10.Kallarawa on 25.05.95, 42 Sinhalese killed.
11.Mahanikawewa on 22.02.96, 21 Sinhalese killed.
12.Kebbitigollawa in June and September 1997, 35 Sinhalese
killed.
C. Who killed the following political leaders in Sri Lanka and abroad?
1. Alfred Duraiyappah, former mayor and MP for Jaffna on July
27, 1975.
2. A. Thiagarajah, MP for Vaddukoddai on May 25, 1981.
3. V. Dharmalingam, MP for Manipay on September 3, 1985.
4. K. Alalasunderam, MP for Kopay on September 3, 1985.
5. Sri Sabaratnam, TELO Leader on May 6, 1986.
6. A. Amirthalingam, Leader of the Opposition and TULF on July
13, 1989.
7. V. Yogeshwaran, MP for Jaffna on July 13, 1989.
8. T. Ganeshalingam, Provincial Minister for North & East on
January 28, 1990.
9. Sam Thambimuttu, MP for Batticaloa and Mrs. Thambimuttu on May
7, 1990.
10.V. Yogasangari, MP for Jaffna in June 1990.
11.K. Padmanaba, EPRLF Leader in June 1990.
12.K. Kanagaratnam, Eastern provincial MP on July 15, 1990.
13.Ranjan Wijeratne, Defence and Deputy Minister of Finance on
March 1, 1991.
14.Rajiv Gandhi, Prime Minister of India on May 22, 1991.
15.Ranasinghe Premadasa, President of Sri Lanka on May 1, 1993.
16.Gamini Dissanayake, presidential candidate and MP for Nuwara
Eliya on October 23, 1994.
17.A. Thangathurai, MP for Trincomalee on July 5, 1997.
18.Mohammed Maharoof, MP for Trincomalee on July 20, 1997.
19. S. P. Tharmalingam, SLFP organiser for Jaffna on October 3,
1997.
D. What about the attacks on Sinhalese in 1958 in Jaffna?
Mr. S. J. V. Chelvanayagam himself admitted that, he regretted the violence directed against the innocent Sinhalese in Jaffna, which was around 4,000 people. What about the Tamil hooligans who ransacked the sacred Buddhist Shrine at Nagadipa and threw the Buddha statue into the sea? So, Professor, did these incidents occur before 1983 or after?
E. Putting the blame on the Sinhala Only Act
When it comes to distorting the truth, you can't beat the minority fundamentalists who have had a relatively unchecked journey until now when people are beginning to realise the truth behind their myth. It is my bounded duty to deal with this extensively, so that people who try to resuscitate the manipulation of history will have to deceive by adopting a different approach to rewrite their own saga. The saddest of them all is that if the majority community place genuine facts before the discerning public, they are named as chauvinists and traitors but if Tamil minorities express the most bizarre idea or the most grossly distorted fact, then it is regarded as their legitimate right.
What is made out by successive Tamil leaders to the world at large, is that all the tribulations they have suffered is after June 5, 1956, with the enactment of the Sinhala Only Act. Let me help to put the real motive in its correct perspective:
E(1) Since British Rule began in our country, they systematically and deviously played the minority against the Sinhalese. The minority Tamils benefited with a disproportionate share in everything.
Then the 1st State Council was elected after Sri Lanka obtained universal franchise. It was at this point in time that some Tamil minorities began to feel insecure. In the first State Council elected in 1931, on the basis of universal franchise there were fifty elected representatives with four from the Jaffna peninsula elected in the by-election of 1934. Their ethnic breakdown was as follows: Race Seats* %of population** Sinhalese 38 69.4 Sri Lanka Tamils 7 11.0 Indian Tamils 2 11.9 Muslims 1 6.9 Burghers 0 0.6 Europeans 2 0.1 50 100 * Source - Legislatures of Ceylon 1833 - 1930. ** Source - Census of 1921
In direct contrast however, when the 29 elected representatives in the last Legislative Council of 1924 - 30, were elected on the basis of a restricted franchise of those educated in English and owning property, the ethnic breakdown was: Race Seats* Sinhalese 14 Sri Lanka Tamils 7 Indian Tamils 2 Muslims 1 Burghers 2 Europeans 3 29
Thus, in the Legislative Council there were 14 Sinhalese and 15 non-Sinhalese. The proportion of Sinhalese was even smaller before the Manning reforms were introduced in 1924.
E(2) When Mr. Arunachalam Ponnambalam Junior (son of Ponnambalam Ramanathan), on behalf of the Tamils appeared before the Donoughmore Commission, did he not say "We the Tamils have lived for 4,000 years and we have an inalienable right to the country?"
E(3) 50/50
After the 1931 State Council Election, did not Mr. G. G. Ponnambalam request a 50/50. He went on to say let them only get 50% even though Sinhalese have a 69% of the population. Was that not a fantastic statistic of minority logic?
E(4) 1947 Federal Party
On November 26, 1947, Mr. S. J. Chelvanayagam said 'why can't we, the Tamils, have a right to secede from the rest'. This was offered not after the Sinhala Only Act in 1956, but even before Independence in 1948.
E(5) 1952 elections and Mr. S. J. V. Chelvanayagam
'If the Tamil people return a Federalist candidate, it will be an alternative to a plebiscite and it will convince the Sinhalese people and the whole world that the Tamils are determined to be free. If the Tamils show their determination to be free, no one can keep them down'. Once again, statement uttered before 1956.
E(6) Mr. Suntheralingam - 1952
He was the first politician to fight the general elections in 1952 calling for the establishment of Tamil Eelam. This was different to Mr. S. J. V. Chelvanayagam who was fighting for a federal form of government. This also occurred before 1956.
F. Jobs for minorities
Recently, there happened to be information published by the Ports and Shipping Ministry giving the recruitment that had taken place on the basis of race. Had you digested that information, you would probably be asking the question. Who faces the problem, is it the minority or the majority? It will be very apparent that the Tamils are not alone in this problem? For your easy reference, let me inform you, Sir, that the recruitment was as follows:
Sinhalese 75% of the population, got 2568 jobs.
Muslims 7% of the population, got 1654 jobs.
G. Insurgency
When the country came to a grinding halt owing to the insurgency in 1971 and again from 1988 - 1989, who was being harassed? Was it the Tamils? No. ! It was the Sinhalese.
H. Naming as a terrorist organisation
Why have Australia, India, Canada and the USA named the war mongers an international terrorist organisation? Is it because these are countries governed by a majority Sinhalese? No, they have taken cognisance of the fact that they are no longer freedom fighters.
1) Sinhala Only Act of 1956 -by S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike
For the purpose of record it should be mentioned that this was legislated on June 5, 1956. However, it was implemented on January 1, 1961. In the interim, the usage of Tamil language was permitted in the North and the East. This was legislated on January 1, 1958. Finally, in 1987 by Article 18, the Tamil language was given its pride of place by being made a national language. It should be proudly recorded that nowhere else in the world is Tamil a national language. For the record, even Malaysia which has 12.5% Tamils, Fiji 20% Tamils, Mauritius 19% Tamils, Singapore 7% Tamils, Kenya 10% Tamils or Tamil Nadu which has 60 million Tamils, have not adopted the Tamil language as a national language.
I fully agree that the language problem has created barriers that remain unresolved but, this is an administrative drawback, which not only affects Tamils but also the majority Sinhalese. For example, if the Sinhalese, representing 75% of the country transact any work in Jaffna or Batticaloa, their correspondence and responses are not in Sinhalese but in Tamil. To cite another example, if you open the telephone directory, the printing is not in Sinhalese or Tamil but in English. Therefore, why do you have to resort to self-pity when all races face their own particular problems?
Let us all begin by treating this country as our country. Together let us all learn Sinhalese, Tamil and English and break down the barriers ourselves and work towards the 21st century as friends who are partners in progress, rather than resort to quibbling as to what language should be used. Unity is the need of the hour and time is of the essence.
J)Devolution of power or power sharing
To ameliorate the minority problem the Tamil politicians have been pursuing three courses of actions. Some for power sharing, others for devolution of power and the extremists, for self determination. There have been many attempts by successive governments to clear this hurdle.
- All Party Conference
- Thimpu Talks
- 1981 District Development Council
- 1988 Provincial Councils
- Mangala Munasinghe Report
- And now Regional Councils.
There is a distinct demarcation between devolving executive power and devolving administrative and legislative power. The supremacy of parliament which embodies the right to create laws for the entire country is distinctly different to federalism, where the constitution lays down everything, making changes almost impossible, rigid and furthermore making parliament impotent.
Sean Connery (of James Bond fame) uttered the following words in respect to devolution in Scotland. He said on Sky News at 23:10 on the 24th August 1997: "It is a constitution that has teeth and the next stop would be independence". Is this not identical to what Mr. S. J. V. Chelvanayagam had said, which is quoted by none other than his son-in-law, who reported in his book 'Political Biography' to the Tamil problem. "All we want is a little now and more later".
So, what finale are we looking at here?. We regularly claim Parliamentary supremacy or unitary state as opposed to a federal constitution, not for extraction of the minority but for the protection of everybody in Sri Lanka. If I can forecast the future, my prediction would be: "Unitary constitution one country, federal constitution many countries".
K) Education policy and standardisation
Since you yourself have admitted that the standardisation problem is a thing of the past, I don't need to dwell on this issue any further. But let me mention that it affected the non Tamils as much as it affected the Tamils. The difference being that the underprivileged areas received the benefit.
L) T.U.L.F. letter to Mr. Rajiv Gandhi
Mr. Amirthalingam and Mr. Sivasithamparam wrote to Mr. Rajiv Gandhi saying the Tamils have only the North and the East to live and disproved that claim by a Tamil diaspora rule.
M) Colonisation
The 2% colonisation scheme of Mr. D. S. Senanayake has been a constant bone of contention. However, a realistic evaluation of the 1981 statistics leaves no room for argument. You may be of the view that there is a difference between forced colonisation and voluntary settlement, but this has a very thin line of demarcation.
According to the 1981 Statistics, 27% of the Tamils live outside the North and the East. If you take the last local government election, held in Jaffna you would find that 60% of Tamils live outside the North and the East. Let us look at the forced colonisation of 84,000 Muslims in Puttalam where land, houses and electricity were given to them (which is equal to 10% of the Muslim population). What exactly are you grumbling about? This is not the sine qua non of Tamil existence but something that is common to all communities.
Finally, in your last para, you request me to join you to meet the warring terrorists to forge a national solution. While I would gladly acquiesce to your request, my willingness is tempered with caution, controlled by the application of the reason. Would it not be more constructive Professor for you to stop preaching to us and educate your oppressed, suppressed and the underprivileged freedom fighters in the North and the East? We have seen through their charade and the pen of hatred that the minority write with has not convinced us. The times have changed and we with them.
N) Case of Thesawalami Law
This customary law is unequal and conveniently forgotten. It is a tenet used exclusively by the Tamils of the Jaffna peninsula where no other community has the right to be a beneficiary. Is this not intransigent in a country where the social fabric is interwoven with different communities? The Thesawalami law was introduced by the Dutch during the time of their rule in the 17th century for the Tamils of Jaffna who were residents of Malabar and not the Tamils of Sri Lanka. If this is the case, where does it fit into the theory of the Tamil homeland? Facts are stubborn, truth hurts.
There is a national problem which is something quite different to a racial problem. Therefore our attempt and the need of the hour is to medicate and eradicate this national problem. We cannot look at this from a racial context and provide an answer for a national problem. The quicker we realise this and work towards it the sooner we could take this country out of this unfortunate mess that we have landed ourselves in. So, it is for every right-minded person to come forward irrespective of race, religion and political affiliation. Let us build a strong Sri Lanka through national consensus and then we are assured of victory.
Hopefully, you may now be a little more enlightened than what you were before. If you pursue the annals of the history of nations, it would indeed be difficult to find a country which is so generous and hospitable to people who have come to them and are not of them.
Diversity in our social fabric is not a curse but an asset. This country could profit immensely from the industrious qualities and thriftiness of the Tamils, the business acumen of the Muslims and the large heartedness of the majority Sinhalese.
The ethnic question is based on the universal concept of live and let live. We are also strengthened in our convictions by the famous dictum of the great poet of the Sangamage Poonkundranar who said, "Yaadhum Oore: Yaavarum Kelir," - which means, 'every country is my own and all the people are my kinsmen.' We feel that the continuation of this conflict in our multi-ethnic, multi-religious country will ultimately destroy the social fabric of Sri Lanka and all communities will suffer immeasurably.
I remain cautiously optimistic about the national situation in our country and will gladly accept any stepping stone that builds bridges or use any launching pads that will steer this country from the trauma of terrorism to the shore of peace.
In conclusion, we stand on the threshold of a new millennium, I urge you, Professor, to use the power of your education to span the ethnic divide and not widen the rift. The task of nation building is the moral responsibility of every citizen so that a united Sri Lanka with justice for all and malice to none can rise like a Phoenix from the ashes of destruction. This is the direction of time's arrow, if we follow it we cannot fail.
We wish to thank Mr. Ravi Karunanayake MP