Srilanka events and developments

November 2009
13th Amendment
E Thambiah
Presidential Power & the TNA
Government & GSP+
Sri
National Question & Self
Determination
Asvaththaamaa
Poetry:
Darwish, Ernesto Cardinal,
Shanmugam Sivalingam
Editorial ● NDP Diary ● Sri Lankan Events ● International Events
________________________________________________________________
Website: www.ndpsl.org
Victim Number 18
Mahmoud Darwish
Once the olive grove was green.
It was, and the sky
A grove of blue. It was my love.
What changed that evening?
At the bend in the track they stopped the lorry of workers.
So calm they were.
They turned us round towards the east. So calm they were.
Once my heart was a blue bird, O nest of my beloved.
The handkerchiefs I had of yours were all white. They were, my love.
What stained them that evening?
I do not understand at all, my love.
At the bend in the track they stopped the lorry of workers.
So calm they were.
They turned us round towards the east. So calm they were.
From me you'll have evening,
Yours the shade and yours the light,
A wedding-ring and all you want,
And an orchard of trees, of olive and fig.
And as on every night I'll come to you.
In the dream I'll enter by the window and throw you jasmine.
Blame me not if I'm a little late:
They stopped me.
The olive grove was always green.
It was, my love.
Fifty victims
Turned it at sunset into
A crimson pond, Fifty victims.
Beloved, do not blame me.
They killed me. They killed me.
They killed me
Translated by: Denys Johnson-Davies/The Music of Human Flesh.
From the Editor's Desk
The resignation of former Army Commander, General Sarath Fonseka
from service has created fresh political stir and speculation about the
next presidential election.
The possibility of fielding a non-party common candidate against the
incumbent at the presidential election was in the air for several
months, especially following the overwhelming victories by the ruling
alliance in Provincial Council elections held in the wake of the military
victory against the LTTE. The internal crisis within the UNP
compelled it to consider the possibility. The prospect of fielding
former Chief Justice Sarath Silva as a common candidate was
pondered for some time but, with the emergence of evidence of a
serious rift between the General and the President, the idea of fielding
General Sarath Fonseka gained support among the opposition parties.
The JVP was the first political party to openly endorse fielding him as
the common candidate and the UNP informally indicated its
willingness.
The UNP and the JVP, between them, have only Sinhala chauvinism in
common, but political desperation seems to have become a strong
uniting factor in the likely agreement on a common candidate. The
prospect of General Fonseka being fielded as a presidential candidate
endorsed by the two main opposition parties has serious implications
for the two parties as well as for the minority nationality parties in the
newly formed twelve-party alliance led by the UNP.
The JVP as a populist party with a 'Marxist' facade and chauvinist
underpinnings has a support base among a section of the population
which has been traditionally hostile to the UNP, which it has seen as a
party of the pro-West elite. Supporting a common candidate who is
not from the UNP but endorsed by it will only be a face-saving
exercise but hard to defend against charges of collaboration with the
UNP. The destruction of the credibility of the JVP as a political force
is high on the agenda of the government since the JVP still has trade
union muscle which it has flexed in recent months, without head-on
confrontation. The government has already denounced the trade
union action as JVP mischief aided by the UNP.
General Fonseka, a US Green Card holder, has not expressed any
political opinion thus far except declaring several months ago that Sri
Lanka is a country of the Sinhalese. How the Tamil, Muslim and Hill
Country Tamil allies and potential allies of the UNP can come to terms
with this view is a matter for speculation. But they should by now have
their excuses ready. The question is how their electorates will respond
to their political bankruptcy.
Much can happen between now and the elections, but the common
candidacy poses serious political questions as the contest is for a very
powerful post with virtually unlimited executive powers. Firstly, we
have the question of the manifesto of the candidate. Mahinda
Rajapakse produced a manifesto that was different things to different
people and besides signed MoUs with some of his allies, all of which
proved to be not binding upon him once elected to office. What kind of
manifesto can one expect from a person with good military experience
but no political experience? Secondly there is the question of how
General Fonseka will use his power if elected to office. That may be
decided to a considerable extent by 'invisible' forces within and
outside the country that are behind his entry into politics. Thirdly we
have the question of how the loose alliance that supports General
Fonseka will present him to their respective electorates without
contradictions that could be exploited by the government. There is no
way of knowing what hold the various forces that back General
Fonseka will have on him if he is elected to power.
Whatever the outcome, it is certain that the elections will not merely
be a contest between the government and a combination of the main
opposition forces. The rivalry between foreign powers, especially the
US and India, is likely to play a role in the election and in the affairs of
Sri Lanka after the election. What is most worrying is the prospect of
choice for the people being limited to a ruler in civilian clothes and a
ruler in military uniform, in a country heading towards a dictatorship
guided by foreign interests vying for hegemony in the region.
India's role in the Sri Lankan national question has always been
cynical and now, while making a show of unrestrained support for the
government, India is seeking to bring together diverse elitist Tamil
political forces together as a new post-LTTE Tamil leadership. This is
likely to be at loggerheads with the leading elite of the Tamil diaspora
in the West, who are resentful of India and are leaning towards the US
to resolve the Tamil national question.
The 13 th Amendment:
a Political Dilemma
Comrade E Thambiah
The Birth of the 13th Amendment
The 13 th Amendment to the Constitution of 1978 was introduced
following the Sri Lanka-India Peace Agreement in order to put into
effect the Provincial Council system that would devolve power to the
Provincial Councils.
At the time the United National Party
Government headed by JR Jayawardane had a 5/6 majority in the
Parliament. Besides, Jayawardane had in his pocket undated letters of
resignation from all MPs from the UNP. As a result, even those who
were in disagreement with Jayawardane had to support the
Amendment.
Supreme Court verdicts on whether the 13 th Amendment ran counter
to the Constitution of 1978 also were in conflict. Chief Justice S
Sharvananda, Justices Colin Thome, EAD Athukorale and HD
Thambiah ruled that since the Amendment was not directly or
indirectly contradictory to the Constitution, passing it in Parliament
with a two-thirds majority was adequate and that there was no need
for a referendum. Justice RS Wanasundera ruled that since the 13 th
Amendment was contradictory to the Constitution it had to be subject
to a referendum. Justices OSM Seneviratne, LH de Alwis and HAG de
Silva accepted his position and made their rulings in accordance with
that. Justice KAP Ranasinghe ruled that certain provisions of the 13 th
Amendment required a referendum.
However, on the basis that Chief Justice S Sharvananda, Justices
Colin Thome, EAD Athukorale, HD Thambiah and KAP Ranasinghe,
who comprised a majority, had taken very much similar stands, the
13 th Amendment was debated in Parliament and passed without
recourse to a referendum. All members but two voted in favour.
Although Prime Minister R Premadasa said that he had his
reservations, he did not oppose the Amendment and instead spoke in
favour and voted for it. Gamini Jayasuriya who was Minister of
Agriculture and Food resigned his seat in Parliament. Cyril Matthew
voted against.
At the time, there was no one to represent the Tamil United Liberation
Front in Parliament since they had not been sworn in because its
seventeen MPs had forfeited their membership owing to their failure
to swear in, in accordance with the 6 th Amendment, declaring that
they will not support the secession of the country. (Chelliah Rajadurai
who entered Parliament as a TULF MP had already joined the UNP
and served as a minister).
It is against this background that the 13 th Amendment became law in
the parliament. The Sri Lanka Freedom Party was totally opposed to
it. Mahajana Eksath Peramuna MP Dinesh Gunawardana also opposed
it. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna opposed it outside the
parliament.
The JVP initiated its second armed insurrection in 1988 which ended
in 1990 (its first being in 1971) in opposition to the Sri Lanka-India
Peace Agreement and the Provincial Council system. It murdered
those who expressed support for the Agreement and the Provincial
Council system. It has been reported that the JVP killed six thousand
leaders and cadres of the Sri Lanka Mahajana Peramuna, the
Communist Party of Sri Lanka, the Lanka Sama Samaja Party, the
Desha Vimukthi Janatha Pakshaya and the Nava Sama Samaja Party
who functioned under the name 'United Socialist Front'.
At the time, the New Democratic Party (then named the Communist
Party of Sri Lanka-Left), while opposing the Sri Lanka-India Peace
Agreement and the arrival of the Indian army, expressed support for
the attempt to transfer of power through the Provincial Council
system, despite its failure to offer full autonomy for the Tamils. It
campaigned against chauvinistic forces who worked against the
Provincial Council system since, despite a lack of transfer of power
through the Provincial Councils, there was more power granted than
with devolution of power. (The NDP also pointed out that it was not a
solution based on the principle of the right to self-determination).
During the Guard of Honour accorded to India's Prime Minister
Rajeev Gandhi, following the signing of the Agreement by
Jayawardane and Rajeev Gandhi, the latter was attacked by a member
of the Sri Lankan Navy. This was an expression of protest against the
Agreement. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, besides rejecting
the Provincial Council system, resumed its armed struggle.
Consequently the Provincial Council could not function in the North-
East. Besides armed activities by the LTTE against the Provincial
Council, the 13 MPs from the Eelam Revolutionary Organisation of
Students elected to parliament in 1988 voted in favour of an
amendment that empowered the President to dissolve the Provincial
Councils. As a result it was possible for the President to dissolve the
Northern and Eastern Provincial Council, a power which did not exist
in the original legislation relating to Provincial Councils.
Marxist Leninists and other left forces who emphasised that autonomy
for the Tamil people should be affirmed on the basis of the principle of
the right to self-determination, did not endorse the Provincial
Councils, but they did not act to reject them. The LTTE, since it
persisted with its stand on a separate Tamil state, took a position
opposed to the Provincial Councils.
From the time that the Mahinda Rajapaksa government started its
military action against the LTTE in the North-East until now, it has
been said by the Government from time to time that the 13 th
Amendment will be implemented in full and that, in the long run, a
political solution will be found by handing over power to the provinces
under the unitary political system
Following the military defeat of the LTTE, there are debates about
what the solution to the national question should be. The JVP, the
Hela Urumaya, organisations of Buddhist clergy and other
chauvinistic organisations and individuals demand that the 13 th
Amendment should not be implemented and that it should be
expunged from the Constitution.
The National Bikkhu Front and the JVP have said that they will launch
a major people's campaign if the 13 th Amendment was implemented.
The Hela Urumaya has announced that it will leave the Government if
the 13 th Amendment was implemented.
The Merged North-East Provincial Council
According to the 13 th Amendment, the Northern and Eastern
Provinces would be temporarily merged. It was decided that a
referendum in the East would be necessary to make it permanent.
Accordingly, elections were conducted for the Provincial Councils on
19th September 1988, and the Eelam People's Revolutionary Liberation
Front captured the merged Northern and Eastern Provincial Council.
Varatharajap Perumal became its Chief Minister.
Varatharajap Perumal demanded that the Provincial Councils be
granted the police and land alienation powers stipulated in the
schedule of powers of the Provincial Councils as well as powers
allocated in common to the Central and Provincial Governments.
As the LTTE was conducting talks with President Premadasa at the
time, the EPRLF-led Provincial Council was subjected to harassment
in many ways. President Premadasa had also issued the LTTE with
weapons to combat the Tamil National Army comprising members of
the EPRLF and a few other organisations under the patronage of the
Indian army. The LTTE used those weapons to launch attacks against
the Indian army. As a result of this, and since an amendment was
passed in 1990 allowing the President to dissolve the Provincial
Councils, the powers sought for the Provincial Councils were not
granted, and the Indian army started to withdraw from the island,
Varatharajap Perumal unilaterally declared an independent Tamil
Eelam and left for India with 250 of his supporters aboard an Indian
military vessel. The North- East Provincial Council was dissolved soon
after. That was followed by the killing of Rajeev Gandhi, the former
Prime Minister of India in 1991 and the killing of President Premadasa
in 1993, both in suicide bomb attacks. No elections were held for the
North-East Provincial Council, although elections were held for the
rest of the Provincial Councils in 1993, 1998 and 2004. In 1999,
President Chandrika Kumaratunga survived a bomb attack in which
she was seriously wounded.
On 16 th October 2006, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of de-
merging the North-East Provincial Council. The JVP had filed the
petition for the de-merger, and Chief Justice Sarath N Silva handed
out the verdict. Justices Nihal Jayasinghe, NK Udalagama, ARN
Fernando, and RANG Amaratunga assented with the ruling.
Former Chief Justice Sarath N Silva, following his retirement, said
that the system of Provincial Government was not suitable for a small
country like Sri Lanka and that devolution through bodies such as
District Development Councils would be appropriate.
Since then, LTTE domination was overcome in the East and elections
were held for the Eastern Provincial Council. The Tamil People's
Liberation Tigers, an organisation which split from the LTTE,
contested under the symbol of the ruling alliance, and won a majority
of seats. Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan became Chief Minister. He
too had demanded that his Provincial Council be granted police and
land alienation powers.
New Thoughts
The argument for the right of the Tamil people to self-determination
is that powers have not been devolved adequately to the Provincial
Councils so that the Provincial Council could affirm the national
aspirations of the Tamil people. That was why the Srinivasan
Proposals were put forward during the time of President Premadasa
and later the Mangala Munasingha Proposals were put forward.
Under the Presidency of Chandrika Kumaratunga, there were firstly
the August 1995 Proposals. In the year 2000, Chandrika Kumaratunga
presented a new Draft Constitution that amended the existing
constitution in ways that would allow significantly more powers to the
Provincial Councils. The UNP set on fire copies of the Draft
Constitution inside Parliament, and defeated it, contrary to its earlier
pledge. (The TULF opposed it too as did the JVP and the Jathika Hela
Urumaya).
The Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) that Prime Minister Ranil
Wickramasinghe made with the LTTE led to subsequent agreement
during peace talks in Oslo that a solution will be found based on a
federal system. Following dissolution of Parliament by Chandrika
Kumaratunga those efforts suffered a setback. In 2005, during
Chandrika Kumaratunga's time, the Post-Tsunami Operational
Management Structure agreement was reached with LTTE. The JVP
and the JHU opposed it and filed action in the Supreme Court. The
verdict in that case was that the PTOMS was unlawful. During
Chandrika Kumaratunga's time, an All-Party Committee was convened
to find a political solution to the national question, and the findings of
its Group of Experts were published as a report. Greater powers for
the Provincial Councils were prescribed therein.
Under Mahinda Chinthanaya
Following the election of Mahinda Rajapakse as President, talks held
with the LTTE broke down, and military action was initiated. Three
years on, the LTTE has been militarily defeated.
Under these conditions the approach of the chauvinists, the
communalists within the government, and the armed forces is that
there is no need for a political solution and that the Provincial
Councils imposed by India were unnecessary. President Mahinda
Rajapakse does not state his position clearly.
The report of the Group of Experts of the APC formed under
Chandrika Kumaratunga was opposed by the JVP and the JHU. The
UNP did not participate in the APC owing to strained relations
between the UNP and the President. The Tamil National Alliance also
kept out of it.
Now, the Peace Secretariat of the Government has been dissolved. It is
believed that in a month's time, the tasks of Tissa Vitharana, the
Chairperson of the APC, are expected to come to an end. It seems that
steps towards a political solution under his leadership have been
brushed aside, since President Rajapakse has called an All Party
Committee on Development and Reconciliation. A political solution is
not studied by it. It is anticipated that the Committee will only serve
further procrastination. Under the conditions, there is uncertainty
about a political solution.
It is understood that the Sri Lankan Government had pledged that the
13th Amendment will be implemented by it in full and that it will go
beyond that to find a political solution. The 13 th Amendment is part of
the Constitution and its implementation cannot have any legitimate
obstacle within or without the Parliament to its implementation. Yet,
like the 17 th Amendment being unimplemented, the 13 th Amendment
too could remain unimplemented. Not implementing part or all of the
constitution is a constitutional offence.
As much as it has been not possible to take action against the
President for his failure to implement the 17 th Amendment, it will not
be possible to take action against failure to implement the 13 th
Amendment. If action is to be taken against him, it has to be an
impeachment motion against him. That would require a two-thirds
majority in Parliament. Even if it were to be done, who is there to do
The opposition to the implementation of the 13 th Amendment will be
extended to any form of autonomy that goes beyond it. Hence, even if
one were not to oppose the implementation of the 13 th Amendment, it
is essential to concentrate ones thinking on finding a solution that will
affirm autonomy for the nationalities based on the principle of self-
determination rather than waste time on the 13th Amendment.
Will President Mahinda Rajapakse, who is determined that the
solution will be based on a unitary state, take the necessary steps to
implement of the 13 th Amendment? Will he go beyond it towards a
political solution based on devolution of power, while those who
support him in Parliament are opposed to it, and the Army, which is
the 'Sixth Force', is opposed to it, and the Bhikkhus are opposed it.
Above all, India may insist on political and administrative structures
that serve India's needs in Sri Lanka, which is being converted into its
Hong Kong. Will it be the 13th Amendment alone? If so, Mahinda
Rajapakse will come under pressure since, unlike in Jayawardane's
time, the government does not have a two-thirds parliamentary
majority. Under the present electoral system, that is unlikely. It rather
seems impossible.
Constraints like the presidency and parliament will not allow
advancing towards a political solution that would affirm the rights of
the nationalities. Thus, time may pass debating the implementation of
the 13 th Amendment.
Tissa Vitharana, who is responsible for submitting the political
solution, has said that no problem will arise in putting forward a
solution if the schedule common to the Central and Provincial
Governments was eliminated: i.e., the 13 th Amendment has a schedule
relating to the limits of power of a Provincial Council. That includes
matters concerning the Provinces. Even if the Central Government
cannot intervene in such matters, it could do so by passing legislation
in Parliament by a simple majority. These powers include matters
such as education, health and industry.
Another schedule referred to in the 13 th Amendment concerns the
Central Government. The Provincial Council has no power in those
matters. Of them, national defence, external affairs and currency are
significant.
The third schedule of powers is common to the Central and Provincial
Governments. That concerns matters such as police and land. In such
matters, when the Central Government or the Provincial Government
takes a decision, it has to consult the other, and arrive at consensus
through discussion. Tissa Vitharana is talking about finding a political
solution with this schedule eliminated.
That would mean that power over police and land will not be allowed
to the Provincial Government without the consent of the Central
Government. Even those arrangements that may seem allowable could
be snatched away in the prospective political solution.
Thus, India would appreciate that allowing the Provincial Government
power over the police is not desirable in the current Sri Lankan
context, despite the fact that the 13 th Amendment was put in place
under pressure from India. Disaster Management and Human Rights
Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe has stated that, as a result, India will
not exert any pressure on Sri Lanka to grant police powers to the
provinces. He also added that in small countries such as Sri Lanka it is
not possible to grant power over police and land to the provinces.
Thus it is possible that the powers given to the provinces at present
too may cease to be.
Meantime, Wimal Weerawansa, leader of the National United Front
has announced: "Power over police and land should not be granted to
the provinces under the 13 th Amendment. The 13 th Amendment is
outdated. The President himself has pledged that it will not be
implemented. That is why we are in the government. The President
should seal the mouths of ministers who talk about implementing the
13 th Amendment. If the 13 th Amendment is implemented we will leave
the government".
Under these conditions, what is the stand of the Tamil parties? What
is the next stage of the struggle of the Tamil people for self
determination? Such questions are inevitable. History is not static
and, contrary to the wishes of dominant political forces and leaders,
will not allow what is wrong.
As far as our Party is concerned, in today's context, it is essential that
the 13 th Amendment is implemented in full. But only measures that
offer maximum autonomy to the nationalities through autonomous
structures, based on the principle of the right to self determination
can serve to solve the national question.
(Approximate translation of article in Puthiya Poomi, June-July 2009)
*****
Presidential Power and
the Plight of the TNA
(From Puthiya Poomi September 2009)
On 9th September, MPs of the Tamil National Alliance met President
Mahinda Rajapakse and had discussions with him. Although news
reports claimed that the discussions were cordial, the views expressed
by R Sampanthan, the leader of the TNA, during the debate on the
extension of the State of Emergency, indicated that the discussions of
9th September were not quite cordial. Sampanthan charged that the
government was exploiting the LTTE threat for the purpose of using
Tamils as pawns.
A series of oppressive measures can be taken against Tamils on the
pretext of people having links with the LTTE. Important personalities
of the LTTE have been released on bail, while thousands are under
detention for alleged contact with the LTTE. Legal action has been
filed against thousands under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and
Emergency Regulations. Many have received severe sentences from
the courts. More than ten thousand persons have been arrested from
the camps for the displaced. Many more could be arrested. Several
who have been speaking out for the rights of the Tamil people have
been subjected to surveillance, shadowing and inquiry.
Sampanthan's views, however, cannot be said to have included such
matters. When he meant by claiming that the government was
exploiting the LTTE threat for the purpose of using Tamils as pawns
was that the government was exploiting the LTTE threat to make a
pawn of the TNA. Several TNA MPs have already been subject to
police inquiries. One is still under detention. Three are still remaining
abroad. The reason for the inactiveness of the TNA under various
pressures is their conservative politics lacking a spirit of
independence.
Why is the TNA reluctant to talk about its discomfiture, its inability to
express its views, and the charges levelled against it
by the
government side during the two and a half hours long meeting with
the president? There seem to be different reasons for initially claiming
that the discussions were cordial and then criticising the government
in parliament. It has been said in media circles that Indian advice was
behind its going for talks with the president and then speaking
critically of the government in parliament.
At a time when three hundred thousand Tamils living as refugees have
faced loss of life property and are subject to cruelty and misery, a
meeting between the head of state and the TNA, which has the largest
parliamentary representation of the Tamil people, cannot be a mere
formality. Both parties should accept this criticism.
It is inevitable that the government talks with the TNA and the TNA
talks with the president. But it is unacceptable that only the agenda of
the government is taken into consideration. It will be worth
remembering that the aspirations of the Tamil people have been
sidelined and the Tamils have continued to be oppressed, since all
negotiations from long ago to this day have been undertaken to carry
forward the agenda of the government. Tamil leaderships have been
reactionary. But it is true that the policies that have been put forward
out of their own class interest also inevitably included the demands of
the Tamil nationality.
On the other hand, it is not hard to see that neither the TNA nor the
other Tamil organisations qualify to represent the aspirations of the
Tamil nationality. The past and present abound in evidence for this. It
has not been possible to know what long-term and short-term
proposals to address the problems faced by the Tamil people were put
forward by the TNA MPs when they met the president. One is led to
wonder whether the TNA MPs used this meeting to diminish the gap
that exists between the president and them.
Had they conducted themselves honestly, they should publish the list
of demands that they presented to the president. The government has
been talking about resettling the Tamil refugees. So that cannot be a
matter about which the TNA can make any boastful claim. The
government had announced its decision to hand over those in the
camps to relatives who are willing to take responsibility for them. So
the claim of the TNA that it was an outcome of their meeting with the
President will be meaningless.
The TNA should make public to the Tamils what it said to the
president about a political solution and what it intends to speak about
in the future. They cannot wear one mask to tackle the government
and another to tackle the Tamil people.
Sampanthan, who now calls upon the government to arrest LTTE
members in the camps and release the rest, may have forgotten what
he said when the war was still on and the government demanded that
the Tamil people should surrender to the armed forces. But those with
good memory would not have forgotten his words. He said that "Those
with the LTTE will belong to the LTTE. How could they accede to the
call by the government and go over to the armed forces?" But now he
has changed his story. Thus the TNA is untrustworthy of the Tamil
people. The demands that have been put forward by the Tamil leaders
throughout history have been in the interest of their political
dominance and not the welfare of the Tamil people. At the same time,
the Tamil people will continue to be further sidelined as a result of the
hostile attitude of the government towards the TNA.
Minister Tissa Vitharana, the chairman of the All Party Conference,
when addressing a seminar at the University of Jaffna had said that
the president will not consent to hand over police powers to the
provincial governments, and that a political solution will be put
forward only after it is approved by the president. But the Chief
Minister of Eastern Province, Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan is
insisting on power over the police and land. He is also speaking out
against the Governor of the Eastern Province.
The solution to the problems of the Tamil people cannot be just things
acceptable to the president. On the contrary, the position of the Tamil
people is that they should fulfil their national aspirations.
Minister Tissa Vitharana says that the Indian panchayat system and
the Senate will be part of the proposals for a political solution. This is
an attempt to divert attention from the solution. Neither the Indian
panchayat system nor the Senate can resolve the national question. At
the same time, government pressure on the Tamil people to accept as
solution its chauvinist agenda will not solve the problem either.
Neither the agenda of the Tamil leaders nor the chauvinist agenda can
be a solution. Only a solution based on the right of nationalities to self
determination within a united Sri Lanka that will fulfil the national
aspiration of the Tamils and assures equality and autonomy of the
nationalities can help to resolve the national question. That demands
a common programme and united action of genuine forces.
*****
The Government
and GSP+
Sri
(From Puthiya Poomi September 2009)
It has been evident over the past few years that the relationship
between the Sri Lankan government and the West was less than
cordial. This is the outcome of the uncertainty whether Sri Lanka
should lean more towards the West or towards India. It is against this
background that a warning signal has been made that the tax
concessions granted to Sri Lankan exports under the GSP+
(Generalised System of Preferences) could be withdrawn. What is
important here is that such withdrawal would threaten several
hundred thousand jobs.
It is said that the President of Sri Lanka has intervened in the mater to
enable the retention of the GSP+ concession. Although certain officials
and government ministers have made boastful utterances about GSP+,
it appears that the government is to plead with the European Union.
The text of the plea by the government is to be drafted by a four-
member committee of the cabinet.
Meantime, a group of three experts from the EU which studied
whether laws relating to human rights are being implemented in Sri
Lanka produced its report. The report is highly critical of the way in
which the government has conducted itself in matters relating to
human rights, freedom of the media, the finance sector, the armed
forces and the police. The EU is expected to make its decision on
GSP+ for Sri Lanka based on the Expert Group Report.
The Foreign Affairs Minister of the EU will confirm the decision in
December. If the concession is withdrawn, six months' time will be
allowed until June 2010, for the EU to examine whether the situation
has been rectified during that period. What the government could do
by then is to be seen.
The Deputy President of the UNP, Karu Jayasuriya has emphasized
the importance of GSP+. Some of the facts that he provided are:
These concessions provide a lifeline to the garment industry which
employs 270,000 people. A further 100,000 people are employed
in related industries.
Of the made garments 52%, valued at US$ 34 billion, go to the EU.
It is because of GSP+ that Sri Lankan businesses are able to
compete in the global market.
If this concession is denied, it will have a serious impact on the
economy of the whole country, including the rural sector.
In 1984, UNCTAD appealed to developed countries that they should
grant trade concessions to under-developed countries. Following that,
in 1971, the EU became the first to grant GSP+ concessions to under-
developed countries.
To understand why the EU rushed into providing this concession, one
should understand the politics behind it. Most of the economically
backward countries which are variously referred to as 'independent'
countries, under-developed countries and developing countries have
in the past been colonies of some of the member countries of the EU.
We should realize that the 'concern' that the EU shows is with the
intention of keeping underfoot forever these 'independent' countries.
It is a measure to affirm neo-colonialism. In other words, it is new
charity from old masters. These countries have little choice but to
gratefully accept it.
Although the GSP+ trade concession is also offered by developed
countries such as the US, Canada and Japan, it is the GSP+ offered by
the EU that is most widely used, as evident from the following import
figures. The total combined import by the US, Canada and Japan in
2003 was US$ 16 billion as opposed to US$ 52 billion by the EU. The
reason for this is the earlier said political background of the GSP+
offered by the EU.
The EU offered its GSP+ concession to Sri Lanka following the
tsunami of December 2004 as a special concession. The concession
that is currently enjoyed is one that was due to terminate at the end of
2008. But the Sri Lankan government appealed to Brussels on 9 th
October 2008. The purpose of submitting the appeal in time was to
ensure its retention until the end of impending elections.
New rules added to the GSP+ on 22 nd July 2008 became applicable
from 2009 January to the end on 2011. They allowed customs duty
free import of 6241 kinds of goods.
Any country seeking to join an organization has to consent at the time
of application to abide by the constitution of the organization and
adhere to its rules. Minister of International Trade, GL Peiris in his
submission papers to the cabinet relating to the application for EU
GSP+ concessions had referred to 27 points of agreement. Thus, the
application for the extension of the GSP+ concessions was made with
the minister and the cabinet fully aware that the GSP+ Committee of
the EU would examine whether the said 27 conditions are properly
fulfilled by the country concerned.
In 2007 Sri Lanka exported goods to the value of US$ 2.8 billion. Of
this the export of made garments comprised US$ 1.4 billion, most of
which was under GSP+ concessions.
Mahesh Amalean, the Chief Executive Officer of MAS Holdings, Sri
Lanka has said that the company had 800 garment factories at one
time and that there are only 300 now of which 150 are in rural areas.
Of those working in garment factories 80% are rural women. The
garment sector directly employs nearly 300,000 people and around a
million people have employment related to the sector.
The Joint Apparel Association Forum representing the manufacturers
of garments has estimated that nearly 100,000 people will lose
employment if GSP+ concessions are withdrawn. The Minister of
International Trade has referred to this as well in his 'confidential'
submission to the cabinet. He added that the impact of the economic
slow down of the US will take six months to one year to reach us, and
that as a result the whole of next year will be difficult, and the first six
months will be particularly difficult. He also pointed out that orders
for the garment manufacturers have declined and that there has been
a need to cut down the prices.
Besides the US, all the countries of the EU face an economic crisis,
and that is likely to have an impact on Sri Lanka. Tea and rubber are
facing problems. There are reports that 65% of the tea intended for
marketing was returned for want of buyers; and seven billion rupees
are to be awarded to the tea industry as recovery fund.
According to an econometric analysis carried out at the University of
Sussex, UK, withdrawal of GSP+ will result in a 2% fall in the gross
national product of Sri Lanka. The problem is not that alone. Of the
garments made in Sri Lanka, nearly a half finds it way to the US
market.
Mahesh Amalean, the CEO of MAS Holdings has pointed out that the
US$ 150 million that the government has announced as relief to the
garment industry in the event of losing GSP+ is only for an year. What
would happen after that?
By sending in an appeal to extend the GSP+ and through a process of
inquiry and deliberations, the GSP+ concessions could be made to last
provisionally until the end of 2009, and the six months' time that the
EU will take to examine whether the situation has been rectified will
carry the concessions to June 2010. Thus the concessions will hold at
the time of general elections in 2010. The recovery fund is being
granted in a way that a loss of GSP+ will not affect the outcome of the
elections. But such recovery funds will increase inflation rate.
American and European capitalist countries provide recovery funds
from revenue collected from the people to protect the interests of the
capitalists. Likewise, the Sri Lankan government too has come
forward to provide recovery funds to the owners of garment factories
and tea and rubber plantations. The World Bank and the IMF that
warn against state financial support and subsidy for the people
approves of subsidy for the capitalists.
The government is fooling the people with declarations of national
independence and self respect. But the sovereignty of the country has
been mortgaged through commitments to the World Bank, IMF and
the WTO, and the Indo-Lanka trade agreement, in order to safeguard
capitalist interests. It boasts that it rejects the EU inquiry, but after
the elections in 2010, the story will be changed to secure, by
imploring, GSP+ and other concessions.
It should be pointed out at this stage that the GSP+ issue does not
affect the garment industry alone. It also affects the export of nearly
2000 kinds of goods comprising aquatic products, ornamental fish,
fruit and vegetable, ceramics, bicycle fittings, leather and rubber
goods. They comprise 35% of the total export, and workers in these
industries will also be affected by the loss of GSP+ concessions.
*****
The Sri Lankan
National Question and
the People's Right to
S el f D et ermi nat i on
Asvaththaamaa
Introduction
Post-war Sri Lanka has taken new directions in its political form with
the LTTE militarily defeated and the liberation struggle of the Tamils
facing a major setback. Against this backdrop, triumphalism of the
Sinhala majoritarian chauvinism in its different forms is placing new
constraints on the resolution of the Sri Lankan national question. Its
impact has been almost instant.
The latest line of the NGOs and 'civil society spokespersons' is the idea
of "non-devolutionary constitutional reform". Newly coined terms are
used to persuade the government that it could introduce
constitutional reforms with little consideration for the rights and
aspirations of the people. On the other hand the Tamil nationalists
among the diaspora remain stuck to the mythical notion of
Vaddukoddai resolution and claiming that separate state Tamil Eelam
is the solution for the Tamils in Sri Lanka. Both approaches contain
their fair share of vested interests.
Although the thirty-year civil war is over, the causes of the conflict
still remain to be addressed. The national question, remains the main
contradiction in Sri Lanka, and unresolved. Chauvinistic oppression
and denial of the basic rights of the minorities remain strong, the
oppression being two-fold, political and military. The reluctance of the
government to propose a political solution has serous long-term
implications.
While a just solution to the national question should be based on
ensuring the right to self determination of all the nationalities in Sri
Lanka, the term 'right to self determination' itself is being interpreted
by different political actors, each in a way to suit its own agenda. Thus
there is a need to understand the concept of the right to self
determination and examine its role in finding a solution to the Sri
Lankan national question.
Right to self determination
The concept of the right to self-determination has its origins in the
Russian revolution. The founding of the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics in 1922 brought together more than 120 distinct peoples,
each with its own language and culture, who had been oppressed by
the fallen Russian Czarist Empire. This great achievement was made
possible by the 1917 October Revolution. Elimination of national
oppression and arriving at a correct position on what was then known
as "the national question" would not have been possible without a
profound struggle.
Marx's analysis of the Irish question was a pioneering contribution to
the understanding of self-determination for oppressed nations. Marx,
who initially doubted the ability of the Irish nation to achieve
independence on its own or even the need for it, expected that the
Irish nation and workers would be liberated when the English working
class overthrew the English bourgeoisie. His view was based on the
idea that the English workers living in an advanced capitalist country
were best placed to overthrow capitalism in the colonizing country of
Britain. By the late 1860s, on recognising the virulent racism and
chauvinism among the English workers themselves against the Irish
people, he supported the right to independence of the Irish nation as
the best means for the Irish workers to fight capitalism. He urged the
English workers to stand up for Irish independence.
Marx further argued that an English workers' party, representing
workers of an oppressor nation, was duty bound to support an
oppressed nation's independence. This attitude became a central
aspect of Lenin's stand on the national question in relation to
oppressed nations. Lenin was later to write: "The policy of Marx and
Engels on the Irish question serves as a splendid example of the
attitude the proletariat of the oppressor nations should adopt towards
national movements, an example which has lost none of its immense
practical importance". Lenin, in upholding the Marxist approach, had
to struggle repeatedly against other socialists who were opposed in
principle to the right to national self-determination.
Lenin explained the right to self determination thus: "The right of
nations to self-determination means only the right to independence in
a political sense, the right to free, political secession from the
oppressing nation. Concretely, this political, democratic demand
implies complete freedom to carry on agitation in favour of secession,
and freedom to settle the question of secession by means of a
referendum of the nation that desires to secede. Consequently, this
demand is by no means identical with the demand for secession, for
partition, for the formation of small states. It is merely the logical
expression of the struggle against national oppression in every form.
The more closely the democratic system of state approximates to
complete freedom of secession, the rarer and weaker will the striving
for secession be in practice; for the advantages of large states, both
from the point of view of economic progress and from the point of
view of the interests of the masses, are beyond doubt, and these
advantages increase with the growth of capitalism. The recognition of
self-determination is not the same as making federation a principle.
One may be a determined opponent of this principle and a partisan of
democratic centralism and yet prefer federation to national inequality
as the only path towards complete democratic centralism".
It was after Lenin explained and defined the right to self
determination that others, notably Woodrow Wilson, defined the right
to self determination as the right of peoples to govern themselves.
Right to self determination implies that no one can legitimately
govern a people without their consent. Wilson promulgated the right
to self-determination in his "Fourteen Points" speech. The
fundamental difference between Wilson and Lenin was that the latter
accepted the right to secede, if it becomes impossible to stay together
so that self determination meant the right to secede but not
necessarily the act of secession. Lenin illustrated this with the
example of the right to divorce, which does not mean that every
marriage should be dissolved but ensures that every person gets into
the contract of marriage while reserving one's right to divorce.
Without the right to divorce, marriage does not guarantee the survival
of marriage. The right to separate makes the relationship more equal
and stable than without. Lenin thus argued that by giving the right to
secession the nations or nationalities in a union explore possibilities
to coexist.
In the later years, the right to self determination acquired political as
well as legal meanings, with the political principle having a wider
scope than the legal. Article 1 (2) of the United Nations Charter,
drawn up in 1945, stipulates that the UN is to "develop a friendly
relationship among nations based on respect of the principles of equal
rights and self-determination of peoples and to take other measures to
strengthen universal peace". Further, the principles of self-
determination were embedded in the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights (ICCPR); and in the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of the 1966. These
covenants affirmed self-determination as a "right of peoples" and
guaranteed it by treaty laws. The impact of these UN ratifications of
the right to self determination were more political than legal; and for
political reasons the right to self determination is being interpreted
and explained in different ways.
Right to self determination in Sri Lanka
The Marxist Leninist position on the national question in Sri Lanka,
as elsewhere, has been unambiguous. It has historically identified the
development of chauvinism and its development into national
oppression, and recognised the development of the national
contradiction into the main contradiction in Sri Lanka. Marxist
Leninists have always maintained that ensuring the right to self
determination of all nationalities in Sri Lanka should be the basis for
the solution to the national question. Any proposal for a solution
undermining the right to self determination of the nationalities in Sri
Lanka is of dubious value.
The class and class interests that constitute the essence of the national
question in Sri Lanka are not readily visible. Thus, limiting one's
search for solutions to the existing political framework, the executive
powers of parliament within it, and to legislation will not permit one
to appreciate the national and class aspects of the national question or
the need to recognise the right of the nationalities in Sri Lanka to self
determination. Hence claims of finding a solution within the existing
framework will fail to address the root causes of the conflict and the
issues involved. It has to be recognised that during the last thirty
years, the contradictions among nationalities which constitute the
main contradiction have grown and need to be addressed in a way that
satisfies all the communities. Thus, when the government or the
spokespersons for the "civil society" talk of non-devolutionary
reforms, they implicitly declare that they are unwilling to accept the
people's rights as the cornerstone of the solution.
The Marxist Leninist position, to be valid, should look closely at the
development of the national question, which has entered a phase
where national oppression involves local and foreign elements. When
a nation, a nationality or a community is oppressed as a social group,
inevitably its struggle against oppression will be based on its identity.
Marxist Leninists hold that to deny the right to such struggle is to
support social oppression. It is on this basis that they have supported
anti-colonial liberation struggles as well as liberation struggles of
oppressed nationalities and social groups.
Tamil nationalism in all its forms and identities is a product of
history. The evolution of Tamil identity into a Tamil national identity
was due to various social, economic and historical factors. Tamil
national identity itself has kept changing, and its form today is
markedly different from the one that preceded it. In the 1970s Tamil
nationalist leaders propagated the notion of a "separate state of Tamil
Eelam" and passed the Vaddukoddai resolution in 1976 for
opportunistic parliamentary political reasons. The solution for the
problems faced by the Tamils cannot be based on that resolution. To
be fair, any solution put forwarded on behalf of the Tamils should duly
recognise the rights of the other minorities, especially the Muslims
and Hill Country Tamils. But the Vaddukoddai Resolution calling for a
separate state of Tamil Eelam failed to address the issues of the
Muslims and Hill Country Tamils. Notably, until recently, Tamil
nationalist parties have been reluctant to seek solutions based on
ensuring the right to self determination for all the nationalities.
The concept of the right to self determination is not a product of
bourgeois democracy but of the revolutionary ideology of the working
class. The national question in the post-colonial era qualitatively
differs from that in the colonial era; and self determination needs to
be seen in a broader perspective than at the dawn of the 20 th Century
when the question mainly concerned an oppressor nation and an
oppressed nation. One should also take a historical view of how
imperialism has used session to advance its hegemonic interests.
Tamil nationalists calling for secession, based merely on the right to
self-determination, have their interests tied up with the imperialist
agenda. While Marxist Leninists accept the right to secede, they do
not see secession as a panacea for national conflicts. They have, in
particular, warned against the prospect of imperialists using secession
to serve their interests, the recent example being Kosovo. Thus
seeking secession as solution for the Sri Lankan national question is
not likely to be in the interest of any nationality.
The need of the moment is to ensure the right of all the nationalities
in Sri Lanka to self determination. Sections of the Tamil Diaspora and
Tamil media propagate the view that the right to self determination is
merely a right to secession. This is misleading and harmful. The right
to self determination is much more than the right to secession. Tamil
nationalists as well as Sinhala chauvinists continue to mislead the
masses on the principle of right to self determination. Meanwhile,
some Tamil parliamentary politicians talk about "internal self
determination" as a solution to the national question. This once again
is an effort to dismantle the concept of self determination and in the
process reject the right of the nationalities in Sri Lanka to self
determination.
At this point it is important to reiterate the stand of the Marxist
Leninists on secession. The use of secession as an imperialist tool does
not make it right to oppose the right to secession. The right to
secession is an integral part of the right to self determination and not
a licence to secede at will. If at all, it is a proven way to avert secession
and conflicts between nationalities. The vested interests of Sinhala
chauvinism and Tamil narrow nationalism ensured that they always
undermined people's struggles for social justice. Their conduct in the
past and present merely confirms their aim to retain their political
power by dividing people and denying the rights of the nationalists.
Conclusion
The right to self-determination cannot be applied blindly or be
imposed on a nationality or an ethnic group. A nationality struggles
for its right to self-determination or for secession when its identity or
its very survival is threatened. Struggles of oppressed nationalities are
complex and continuously evolving, with no two struggles alike. In
several instances, including Sri Lanka, issues have been made more
complex by foreign intervention driven by hegemonic intentions. The
situation in Sri Lanka is worrying, with rights of the nationalities
under great threat, and upholding the rights of the minorities has
become a momentous task. It is time for the progressive forces to
unite and fight for the right to self determination of all nationalities,
to ensure a just solution to the Sri Lankan national question.
*****
NDP Diary
NDP Statement to the Media
Denounce the Prison Attacks
15th November 2009
Comrade SK Senthivel, General Secretary of the New-Democratic Party
issued the following statement denouncing the recent Magazine Prison
attacks.
The violent attack on Tamil prisoners in Block J of the Colombo Magazine
Prison on 13 th November has led to fears about the possibility of plans for
yet another round of prison killings. Relations of Tamil prisoners and the
Tamil public as a whole are perplexed and pained by it. Cruel incidents of
attack and murder of Tamil prisoners have occurred from time to time.
The basic reason for it is an attitude of rabid chauvinistic dominance. It is
understood that prison officials with such attitude and Sinhala prisoners
instigated by them have been responsible for the recent attacks and
injuries. In that event, one needs to ask where law and order, justice and
fairplay and humanitarianism have gone. The New-Democratic Party
strongly denounces this incident and expresses its support for the hunger
strike campaign by the Tamil prisoners demanding justice for the attacks
against them as well as other issues.
The government is emphatically declaring in the international forum that
human rights are protected in Sri Lanka and that the Tamils are not
discriminated against. It is beautifully written on the prison walls in all
three languages that "Prisoners are also people". But what is worrying is
that the happenings inside are inhuman chauvinistic attacks. In 1983 and
in periods following it, Tamil prisoners have been attacked and killed in
cruel and degrading fashion in the Welikada and Kalutara prisons and the
rehabilitation camp in Bindunuweva. Inquiries have held prison officers
and chauvinist thugs responsible for the events. Such revengeful acts
occur now owing to continued detention of the prisoners despite the end
of the war. Hence the New-Democratic Party demands that proper
judicial inquiries about the attacks that occurred should be undertaken,
and that the government should accept the demand of Tamil prisoners to
try them or discharge them and take the necessary steps.
S K Senthivel
General Secretary, New-Democratic Party
NDP Media Announcement
Comrade Thambiah to Delhi Conference
15th November 2009
Comrade E Thambiah, Attorney-at-Law and National Organiser of the
New Democratic Party has travelled to Delhi to take part in a communist
conference. He is attending the Second All India Congress of the Socialist
Unity Centre of India, 16 th to 19 th November 2008, as a delegate of the
NDP and will participate in discussions relating to the current political
situation, the national question and the international communist
movement. He will also discuss with representatives of Marxist Leninist
parties of various countries on issues including the Sri Lankan national
question. He is also scheduled to address public meetings there.
S K Senthivel
General Secretary, New-Democratic Party
NDP Statement to the Media
Plight of Passengers in the North
9th November 2009
Comrade SK Senthivel, General Secretary of the New-Democratic Party
Issued the following statement on behalf of the Politburo of the Party.
Travel between the Jaffna peninsula and other parts of the country has
been an agonising experience for passengers. On the one hand there are
travel permit procedures in the name of security. On the other hand there
are practices of fleecing the passengers. They are practices that constitute
chauvinistic oppression. By carrying them out the government is
revengefully wrenching out of the people their normal life and freedom to
move about. There cannot be much sense in acting in this manner and
declaring that the government is carrying forward the Northern Spring
programme. Hence the New-Democratic Party emphatically asks the
President to intervene and open the A-9 highway to the public and enable
travel for a reasonable fare.
The people of the North ask why the A-9 highway is not open to the public
even after five months since the defeat of the LTTE. It makes one wonder
if the tight regulation of transport, fleecing of passengers and subjecting
people to continuous misery is revenge or oppression.
It appears that since the departure of the LTTE, the government has
adopted their practices and control. Hence the people express concern
whether the government has taken over the anti-democratic activities of
the LTTE. To this day the Tamil people have been taken for a ride by all
the Tamil parties and movements. The current experience of the Tamil
people is a mere continuation of past experience. In which case, is there
any meaning in the government's claim that it has rescued the Tamils?
People are compelled to pay Rs 21,000 (now 19,500) for return air fare
and Rs 2,400 for a single journey by luxury bus between Jaffna and
Colombo. Bus fares in the region of Rs 300 and 400 from Jaffna and
Vavuniya are subject to painful procedures with passengers driven from
pillar to post. Also, the way in which the people are treated when they
apply for permission to travel and in making travel arrangements are
appalling. Hence the New-Democratic Party emphasises on their behalf
that there is need for a change and relief from the painful, troublesome
and costly practices for the passengers from the north.
S K Senthivel
General Secretary, New-Democratic Party
NDP Statement to the Media
Wage Increase for Plantation Workers
5th September 2009
Comrade E Thambiah, National Organiser of the New-Democratic Party
and President of the Proletarian New Democratic Union issued the
following statement on the campaign of non-cooperation by plantation
workers to win a fair wage increase.
Plantation trade unions that have been signing the collective agreement
with the plantation companies should not indulge once more in the game of
launching struggles every two years for winning a fair wage increase, amid
which they transform the struggle into a rope-pulling contest, and finally
compel the workers to accept whatever wage rise that is offered by the
plantation companies. The struggle for a daily wage of Rs 500 should be
carried forward until final victory.
The New-Democratic Party and the Proletarian New Democratic Union
have decided to offer conditional support for the campaign of non-
cooperation by plantation workers initiated by the plantation trade unions
that have been signing the collective agreement for an increase in daily
wage of plantation workers to Rs 500.
It is the trade unions that have usually betrayed the struggles of plantation
workers for a wage increase that have initiated the present campaign.
Although we are in disagreement with the policies and practices, based on
the principle that we cannot be opposed to struggles of the people, we offer
conditional support for this campaign.
The trade unions concerned should carry forward the struggle without
compelling the workers to accept a daily wage of less than Rs 500. Also the
system of signing collective agreements every two years should be replaced
by a system that includes a wage scheme which assures an annual wage
increase on a fair basis.
E Thambiah
National Organiser, New-Democratic Party
President, Proletarian New Democratic Union
Comrade Navaratnam Commemoration
& Book Launch
8th November 2009
The 5th death anniversary of Comrade S Navaratnam was marked in
Colombo by the Comrade Navaratnam Memorial Committee and
Puthiya Poomi Publications on 8th November 2009 at the Kailasapathi
Auditorium of the Dhesiya Kalai Ilakkiyap Peravai. The meeting was
chaired by Comrade S Thevarajah, Member, Politburo of the NDP.
Comrade Thevarajah in his opening address outlined Comrade
Navaratnam's life of selfless commitment to the party and the people.
Comrade SK Senthivel, General Secretary of the NDP delivered the
memorial address, where he discussed the critical political situation in
the country and the importance of the inspiring contribution of
Comrade Navaratnam which will remain alive with the party and its
members in meeting challenges. He called upon the younger generation
to learn from Comrade Navaratnam in learning from practice in the
course of serving the people.
A book in Tamil comprising the text of an interview of Comrade
Senthivel by the website 'Inioru' (www.inioru.com) on 4th September
on matters relating to the political situation since the fall of the LTTE
and the NDP's stand on the national question was launched following
the memorial address. The book also included responses by Comrade
Senthivel to questions following the interview.
Comrade Thambiah launched the book and discussed in depth its
contents in the context of the national question and the current political
climate and explained the need for the release of the book at this
juncture. Comrade Sri Manoharan delivered the vote of thanks.
*****
Sri Lankan Events
Blaming the child victims
The bodies of two Hill Country Tamil girls who worked as domestic helps
in Colombo were found in a waste water ditch in Colombo in mid-August.
The deaths were readily dismissed by the police as suicide with the help
of 'suicide notes' implicating the girls as lesbians.
The deaths brought out a number of issues besides law enforcement, and
employment of young children (one victim was 13 years old and the other
14 when employed, the legal minimum age being 14). Abuse of child
domestic employees and safety of child employees have become matters
of concern in the plantation, but poverty among plantation workers is still
forcing families to send children for domestic work
Trade union and political leaders did not care until after a team of
lawyers including Senior Attorney-at-Law E Thambiah took up the case of
the two girls and initiated action for a fresh inquiry into the cause of the
deaths. The lawyers are appearing free for the families of the victims.
Once the matter was in public view, some Hill Country Tamil politicians
claimed credit for enabling the inquiry while others including a media
upstart maliciously claimed that NGOs were paying the lawyers. What is
sad is that media commentary, by highlighting sensational aspects, is
diverting attention from more real and urgent issues.
A ready-made sell-out
An enthusiastic non-cooperation campaign by the plantation workers, the
lowest paid section of the working class, demanding a daily wage of Rs
500 was sold out by the leadership that called for industrial action. The
three trade unions that make the collective agreement with the Employers
Federation settled for Rs 405 a day, each giving different reasons for its
betrayal. The strongest union, the CWC said that it agreed of its own
accord while the UNP-led LJEWU said that it signed under duress.
Interestingly, the UNP leader had pledged that the LJEWU will not sign
the agreement without consulting its trade union allies in the plantations.
Despite the LJEWU signing without reference to them, it has been
business as usual between the UNP and its partners.
The plantation workers, who have been taken for a ride in style for the
third time in succession, are bitter. But the reality is that they cannot
carry out a sustained struggle until they shake off the present set of
political and trade union leaders dominating their affairs.
Brutal killing in broad daylight
Video camera footage of the forced drowning on 30th October of a 26 year
old man with a psychiatric problem was telecast by several private TV
channels in Sri Lanka. Of the four persons involved in the killing by
forcing the man to drown in the sea, only two have been identified,
although the incident took place in broad daylight with several hundred
eye witnesses. Some of the railway passengers angered by the man's
throwing stones at the train seem to have endorsed the cruel act.
Although the video footage is said to have shocked viewers, given past
experience, the outcome of the police inquiry remains questionable.
What is as worrying as police violence is the response of the public to
such violence and its attitude towards the mentally handicapped.
JVP journalists arrested
Three journalists of the JVP's Sinhala weekly 'Lanka' were arrested on 2nd
September for allegedly entering a private land without permission and
filming the construction site of a new house of a VIP in Deniyaya in the
Southern Province. The editor of 'Lanka' was taken into custody on 17 th
October by the CID for questioning in connection with a news story in
'Lanka'. He was later released.
The JVP protested strongly against the arrest, which the left and
democratic organizations too condemned. But ironically the JVP had, not
long ago, actively or passively endorsed the arrest of Tamil and Sinhalese
journalists on the pretext fighting terrorism.
Exercising the right not to vote
The people of Jaffna did something remarkable at the elections to the
Jaffna Municipal Council: 78% of the electorate did not vote, and 6% of
the voters, numbering more than the votes received by the TULF which
won a seat, spoilt their ballot papers. Thus 80% of Jaffna boycotted the
polls without an active campaign calling for a boycott. The New
Democratic Party had issued a statement calling for a boycott, but did not
campaign for it.
This exercise of the democratic right of a people not to vote in the
absence of a choice has stunned the political parties, as well as NGOs who
cannot understand politics without ballot boxes. All manner of
explanations have been given for voter 'indifference'. It was really not
lack of interest in politics but a clear understanding of politics that led to
the rejection of the ballot box.
International Events
Afghanistan: The deepening crisis
A fraudulent victory
That the presidential election in Afghanistan on 20 th August was
fraudulent was beyond doubt to even the supporters of Karzai. But it took
a lot of convincing for those in power to accept the obvious. Charges of
fraud were supported by the EU monitors according to whose statement
of 16 th September, a third of the votes received by Karzai (54.6% against
27.8% for his main opponent Abdullah Abdullah) were suspect in an
election with a pathetic turnout of just over 38%.
On 21 st October, after a re-scrutiny of part of the votes, the UN-backed
Electoral Complaints Commission decreed that that Karzai secured 48%
of the vote against just under 31% for Abdullah. Under US pressure out
of concern for nominal credibility, Karzai agreed to a run-off vote on 7 th
November, but rejecting several recommendations of the Commission on
the conduct of the run-off vote.
Abdullah demanded on 30th October, as a precondition for participation
in the runoff vote, the dismissal of the country's top election officer,
whom he held responsible for the electoral fraud. When it was clear that
Karzai's view will prevail, Abdullah announced his withdrawal, while
rejecting the result of the election. Although Karzai was declared elected
on 2nd November, doubts linger about the credibility of the government,
with the US needing an effective ruling partner in its war.
It is unclear why Abdullah avoided a call for an electoral boycott or a
street protest by his followers. The US had promoted the idea of power
sharing between the contestants during the height of dispute. Abdullah,
although tempted, decided against it. Interestingly, before his
withdrawal, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton downplayed the
prospect of a withdrawal, saying that it would not undermine the
legitimacy of the election, making clear that a clean election was the least
concern of the Obama administration.
Despite bickering within the US establishment about the aptness of
announcing additional troop deployment before the outcome of the
presidential election was finalised, the view of the government of
Afghanistan on US troop deployment mattered the very least to the US.
Whoever was elected would have to be a US puppet to survive. The
electoral fraud has, however, divided anti-Taliban groups at a time when
the US and its allies are pressing for unity in the face of growing
insurgent strength.
President Obama, his top diplomats and military advisers have been
engaged in a remarkably public debate over the size of a future military
force and how to deal with a Karzai government that it has accused of
corruption and ineptitude. A more serious fault of Karzai had been his
occasional protest, under pressure from among his supporters, against
excesses by the forces of occupation.
Sources: dawn.com, nytimes.com
2009: the most fatal year for US-led forces
The year 2009 is already the most fatal for foreign forces deployed in
Afghanistan since 2001. Eleven US soldiers were killed on 26 th October,
bringing US casualties to 282 (out of 461 for all forces of occupation) by
the end of October compared with 630 (out of 1047) between 2001 and
2008. The number of fatalities already far exceed the figures for 2008,
according to icasualties.org.
The killing of five soldiers by an Afghan policeman at a checkpoint on 4th
November in the province of Helmand (the most violent region in the
country) has added a further dimension to the problems faced by the
aggressors, when public opinion in the US is going against the war and
President Obama's strategy for Afghanistan is under strong criticism. The
political problem is bound to intensify in the US with Obama announcing
the deployment of reinforcements.
Sources: icasualties.org; granma.cu/ingles
Bangladesh: Protesting Sell-Outs
On 24th August the government of Bangladesh approved offshore oil and
gas exploration deals in three sea blocks of the resource-rich Bay of
Bengal with ConocoPhillips of the US and Tullow Oil Ltd of Ireland.
Critics point out that a provision in the off-shore deals allows the foreign
companies to export up to 80% of extracted gas, posing a threat to the
energy security of Bangladesh.
The National Committee for Protection of Oil-Gas-Mineral Resources and
Electricity and Ports organised a massive protest in Dhaka on September
14th calling upon the people to foil the conspiracy of siphoning off
precious national wealth. Among other calls were:
• Boldly resist the Indian project of constructing a river dam in
Tipaimukh, which will prove a new death trap for Bangladesh.
• Build broader unity of patriotic people against imperialist domination.
• Ensure extraction of mineral resources with 100% social ownership;
ensure fuel security for the country.
The police resorted to brutal lathti charge against the peaceful rally. A
number of people including women and senior leaders of the National
Committee and the Revolutionary Workers' Party of Bangladesh were
seriously wounded. The incident has led to widespread protests against
the brutal attacks by the 'Mahajot' (grand alliance) government.
On 29 th September, leaders of the National Committee held further
protest meetings and formed human chains in different districts opposing
the offshore oil and gas deals with multi-national companies.
Source: thedailystar.net
India: State Terror on the Rampage
Bastar, Chattisgarh
The UPA government declared its 'Operation Greenhunt', a paramilitary
offensive said to eliminate Maoist terror; and CoBRA battalions along
with the Chhattisgarh State Police unleashed state terror in the Bastar
region spread over 40,000 km 2. The paramilitary offensive and central
government backing for the state government's patronage of the
notorious Salwa Judum militia in Chhattisgarh are in breach of
recommendations of the Expert Committee of the Planning Commission,
advising against ineffective militaristic solutions and pointing to the
socio-economic malaise due to the state's neglect of a most deprived
people. Since 2005, attacks by the Salwa Judum, whose leaders have been
accused of rape and loot against the adivasis of Bastar, rendered
homeless around 200,000 adivasis.
The Home Ministry, which authorised the unlawful cold-blooded murder
of innocent people in large number in faked 'encounter killings', gives
publicity to killings by the Maoists in conflicts with the armed forces; but
is silent on the numerous 'encounters' in Bastar, where victims have
predominantly been identified as innocent adivasis.
By the end of October, 40 battalions of paramilitary, roughly 40,000
men, are said to have been be deployed in six districts in Chhattisgarh,
Jharkhand, Orissa and Maharashtra. Another 40 battalions are
envisaged. The strategy is said to be unlike that in Lalgarh, West Bengal,
which in itself is an admission of failure in Lalgarh, while the Maoists
seem to be adapting fresh strategies to meet the challenge.
The government forces plan to penetrate Maoist-dominated areas, clear
them of Maoist presence, and hold and control the territory for
government agencies to move in to initiate 'developmental work'. Thus
the identification of the Maoists as the greatest internal threat to India's
security has aims besides 'national security'. Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh has been cited by Arundathi Roy in her article "Mr Chidambaram's
War" in the Outlook India Magazine of 9.11.2009 as telling Parliament on
June 18, 2009: "If left-wing extremism continues to flourish in parts
which have natural resources of minerals, the climate for investment
would certainly be affected". That reveals his government's real concerns.
(See http://outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262519)
The 'counterinsurgency' operation in Chhattisgarh is a war on the people,
denounced by reputed personalities, human rights organisations, and the
genuine left. Vacillation in the CPI(M) quarters tainted by blood of the
innocents of Nandigram, Singur and Lalgarh was not surprising.
Sources: www.tehelka.com, timesofindia.indiatimes.com
Lalgarh, West Bengal
The People's Committee Against Police Atrocities (PCPA) was formed in
response to police violence against the tribal people in Lalgarh. Hostility
of the central and state governments and betrayal by opportunist political
parties led to a call for autonomy for Jangalkhand in the south of the
state like the demands of Gorkha and Koch people in the north. The PCPA
leader Chhatradhar Mahato who led the initiative was arrested in
September by deception, adding to the fury of the tribal people.
In October, the PCPA declared that it is now an armed militant force,
giving the lie to the government and mainstream media propaganda that
it was a frontal outfit of CPI (Maoists). Within 24 hours of the declaration
"We plan to take control of government offices in Jangalmahal" by PCPA
leader Asit Mahato in late October, the PCPA led hundreds of villagers,
armed with traditional weapons, to stop a Rajdhani Express and hold its
drivers and passengers hostage for more than five hours. Unlike Maoist
guerrilla operations, this was entirely a mass protest activity by which the
villagers successfully sent a warning to the state without bloodshed.
Sources: sanhati.com, Frontline6.11.2009
Pricol incident and police witch-hunt
Pricol Ltd in Coimbatore is a company notorious for its practices of locking
out of workers, transferring them, and depriving them of their earned
wages and other statutory benefits. The management has acted in blatant
violation of the laws of the land, bullied workers in order to force them to
leave their union, and blatantly refused to negotiate with the trade union,
belonging to the All India Central Council of Trade Unions (AICCTU).
A hunger strike by Pricol workers including many women, ended on its
16th day after the Labour Minister of Tamilnadu responded to a Calling
Attention Motion on 30th June, raised by members of the Tamilnadu
legislature from the AIADMK, Congress, PMK, CPI, and CPI(M),
accepting that Pricol management had violated labour laws and assuring
of action against them. But the Pricol management continued to disregard
all state government and court rulings, thus creating a situation that
prolonged the struggle of the workers. Frustration led to the accidental
killing of Mr. George, Vice President of Pricol. The AICCTU condemned
the killing unconditionally and pointed out that the incident occurred in
the context of flagrant violation of labour laws and constitutional rights.
The state police maliciously targeted AICCTU and its central leadership
in false cases and issued an FIR against S Kumarasami, National
President, AICCTU. The AICCTU has demanded a high level inquiry into
the incident, withdrawal of false and fabricated cases against
Kumarasami, end to arrests and witch-hunt of workers, and bringing to
book the management of Pricol for violation of labour laws, and court and
government orders regarding the dispute. The call by the AICCTU has
received support from left and progressive quarters across India.
Source: cpiml.org/pgs/ml_upd/vol12/12_42.html
Nepal: Towards a mass uprising
India's use of opportunist and reactionary political parties to topple the
government led by the Maoists (UCPN-M) and cobbling up of a 22-party
alliance to form a government led by politicians rejected by the people at
the elections has plunged Nepal into a political crisis.
Without the Maoists (UCPN-M), the largest party in the Constituent
Assembly (CA) the government cannot muster the necessary majority to
draft the new constitution. The Maoists (UCPN-M) would not deviate
from the principles agreed between them and the Seven Party Alliance
(SPA) that led to the setting up of the CA.
Disunity and threat of desertion by allies forced Premier Madhav Kumar
Nepal to make the occasional conciliatory gesture towards the Maoists,
like that on 1 st August when he declared that the government was serious
about the integration of the Maoist army with the Nepal Army, one of the
issues behind the toppling of the Maoist-led government.
The ability of the government to uphold peace and resolve the crisis was
always in doubt, since the foreign powers on whose support it relies have
other ideas. Notably, in late July 2009, Defence Minister Bidhya
Bhandari requested India to resume military assistance to Nepal, and was
confident of resumption of military assistance that had remained stalled
since 2005. The Maoist leadership denounced her plea to India.
Yet, the Maoists, the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML agreed to form a six-
member taskforce to accelerate the drafting of the new constitution. The
parties forged consensus to form a political mechanism to draft the
constitution, enable army integration, and take the peace process to its
logical end. In practice, however, the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML
drag their feet and conspire with their foreign masters to outmanoeuvre
the Maoists.
As it became abundantly clear that the government was not serious about
meeting its commitment to draft a constitution in the spirit of the
agreements between the SPA and the Maoists, the Maoists warned that
they will mobilize the masses to persuade the government to abide by
earlier pledges. The Maoists started their agitation after several rounds of
talks with the Nepali Congress and CPN (UML), the main ruling parties,
failed to reach consensus on any issue. For instance, when the Maoists
demanded a parliamentary discussion of President Ram Baran Yadav's
overturning of the dismissal of former Army Chief Rukmangad Katawal to
label it 'wrong' in one or the other way, the NC and UML disagreed and
argued that the Interim Constitution could instead be amended to clarify
the jurisdiction of the President.
The government underestimated public support for the demands of the
Maoists, and with the build-up towards the second round of nationwide
protests led by the Maoists, leading members of the ruling alliance
frantically resumed their 'Delhi run' starting in late October, to meet
Indian political leaders of the Congress, BJP, CPI(M) and others. The
Maoist leaders pledged to continue their efforts to resolve the dispute by
through dialogue even as they announced their programme of mass
protests starting 1 st November, which they asserted will not violate the
terms of the 2006 peace agreement.
1 st Nov.: Formal declaration of the movement and countrywide torch
demonstration
2nd Nov.: Whole day gherao of all Village Development Councils and
Municipalities
th & 5 th Nov.: Whole day gherao of all District Administration Offices
9 th Nov.: Declaration of Autonomous Republics
10th Nov.: Blockade of the Kathmandu Valley including the Airport
12th , 13th Nov.: Mass gherao of Government
The protests have been a massive success, and the government is in a
panic. Prompted by India, it pitched into UN Secretary-General Ban Ki
Moon, who, in his report to the UN Security Council on 30th October
urged the ruling parties and the Maoists to work on the basis of
consensus and form a national government, and charged him of meddling
in Nepal's internal affairs. It was unsurprising since India always
resented the UN Mission in Nepal (UNMIN), and has encouraged the
government of Nepal to terminate UNMIN presence in Nepal when its
term expires in January 2010.
Sources: nepalnews.com; news.outlookindia.com; mikeely.wordpress.com
Pakistan: Road to Destruction
A country at war with itself
The US, while slipping up in its war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, is
destabilising Pakistan by its military activities inside Pakistan. Eight
major terrorist attacks took place in October with 200 lives lost,
compared with just one in August and none in September. Terrorist
attacks, already spilling into November are getting increasingly costly in
terms of loss of life and extent of damage to property. An 18-hour siege of
the army general headquarters (GHQ) on 10th October left the
Government of Pakistan and its armed forces clutching at straws for
explanations, while people felt increasingly insecure.
The army's success in wresting control of the Swat Valley boosted the
army's morale and added to its prestige but did little good for Pakistan's
security of in the medium and long term. The signs are that the campaign
launched in mid-October in South Waziristan will lead to bigger losses of
life of combatants and civilians. A senior Red Cross official has reportedly
said in late October that there was evidence of a sharp rise in civilian
casualty rate. On 4 th November, the Pakistan daily, Dawn, reporting
military claims of capture of Taliban territory and the killing of over 390
militants with a loss of 45 troops since the South Waziristan operation
began, pointed out that there were sporadic outbreaks of violence in the
Swat valley despite the successful offensive in July.
The aid package of US$1.5 billion a year for the next five years passed by
the US Congress, meantime, requires Pakistan to cease support for
terrorist groups on its soil and to ensure that the military does not
interfere with civilian politics. President Asif Ali Zardari's acceptance of
the conditions has added to his unpopularity. Many, including members
of the armed forces, see the US Congress conditions as undue
interference and suspect sinister US motives.
New York Times on 6 th October commented that US moves to vastly
expand its aid as well as the role of its embassy and private security
contractors to monitor the handling of the aid, are aggravating an already
volatile anti-American mood while the US demands sterner action against
the Taliban. Among matters that are seen as US bullying are public
assertions by US diplomats and officials as to how Pakistan should
conduct its affairs. Although they have led to defiant responses from
Pakistan's defence establishment, the US will have its way in the end.
Well publicized plans for a massive US embassy building to house a staff
of 1000, with security for some diplomats provided by a US-based private
security firm, DynCorp have reinforced the image of the US as a bully.
The US conduct in Pakistan is increasingly seen to be like that in Iraq and
Afghanistan. Pakistani military and intelligence agencies resent the
moves to develop DynCorp as a parallel security organisation; and the
raids in September by Islamabad police on Inter-Risk, a local company
hired by DynCorp to provide security guard trainees for US diplomats,
and the arrest of its owner reflect a growing resentment that could lead to
a review of the role of DynCorp.
Barrister Zafarullah Khan, a prominent Pakistani lawyer, has filed a
petition in Pakistan's Supreme Court against the Interior, Foreign and
Law ministries, protesting against the US decision to expand its embassy
in Islamabad and charging the US Embassy of making illegal efforts to
acquire from the Pakistani Government more than 56 acres (22.5
hectares), sufficient for a military airport or an army base. The filing of
the petition was amid reports in the Pakistani media of US plans to
deploy a 1,000-strong contingent of US marines to its embassy. The US
insists that the expansion is essential to accommodate additional staff
(spies, mercenaries and war criminals) to deal with the increase in
Washington's financial aid to Pakistan, but the petition warns that giving
away Pakistani land to the US would jeopardize the stability and
sovereignty of Pakistan.
Sources: dawn.com; nation.com.pk; philly.com/inquirer; aljazeera.com
Army and killing of civilians
The Pakistan daily Dawn reported on 1 st September that bodies of 251
people, many of them tortured, were found dumped in the Swat valley,
most of them in Mingora and rural areas, once militant strongholds now
under firm military control. The military's attempts to dismiss the torture
and killings as revenge reprisals by local individuals against the ruthless
Taliban fail to explain the scale and pattern of the offences. The pattern
of the deaths and disappearances has led local residents, human rights
workers and some Pakistani officials to infer that the military has had a
role. The number of killings and the presence of mass graves suggest that
the military could have done it to settle scores for its heavy casualties as
well as to silence support for the Taliban. Notably, the International
Committee of the Red Cross, investigating the illegal killings, was ordered
by the military to leave Swat in August.
Sources: dawn.com, nytimes.com
Land lease and risk of food shortages
The acquisition of farmland in poor countries, to meet the food needs of
richer nations is a trend that continues despite discussion at various
international forums. Fears have been raised of a likely increase in food
insecurity in Pakistan if a deal to lease out 200,000 hectares (500,000
acres) of farmland to Saudi Arabia goes ahead. Pakistan Kissan Rabita
Committee, an alliance of 22 organisations representing peasants,
observed, "Leasing land to foreign companies or the Saudis will not
benefit Pakistan in any way. It will aggravate the worsening agricultural
crisis we face".
The fact that hunger is rampant in Pakistan adds to the concerns about
land leasing. However, the government is moving ahead with the deal and
a Ministry of Agriculture spokesperson told the media that the land would
be used by Saudi Arabia to grow fruit, vegetables and crops. The
government plans to lease land to other countries as well.
Sources: irinnews.org; dawn.com
The Philippines: Enemies of Peace
Who is scuttling peace negotiations?
The Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP) has
blamed the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) for lack
of progress in the resumption of formal talks between the NDFP and the
Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP), with Norwegian
facilitation, and accused the NDFP of scuttling the process.
Fidel V Agcaoili, spokesperson for the NDFP Negotiating Panel in his
response of September 8th 2009 pointed out that since 15 June, the date
of the agreement for the GRP to comply with the Joint Agreement on
Safety and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG), the Secretary and the
Executive Secretary of the OPAPP had only acted to prolong impediments
on NDFP consultants while issuing endless press releases proclaiming an
early end of the armed conflict. He also drew attention to the insincerity
of the Arroyo regime on the question of peace negotiations and seeking to
destroy the revolutionary forces militarily while using the peace
negotiations as a means to achieve the capitulation of the NDFP. He also
accused the US-backed Arroyo regime of victimising NDFP panel
members, consultants and other JASIG-protected persons on the one
hand while maliciously blaming the NDFP for scuttling the peace
negotiations.
Reversing 7 years of injustice
Meanwhile in Europe, the European Court of First Instance (ECFI) on
30th September knocked down the unjust decision of the Council of the
European Union which unjustly placed Prof. Jose Maria Sison, the Chief
Political Consultant of NDFP on a terrorist black list. The ECFI decision
demonstrated that Prof. Sison was not the subject of any investigation or
conviction for any act of terrorism and therefore the Council of the EU
had no valid ground at all to put Prof. Sison on its terrorist blacklist. The
Court cited the statement of the then Dutch Foreign Minister De Hoop
Scheffer on 8 th October 2002 before the Dutch Parliament stating there
was no reason to even start a criminal investigation against Prof. Sison,
and noted that this was done less than three weeks before the EU Council
put Prof. Sison on its terrorist blacklist on 28 th October 2002.
The unjust blacklisting of Prof. Sison, and the Communist Party of the
Philippines and the New People's Army, two major allied organizations of
the NDFP, has seriously prejudiced peace negotiations between the GRP
and the NDFP. After the terrorist listing of Prof. Sison, the CPP and the
NPA by the USA, the GRP, the Council of the EU and some other
governments sought to divert attention from addressing the roots of the
armed conflict to persuading the NDFP to sign a so-called Final Peace
Accord (FPA) formulated one-sidedly by the GRP, and designed for the
capitulation and surrender of the NPA. The ECFI decision is a blow to the
mean attempts by the GRP and its US masters.
Source: ndfp.net
Israel: Double Standards of the West
The UN nuclear assembly voted on 18 th September to urge Israel to
accede to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and place all atomic sites
under UN inspections, in a surprise victory for Arab states. The
resolution, passed narrowly, for the first time in nearly two decades,
expresses concern about "Israeli nuclear capabilities" and calls on
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed al-Baradei to
work on the issue.