[gha] Sri Lanka
- From: Wadlowz@xxxxxxx
- To: gha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 06:07:37 -0400 (EDT)
Dear Colleagues, On the anniversary of the end of the LTTE war in Sri
Lanka, my essay on the difficulties of peacemaking and of inter-religious
understanding there. Best wishes, Rene Wadlow
Sri Lanka: Four Years after the war’s end, little reconciliation, few
creative changes
Rene Wadlow
On 19 May 2009, the Government of Sri Lanka proclaimed an end to the
fighting against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelan (LTTE) led by Veluppilai
Pirabhakaran. At one point, the LTTE controlled a quarter of Sri Lanka’s
territory as they pressed their campaign for an independent state for the
country’s Tamil minority.
The start of the armed conflict in 1983 provoked the concern and then the
intervention of the Government of India concerned with regional security and
the impact of the violence on its own Tamil population in Tamil Nadu,
south India. In 1987, there was an agreement between the Governments of Sri
Lanka and India for a decentralization of authority by the creation of
provincial councils and the deployment of an Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF)
to
enforce a ceasefire.
A 13th Amendment to the Sri Lanka Constitution providing for the
establishment of provincial councils was passed by the Parliament.
Unfortunately,
these councils never became functional. The Indian Peace Keeping Force had no
peace to keep and became an agent of political discord and a target of
violence. In 1990, the last of the IPKF was withdrawn. In 1991, the former
Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was killed by a LTTE supporter, and the
Indian government ceased to play a visible role in the Sri Lankan conflict
though India watched events closely.
International Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) quickly became
concerned with the conflict in Sri Lanka. They organized conferences and made
suggestions for changes. NGOs proposed their services as mediators. One of
the first high-level seminars was organized in October 1986 in Oslo, Norway
by the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO) which led, a good
deal later, to direct mediation efforts by the Government of Norway.
Norway had been involved in aid projects in Sri Lanka from the 1950s and so
there was a history of experience and trust. However, in the end, the efforts
of the Government of Norway did not produce negotiations in good faith.
I had also been involved as the representative of Peace Brigades
International (PBI) in negotiating with the Sri Lanka Government
representatives at
the UN, Geneva, for the sending of a PBI team to Sri Lanka to undertake
non-violent protection of organizations working for peace. However, due to
Government restrictions and death threats, the PBI team was withdrawn.
Since the armed conflict had a certain religious colouring, the Tamils
being largely Hindus, the majority Sinhalese, Buddhists, and a small but
geographically-compact population of Muslims, religious organizations, both
national and international, tried to play a role as mediators or at least,
proposed possible measures for negotiations.
In the end, no offer of compromise was ever enough, and all forms of
moderation were seen as betrayal. The war continued with the last months being
particularly destructive. The psychological wounds are deep, and the healing
of individual traumas with psycho-spiritual techniques remains a real
priority, for the sufferings of the war may sow the seeds of future unrest and
a desire for revenge.
At the end of the armed conflict in 2009, the Citizens of the World again
proposed federal structures of government as a way of respecting differences
in a pluralistic society while providing the possibilities of joint
action. There is a need to develop government structures in which all citizens
feel that they belong and that their interests are safeguarded.
I have not been to Sri Lanka since the end of the fighting so that my
impressions come only from contacts in Geneva and correspondence with people
in Sri Lanka. My impression is that there is little spirit of
reconciliation. However, there is a realization that violence does not bring
reforms.
There does not seem to have been creative changes in the structure of
government or effective measures to develop popular participation in
government. But, obviously, there are on-the-ground observers who may see
positive
processes that I do not see from a distance.
The Citizens of the World continue to call for creative responses in Sri
Lanka from a population that has much suffered but which has real
intellectual and spiritual resources.
Other related posts:
- » [gha] Sri Lanka - Wadlowz
