The lessons of history are that actually there is nothing called ethnicities winning and losing. It is always forces of oppression and liberation losing and winning. ‘Fight to the end’ is vantage of the vultures hovering above for the spoils of both losers as well as winners. If ‘fight to the end’ is thrust upon peoples then they can’t help it. They have to fight it until the interests of those who orchestrate it are affected to the contrary or civilized world prevail upon those international belligerents. "Let us hope in the civilized world," writes Opinion Columnist Chivanadi.
Opinion Columnist Chivanadi
Colombo and New Delhi, the partners waging the current war against Tamil interests in the island of Sri Lanka and the media playing in their hands try to create an image that the war of three decades aiming for a separate country for Eezham Tamils is over, and if not, it should be fought to the finish.
According to them the LTTE, the driving force of Eezham Tamils behind the said political aim, has no future. While an Indian Minister says the LTTE has to lay down arms for any ceasefire or talks, the Sri Lankan authorities deny negotiation opportunities even if LTTE comes forward to lay down arms.
A Delhi-based mainstream Indian media, Hindustan Times on Tuesday said that the time for truce is over.
US-based, International Herald Tribune, on Friday carried an article by Bennet Ramberg, former State Department’s policy analyst of Bush administration, saying “ethnic civil wars end more durably when there is a decisive military victory.”
“Statistical analysis of the dozens of civil wars between 1945 and 2004 shows that 77 percent ended in a decisive victory by one side, while 23 percent ended in negotiated accords. Four fifths of the decisive victories held; two thirds of the negotiated agreements failed”, he writes.
Extending his analysis in favour of Colombo he says, “At this point, the on going offensive by the Sri Lankan military against the Tamil Tiger leadership may be the only way to end this long and bloody war.”
“The Obama administration should heed the lessons of history. In civil war, as in all war, events on the ground dictate outcomes – including opportunities for effective international mediation. Wishing that it were otherwise will not make it happen”, is the conclusion of this analyst who worked for the Bush administration that tilted the ground realities in favour of a genocidal state.
What else betrays the analyst of the article is the opportunism in logic that from ‘war on terrorism’ he at least shifted to concede that what is taking place in the island of Sri Lanka is an ethnic war.
Another media, Wall Street Journal Asia argued like Churchill defending the dropping of atom bomb that it cut short probable long-suffering in the war against Japan.
It said “The danger is that any let-up in the assault will give the Tigers time to regroup, thus extending the conflict and the civilian suffering even longer […] The civil war has come at a high cost in Sri Lankan blood and treasure, a cost that may grow as this offensive reaches its conclusion. But the cost of stepping back from the fight would be higher still.
Of particular notice of the belligerents of the said lines of thinking is that they now talk less and less or nothing at all on any political solution satisfying the aspirations of Eezham Tamils.
Arms to Colombo, alms to Vanni and mum is the word on the model of political solution, seems to be the policy of Soniaji at the helm of the Indian Establishment concurrently waging a proxy war against Tamil nation in the island of Sri Lanka.
‘In a winning war who will come forward to negotiate without the opponent laying down arms?’ was the tone of the Indian Home Minister Chidambaram.
If the war ends in favour of Colombo, then the same elements will ask, who will concede political rights to a defeated people and therefore settle with whatever you get. And later, they may even say, lay down your Tamil identity as fast as possible for your own survival, because no ethnic winner will ‘develop’ the defeated unless the identity threat is completely eliminated.
Assertive sections of Sinhala polity already envisage a political solution of the genocidal model to get rid of the Tamil question once and for all. Sri Lanka belongs to the Sinhalese, others may survive but only as subordinates, is the message coming from top to bottom of the Sinhala polity assertive today.
Those who have started the game six decades ago based on the false grounds of ‘grievances of the majority’ are now leading a dangerous politics based on ‘greed of the majority.’
Even reasonable Sinhala academics like Jayadeva Uyangoda, who was once sceptical of the Sri Lankan state coming out with any viable solution unless something comes from outside, is now pushed to the extreme of suggesting the option of Tamils seeking the ‘magnanimity’ of the majority Sinhalese for survival.
The lessons of history are that actually there is nothing called ethnicities winning and losing. It is always forces of oppression and liberation losing and winning.
‘Fight to the end’ is the vantage of vultures hovering above for the spoils of both losers as well as winners.
Dr. Wikramabahu Karunaratne’s call on Thursday to stop the war immediately and to negotiate an interim government for Tamils in their homeland was in fact stems from this wisdom, to save both the Sinhalese and Tamils.
But the way the Sinhala polity has been groomed for decades it would rather listen to the vultures than heeding to his advice.
‘Fight to the end’ is a double-edged weapon.
But, those who advocate it now, from an ethnic point of view, do not hide their wishful thinking that the Sinhalese should win and Eezham Tamils should lose.
They don’t look at it from the point of merit or justifications of a cause.
Why they think so needs careful scrutiny.
LTTE’s ‘terrorism’ and ‘dictatorship’ are smoke screens as it is no equal to Sri Lankan state in this matter.
The fact is that they only want to play the majority card for their own greed.
The investments and interests in the island based on the Colombo-centric and Sinhala majority system have to be protected and furthered.
A phenomenon of significant notice is the predominant growth of Indian investment in the island, especially in the last couple of decades, at the height of the ethnic war.
Those who play the majority card in Sri Lanka, and want to fight to the end, fail to see a bigger majority in Tamil Nadu and in global Tamils watching it with fury.
They also fail to see that ground realities are not confined to outcomes of conventional wars in contemporary times. If ground realities dictate winning and losing, then those realities lie very much in the feasibility of ground economic operations of powers and corporate economies.
Winners are not necessarily those who identify themselves for their usefulness. If not chosen for usefulness, those who can prove their sustainable capacity in ‘blighting’ ground feasibility of interests, unless their righteous aspirations are met with, can also be eventually winners.
If ‘fight to the end’ is thrust upon peoples then they can’t help it. They have to fight it until the interests of those who orchestrate it are affected to the contrary or civilized world prevail upon those international belligerents.
Let us hope in the civilized world.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow TNN on Facebook and Twitter )