Making Peace
War is putting hot lead and shards of metal into enough internal organs that there aren’t bodies or minds left to resist. It’s pretty terrible for everyone involved. However, as Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama said, There will be times when nations – acting individually or in concert will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.»
Sri Lanka needs a national narrative that includes everyone
The greater consensus in Sri Lanka today was that the war was morally justified. Or at least practically justified. Personally, I’m more morally confused than ever. I’m glad the war is over but I mourn the cost. My great concern near the end was not the war — which by then was a force of nature — but how do we come together going forward.
Back And Forth
I think most Sri Lankans share this common desire to live and go forward. But not necessarily together. Many people I’ve interacted with simply want to erase the memories and reality of the war and move forward. That is fine for the ‘winners’ in the south, but it shows no generosity or even dignity for those who, for whatever reason, found themselves on the losing side when the whistle was blown.
Thousands of people herded by the LTTE were bombed and shot. By both sides. The LTTE more callously and nihilistically than the army by far, but it’s not like the army was shooting blanks. The LTTE killed pointlessly and vindictively long after their war was lost. The army killed with some purpose and won in the end, but our frail bodies know no such distinctions. We did terrible things to end the war, though in the end it may be morally justified. The moral part really depends on reconciliation.
Morality
To me, morality is not always doing the right thing, which is impossible. It is more feeling bad and trying to be better tomorrow. As Obama said in an interview, ”I think God put us here with the intention that we break a sweat trying to be a little better than we were yesterday.”
What scares me is that many Sri Lankans don’t seem to feel bad at all. Many people I interact with just want to move on without breaking a sweat. They’re bone-chillingly cool. The IDP camps, however, are hot. It’s hot in the north. I’ve seen kids with hot lead through their stomachs, with shrapnel in their legs. I don’t see how we can move forward together without somehow atoning for their reality.
Foreign interference
Of course, the baying hounds of the diaspora don’t help. War crime investigations by foreign bodies don’t help. Personally, I think the only war crime that ever gets punished is losing, and it’s not like they’re investigating themselves. I don’t think international prosecution of the people who won this war helps the Sri Lankan people. It’s a bloodsport for the diaspora, but it just hurts the middle here.
I don’t want anyone to be punished or, more to the point, I’m not in a position to punish anyone. I also wouldn’t have anything to replace them. The UN and the US are also impotent, so they should just chill out for 15 minutes and let Sri Lanka sort itself out. The foreign bogeyman just corrupts the dialogue.
National narrative
More than punishment, I think Sri Lanka needs a national narrative that includes everyone. ‘The war was pristine and awesome’ leaves too many people out. Saying ‘the war was terrible but justified’ is somehow more inclusive. Not to punish or blame anyone, but just to give people a space to both grieve and achieve.
Whether we can tell a story that includes every experience in the island determines our character as a nation. I also think telling the truth and having guilt also shows our character as human beings. I doubt this will happen, and we’ll probably still be OK. The default is to let a new oblivious generation emerge into a prosperity unburdened by history.
To paraphrase another Nobel Laureate, Max Planck — new ideas emerge because old scientists die. There are generations coming up that don’t remember this war, and more power to them. Me, however, I believe in something higher than myself and I am a bit scared of what happens when I die. So, for that reason, I’d like to make my peace.
Many thanks Indi for opening this timely narrative right here and now.
All of what you cite from Prez Obama is fine, conditionally. That is, that whether there is truly a position when as individuals or nations, the use of force becomes morally justifiable. Let me elaborate. Let’s leave the holocaust, Vietnam, Middle East etc alone and focus on Lanka.
Very naively, this was a home and home affair, as some pundits are clever in pointing out asking foreigners to keep out!
Well, can anyone disagree that since about the time that the British, in helping evolve this land into a modern democracy, introduced the gradual inclusion of ‘educated Ceylonese,’ to an evolving system of ‘committees’ that assited with governance, -[as'executive committees,' 'legislative committees,' with a limited number of Ceylonese able to vote, until the Donoughmore Commission recommended universal adult franchise in 1931 and we had full elected members in the State Council], – there were strains on the relationship between Sinhalese and Tamils?
While there was overall cooperation of all communities under the Ceylon National Association and later Ceylon National Congress c1919, in the independence movement, the tensions remained beneath the surface as these two communities had a history of conflict and tales of glory about the battle won by the King Dutugemunu over the northern King Elara being being cited out of context.
If representation that was community or race-based and later made territorial were some initial causes of tension, the post independence tensions just expanded to economic opportunity, education and employment. In other words, socio-economic and political tensions, and these grew after 1948. This situation required delicate consultation between all the communities.
However, sadly, it was found expedient by the southern Sinhalese majority to violate the spirit of the independence constitution and the protection it afforded by section 29 to all communities to be free from discriminatory legislation.
Once the Sinhalese found it expedient to do so, there was no stopping several race riots through 1958 to its culmination in the black July of 1983, and the start of the open armed conflict. It took a fairly long time for the Lankan state and its forces to get their heads around the mix of guerilla type operations and formal warfare that the Tamil militants mastered with suicide bombings thrown in to compound the situation.
What’s the morality issue?
Simply, and again, naively, there is no morality in the use of force against anyone, and the taking of lives; and, in this case, of one’s fellow-citizens in a modern democracy. This grave moral wrong can be attributed to the early armed groups and the later single strong group called the LTTE, on the part of Tamils, and the Sinhalese leaders in the successive Lankan governments since 1956, and more particularly, since 1977. The moral wrong is compunded by both the lack of sound consultation and dialogue that the Lankan government was obliged to initiate, and the intransigence that the LTTE came to be famous for on many occasions.
It is this latter fact that undermined the single-most sincere attempt by a Sinhala leader, the Hon Ranil Wickremasinghe, who created an international safety net while offering the olive branch to the LTTE. It may be agreed by some, that the opportunity that the Hon RW got to do this was too late! That is, that the war had been allowed to go on for too long since c.1981 or thereabouts, when the violation of the election laws at the DDC elections sent a crucial message to even moderate Tamils that there was no possibility of expecting a fair dialogue with the Sinhalese leadership! 1983 simply capped this fallout! In the time between that and 2001 when the CFA was introduced, the LTTE had mastered other means of intransigence and reentering the battle field. The sophisticated possibilities that could have led to an honourable peace for all was lost on both the LTTE leaders and some southern politicos! If there was one leader who despite the enormous unpopularity of it, was prepared to be patient and sit it out with discipline, it was the Hon RW.
The morality of the approach of the CFA and the involvement of the global human community cannot be denied, by any fair-minded person. That the Sinhalese suffered many losses of lives and limbs as soldiers or civilians caught in the deadly bombs detonated in public places created an enormous amount of illwill and and a desire to see the LTTE annihilated, is understandable.
But the moral issue that Indi raises goes beyond that, because of the civilian fallout or, the fact that there was an enormous amount of Tamil civilians who were not armed LTTE cadre, and amongst the LTTE cadre there were so many conscripted against their will! What about Lankan soldiers? They too were there in large numbers because of the livelihood that soldiering offered! There must certainly be fewer there for king and country! And what king, anyway?
It is in this background that we must evaluate the morality behind the Lankan leaders who let the issues get so politicised without focussing on opening economic sectors and opportunity, education and development projects in the North and East as well as other provinces; the morality behind the National Language Act 1958; the morality behind the 1972 constitution and the departure from the 1948 constitution that was particularly designed to administer a multi-communal polity that Ceylon was; the morality behind the 1978 constitution that still did not undo what the 1972 did; the morality behind the many omissions of the SRDB abd the JRJ governments; the morality of Prez CBK in mishandling peace efforts; the morality of Prez CBK in prematurely dissolving the 2001 government; and the morality of Prez MR in striking an agreement with the late VP to disenfranchise the northern voters that denied a strengthened presidency for the Hon RW to see the peace process inititated with the CFA to its logical conclusion.
Even if that logical end meant a federal system, let us not fool ourselves that the same issue cannot crop up once more if this issue is to be left in the hands of an inept MR led government. This brings one to question the morality of seeking a high office that one simply does not have the capacity for.
The folly of MR’s raw ambition of 2005 led to a situation that presented itself to wage an all out war. With whom? One’s own citizens or a section of it. But actually it transcended that as the whole citizenry from journalists to anyone whom the administration wished to brand as traitors came to be endangered. Self -defined notions of patriotism and treason came to mark the MR administration as scoundrels whose last resort was ill-defined patriotism!
If there be any worthwhile definition of patriotism in today’s world, it must encapsulate the whole of humanity, and due regard for international norms of conduct and the rule of law! To say that the US violates international norms of military engagement in the Middle East does NOT give a moral right to the Rajapakse administration to not seek a political solution earnestly!
The fact that the All Party Peace Conference was derailed midstream points clearly at the preoccupation that there was to decimate a part of the citizenry for their belief that they were discriminated against! The intransigence of the LTTE fails to be an excuse to the end. Did not the CFA drastically reduce the numbers of dead soldiers? As the Hon RW said on his election in 2001, when he addressed the nation from the premises of the Gangaramaya temple, citing the Licchavis of ancient India, there was clearly one way for good governance and management of conflict, and that was through dialogue. Period. The morality of the use of force is irrelevant to the wise. To a myopic, ambitious, inept, politcal animal, it can serve a lesser cause, though.
Pardon me, but I cannot fail to imagine that ‘…the breaking sweat trying to better yesterday’s performance,’ must mean that we engage in greater patience and discipline in the use of force, while we pour more sweat in trying to avoid it.
There is no other way to morally justify the means or the end. In fact, if as Indi notes, we wish to move on without breaking a sweat , that is just a foolish dream. All Sinhalese, because of this so-called war victory, must examine our conscience and engage in some part to break a sweat to developing our individual sense of compassion, and collectively, do much to reach out and assist those of broken limb and heart on all sides, if there is to be some meaningful commencement of a narrative towards reconcilliation.
All those engaged in voluntary work with the IDP children and children of soldiers, dead and injured, conducting psycho-social camps, and bringing relief through essential goods etc must be highly commended for their part in this narrative of reconciliation.
Moving forward though, is an entirely different matter. That can come only with enlightened leadership; leadership that is not merely populist, and knows what truly being righteous means!
May we be blessed by just, fair and moral rule! May we have that noble space to make peace with ourselves and our fellowcitizens here and now!
May all be safe and well!
The more INDIs and Pandukas that speak out the more Tamils who will begin to believe they will be equals with the Sinhalese one day. But sadly their voices are drowning in the Tsunami of the “Sri Lanka belongs to the Sinhalese” chant.
Thank you N K Ratnam for your kind thoughts.
Way back in the 1980s, the Bahai Centre at Thimbirigasyaya, passing the Police grounds, had the beautiful words etched on the outer wall: ‘The world is but one country, and all mankind its citizenry.’
I do not know if this is still there.
If one sincerely believes that all of us have the same capacity to think, and reshape our perceptions, most of which has been foisted by society, and our experiences.
But nothing is etched in gold, nor set in concrete; they are (perceptions) impermanent, changeable and constantly being reinforced or challenged.
When we are alive to this inevitable process, and come to appreciate the power of change and observing it, within and without, there is an absolutely great power that makes anything possible.
If we are sincere enough, and not leave it to others, and start living the spirit of what we want to see (to be the change that we want to see) in our own little ways, we can create a groundswell to complement all the initiatives taken by good wiilled people and organisations, both local and international, to reach out and make this sense of equality a reality, and more, compell the politcal leaders that they can do no other or be different.
This country or for that matter, no country, belongs to any particular sect of people, but to humanity. There is one important proviso though. That is that the world is increasingly sensitive to the need to have people conform to acceptable norms of behaviour. [Civilised behaviour, if you will]. They are increasingly ready to ignore differences, provided some basic courtesies and etiquette is apparent in one’s behaviour.
It’s a wonderful world if you are prepared to see it that way, and live it accordingly. It’s all in the mind (of course, to be followed in action)!
Thank you once again NK Ratnam.
May all be safe and well!
Thank you N K Ratnam for your kind thoughts.
[I have merely corrected an obvious error in grammar in the above. Hope this is clear].
Way back in the 1980s, the Bahai Centre at Thimbirigasyaya, passing the Police grounds, had the beautiful words etched on the outer wall: ‘The world is but one country, and all mankind its citizenry.’
I do not know if this is still there.
If one sincerely believes that all of us have the same capacity to think, and reshape our perceptions, all of which has been foisted by society, and our experiences, there is so much that we can do to make life better for all.
None of these perceptions is set in concrete; they are impermanent, changeable and are constantly reinforced or challenged.
When we are alive to this inevitable process, and come to appreciate the power of change and observing it, within and without, there is an absolutely great power that results, that makes anything possible.
If we are sincere enough, and not leave it to others, and start living the spirit of what we want to see (to be the change that we want to see) in our own little ways, we can create a groundswell to complement all the initiatives taken by good wiilled people and organisations, both local and international, to reach out and make this sense of equality a reality, and more, compell the religious and politcal leaders that they can do no other, or be any different.
This country or for that matter, no country, belongs to any particular sect of people, but to humanity. There is one important proviso though. That is that the world is increasingly sensitive to the need to have people conform to acceptable norms of behaviour. [Civilised behaviour, if you will]. They are increasingly ready to ignore differences, provided some basic courtesies and etiquette is apparent in one’s behaviour.
It’s a wonderful world if you are prepared to see it that way, and live it accordingly. It’s all in the mind (of course, to be followed in action)!
Thank you once again NK Ratnam.
May all be safe and well!
Our problem is ONLY ONE. The Evil Religion.
Since the arrival of the Buddhist Monks, our Indigenous people are being genocided systematically like in Burma, Bhutan and the other Buddhist countries.
Once we got rid of those alien religions, we can have Peace and Harmony.