|
With
the decisive conventional military defeat of the LTTE
and the elimination of its leadership by the armed
forces, there is a historic opportunity for a just and
lasting peace. The victory celebrations, the honouring
and feting of the political and military leadership, the
surge of patriotism and nationalist fervour must not
obscure the stark and simple fact that there is a
conflict to be resolved and peace to be won.
None
of this is easy, but all the more important precisely
because of this. The military has done the job it was
ordered to do; the politicians have to follow in doing
theirs. Over the years, this is an opinion that has been
shared with me by many a member of the armed services.
There
is a limited utility to the use of force and military
force cannot be a substitute for politics. All the
clichés apply – a political defeat must not be snatched
from the jaws of military victory.
In
this respect, the President’s speech to parliament on
Tuesday held out the promise of progress ahead on the
political front. However, so did the APRC. For decades
as we have fought we have argued the pros and cons of a
political settlement of this conflict. In substantive
terms it is not that there is nothing new under the sun
as far as constitutional reform as an instrument of
conflict resolution is concerned. It is that political
commitment, courage and imagination have been lacking.
Political settlement
We now
have a political leadership, which enjoys the
overwhelming support of the majority Sinhala polity and
accordingly the political support to underpin a
democratic and lasting peace, reconciliation and unity.
Once a meaningful political settlement is pursued in
earnest and accomplished, major plaudits and honours
will most definitely be in order. Until then, we have
the promise of possibility, the memories of failure and
the critical job unfinished.
A
political settlement is by no means a panacea. The
experience of Perumal and now Pillayan reveals that
whatever it looks like on paper it can always be
frustrated in practice. President Rajapakse must use
his considerable political support and savvy to convince
his majority constituency that as with inclusive and
sensitive celebrations of military victory, a political
settlement in settlement of an ethnic conflict must be
generous and sincere. Or else, the risk of going back
to the future could be great.
The
environment in which this is to happen, though now
marked by jubilation and relief over military victory is
also one in which a major humanitarian crisis persists
and with it human rights violations and the culture of
impunity.
Consequently a holistic approach to ending the conflict
within a framework of peace, reconciliation and unity
requires that this crisis be addressed rapidly and
constructively.
We
need international cooperation for this. Therefore the
crude, combative populism that has characterised the
international relations of the regime in the last three
months must be abandoned. Is there really any sound
reason for restricting the access of international
humanitarian agencies to the camps and to the war zone,
particularly since there probably are civilians still
trapped in the latter who are badly in need of basic
assistance?
Something to hide
A
minister has ventured the opinion that this is being
done to provide relief to the IDPs — more vehicles in
the camps will be tantamount to harassing them. Are the
international humanitarian agencies pests, as this seems
to suggest or is it the case that access is being
restricted because there is something to hide?
This
takes on a greater importance and pertinence in the
context of calls for an investigation of the allegations
of war crimes and crimes against humanity by both
sides.
Reconciliation requires that we know what happened. We
cannot move forward by allowing unverified allegations
to constitute the basis of myths of victimhood which in
turn will fuel grievance and conflict. The truth needs
to be known and justice needs to be done. Whilst this
will be to the discomfort of both sides it is necessary
in order to prevent the trading of allegations and
counter-allegations into the future. And in this
context, there should be a monument to the civilians of
all ethnicities who sacrificed their lives.
The
onus of responsibility in all of this will lie with the
government. This does not in any way, however, vitiate
the major responsibility that falls on the shoulders of
the leaders of the Tamil polity. They have to step out
from under the shadow of the LTTE and lead the Tamil
polity back into mainstream democratic politics.
Time
is of the essence here, since there are likely to be
local elections in the north and a general election in
the very near future. Most importantly, the Tamil
political leadership that has survived this war, needs
to take on the responsibility for the protection of the
IDPs and their immediate needs. It would be fatal if
they were to fail in this task and rely on the
international community and India in particular, for
instruction as to what to do. Credible, independent
leaders are the need of the hour.
The
celebrations are understandable, but there is no getting
away from the stark reality of the not inconsiderable
unfinished business.
 |
