Will the real TNA leadership please stand up

 It is my wish that one day I can write something positive about the TNA leadership. I genuinely do. But until that day comes, one has to continue to highlight the willful omissions and commissions of the leadership. Mainly because many of those omissions are not just tactical missteps but they are strategic blunders that will set the Tamil struggle back much further.  The latest misdirection comes in the form of a response to Sivajilingam for trying to bring a resolution under NPC. A resolution that reaffirms that the Tamils are continuing to be subjected to Genocide.

If this reported response is true, it is riddled with many fallacies and conjectures.

One positive thing about Sivajilingam’s attempt at this resolution is that the debate can now be public. On the  important topic of Tamil Genocide  there needs to be a vigorous discussion at the grass root level.  This is far too important of an issue to leave it on the hands of a few “educated fools ( padiththa muddalkal ”.  

Please see the TNA leadership’s response to Sivajilingam in entirety here in Tamil.

http://www.tamilwin.com/show-RUmszARUKWfvy.html

இதேவேளை கூட்டமைப்பின் தீர்மானத்தில் சுட்டிக்காட்டப்பட்டுள்ள விடயங்களாவன,

01 'இனப்படுகொலை' என்ற சொல்லுக்கு சமூக, அரசியல், ரீதியிலான பல வரைவிலக்கணங்கள் இருந்த போதும் அதற்கான சட்ட வியாக்கியங்களானது இனப்படுகொலை சமவாயத்தின் 2ம் உறுப்புரையிலும், பொருத்தமான சந்தர்ப்பங்களில் மற்றைய சர்வதேச ஆவணங்களிலும் காணப்படுகின்றது.

The response leads with emphasizing the legal premises of article 2 of the convention on the prevention and punishment of Genocide.  This outlook itself is flawed.  What Sivagilingam, as a representative of the people, tries to bring is a simple resolution that expresses the wish and will of the people. It is neither a legislation nor does it have anything to do with International Law.  If he gets enough votes in support, resolution becomes the political expression of the council.  If he is wrong to bring the resolution, then Tamil people shall judge him.  Tamil people and their representatives must have the right to free expression on any democratic platform.  TNA leadership says there are social and political interpretations of the term Genocide. There is a subtle allusion that may be Tamils should not, perhaps not yet, get into the legal aspects of the term or the parameters of article 2.  Tamils do meet the criteria used in any interpretation of the term Genocide. Be that Social, Political or Legal. Nonetheless, the question of legal threshold does not even arise in this case since it is people’s expression in the form of a resolution.  Without Tamil’s own collective expression on Genocide, how would one expect anyone else to do this?  

02. இலங்கையில் தமிழ் மக்களுக்கு இழைக்கப்படும் கொடுமைகளை இந்த விரிவாக்கப்பட்ட சமூக அரசியல் வரைவிலக்கணங்களில் தாம் தெரிந்து கொள்ளும் ஒரு கூம்புக் கண்ணாடிக்கூடாக கண்டுகொள்ளும் உரித்து தமிழ்த் தேசிய கூட்டமைப்பு உறுப்பினர்களுக்கும், தமிழ் மக்களுக்கும், இலங்கையின் அனைத்து பிரஜைகளுக்கும், அனைத்துலக சமுகத்தினருக்கும் உண்டு. இவ் உரிமையினை அடிக்கடி அவர்கள் உபயோகிப்பதுண்டு.

03. சர்வதேச குற்றங்களின் விசாரணை ஒன்றுக்கு பொருத்தமான வரைவிலக்கணம் எனப்படுவது இனப்படுகொலை சமவாயத்தின் ஏனைய சர்வதேச ஆவணங்களிலும் காணப்படும் வரைவிலக்கணம் மட்டுமேயாகும்.

04. 1948ம் ஆண்டின் இனப்படுகொலை சமவாயத்தின் 2ம் உறுப்புரையில் காணப்படும் செய்திகள் பல தசாப்பதங்களாக இலங்கை அரசின் செயற்பாட்டாளர்களால் தமிழ் மக்கள் மீது இழைக்கப்பட்டு வருவது விவாதத்திற்கு அப்பாற்பட்ட உன்மையாகும்.

If the leadership truly believes that what is happening to the Tamil people is indeed Genocide and it is beyond debate, then why stop the expression of that at the council? Mr.Sumanthiran is quoted reiterating again yesterday that it is indeed Genocide. Why is it okay for the leadership to continue to express it to the press but not the council?  

05. ஐ.நா செயலாளர் நாயகம் நியமித்த நிபுணர்கள் தமது அறிக்கையில் இனப்படுகொலை என்ற குற்றம் இழைக்கப்பட்டதற்கான நியாயமான சாட்சிகள் இருப்பதாக சொல்லவில்லை. தமக்கு கொடுக்கப்பட்ட மட்டுப்படுத்தப்பட்ட ஆணைக்குள் இப்படியாக குற்றம் புரிவதற்கான விசேட குற்றமென செயற்றிட்ட எண்ணம் இருந்ததற்கான சான்று இல்லாதது இதற்கான காரணமாக இருக்கலாம்.

06. யுத்தக் குற்றங்களும் மனிதாபிமானத்திற்கு எதிரான குற்றங்களும் இரு சாராரும் இழைத்தமைக்கான நியாயமான சான்று இருப்பதாக இந்த நிபுணர்குழு தீர்மானித்திருக்கின்றது. இதில் அரசாங்க செயற்பாட்டாளர்கள் இழைத்ததாக கூறப்படும் அழிப்பு மற்றும் துன்புறுத்தல் ஆகிய மனிதாபிமானத்திற்கு எதிரான குற்றங்களும் அடங்கும்.

The Panel of Experts indeed did not have the mandate to look into the charges of Genocide as is the case with OSIL. Here is what the Panel Of Expert member Ms. Yasmin Sooka said in her interview to Tamil Guardian

"I do think that when the [forthcoming OHCHR] inquiry takes place they will need to probe this question because many Tamils have often spoken about the fact that this is a genocide, and that it has genocidal tendencies - the way in which this war prosecuted.”

"I think all of us in the Panel that were confronted with this question have always raised that there is a real need for a proper investigation when it happens to test this issue [genocide]."

Note that she says it is indeed because the Tamils themselves have asked is why OSIL will need to probe this question.

07. சர்வதேச குற்றங்களில் உயர்ந்த, தாழ்ந்த படிநிலைகள் இல்லையென்பது எமது நிலைப்பாடாகும். யுத்தக் குற்றத்தாலும் மனிதாபிமானத்திற்கு எதிரான குற்றங்களாலும் பாதிக்கப்பட்டவர்களுக்கான பாதுகாப்பும் பொறுப்புப்கூறுதலும், இனப்படுகொலையால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டோருக்கான பாதுகாப்பும் பொறுப்புக்கூறலும் எவ்விதத்திலும் குறைவுபட்டதல்ல.

Another fundamentally flawed and irresponsible statement.    A charge of Genocide and a charge of Crimes Against Humanity aim at different outcomes. Prevention of Genocide is intended to protect a group. Prevention of Crimes Against Humanity primarily aims to protect individuals. This being the case on the prosecution side as well where Genocide assigns responsibility to a State or a group of people where as Crimes against Humanity can assign blame to individuals.  A good comparison between the two concepts is here. The convenience of prosecuting Individuals  through the International Criminal Court using the Rome statute and the reluctance by  Sovereign States to go after charges of Genocide  may have shifted the recent International discourse towards Crimes Against Humanity.  But that should not be the reason why Eelam Tamils should settle for vague Crimes Against Humanity charges.  The charge of Genocide goes to the heart of the Tamil national question: Under what political setup can the two groups (Sinhalese and Tamils ) coexist.  It seeks to highlight the persisting structural conditions and the continuing Sinhala indifference that put Tamil lives in danger.  One needs to wonder if the legal mumbo jumbo of the TNA is to deflect the reactive, rudderless strategy it is pursuing. Is the leadership worried  what is acceptable to the Sinhala leaders ? That their every other which way to please the Sinhala leaders  won't move forward ?.  Perhaps this is a coded message to the NPC saying Delhi will stop whatever little the UN has started if you ask too much.

08. நிபுணர்குழுவிற்கு கொடுக்கப்பட்ட ஆணையை விட ohchr யினது விசாரணை விரிவானதும் பொருத்தமான விதத்தில் யுத்தக்குற்றங்கள், மனிதாபிமானத்திற்கு எதிரான குற்றங்கள் மற்றும் இனப்படுகொலை சம்மந்தமான விசாரணை நடத்தும் தேவைப்பாட்டை உணர்த்தியுள்ளது.

A wishful interpretation of the UN resolution.  The current UN resolution does not specifically mandate the OSIL to look into the charges of Genocide. This was the request and campaign of many diaspora organizations with the exception of a few.  If OSIL feels that there is room to interpret the resolution language that way, it will only do so if Tamils themselves are demanding it. And if Tamils continue to submit evidence towards it. It will not do so voluntarily as TNA leadership implies or wishes.  This why NPC resolution is both timely and is a needed impetus from the ground.

09. தற்போது (ohchr) நடத்தும் விசாரணையில் கருத்தில் எடுக்கப்படும் சட்டம் மற்றும் சான்றுகள் பற்றிய அறிவிப்புக்கள் அல்லது தீர்மானங்கள் வடமாகமாகாணசபையோ வேறு அரசியல் கட்டமைப்போ செய்வது பொருத்தமற்ற செயலாகும் என நாம் கருதுகின்றோம்.

Why so? The very existence of NPC is due to the UNHRC and its resolution. If anyone has a conferred authority to speak to the UN, it is precisely the NPC. Not the TNA leadership. It should be noted that many of the NPC members, including the current CM, ran the election campaign on the following platform as well.

“3) We charge that Tamils living in Sri Lanka are subjected to genocide. Even after the war, demographic change through the systematic colonisation and land grab are continuing.  We are firm on our insistence that the war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity committed against the Tamil people during the war and for the last 30 years should be investigated through an international, independent, UN mechanism. “

A resolution by the council will naturally reflect, as late as it might be, the mandate they requested and were given during the election

10. இந்த சர்வதேச விசாரணையின் சுயாதீன செயற்பாட்டையும் அதற்கான மதிப்பையும் இப்படியான தீர்மானங்கள் பாதிக்கக் கூடும்.

The assertions come to end on a conjecture. It is very wrong that TNA leadership will neglect to do what is right and what is needed and place its trust on a system that has consistently failed us.  An absurd argument that Tamils should not exercise their democratic right because of a guess that  something might happen.   

11. இந்த சர்வதேச விசாரணைக்கு தமது சாட்சியங்களையும், சமர்ப்பணங்களையும், முறையான விதிகள் மூலம் மேற்கொள்ளுமாறு தமிழ்தேசிய கூட்டமைப்பு பொதுமக்களை தொடர்ந்தும் ஊக்குவிக்கும்.

All and every TNA resource should have been working on this. The youth leader of the ITAK complained a few days ago that the TNA leadership is not doing enough to help the people submit evidence. This begs the question.  Has TNA leadership been either discouraging or not helping victims of Genocide submit the evidence because they have assigned themselves to be the “legal” authorities ?

and furthermore as Dr. Packiasothy aptly  said

"Does Tamil political representation set the agenda for Tamil political aspirations or does it feel it has to adopt to an existing reality?" ... "At the end of the day, if, before you can articulate your political aspirations, you have to be concerned about what the Sinhalese would say in the South and what the Indians would say across the Palk strait, then what kind of self-determination are you talking about?

It can not be the say anything now and then do something different later kind of politics anymore . Eelam Tamils are too astute to fall for that. 

The Indo-Lanka-13A

 There is an uptick on the TNA pronouncements lately about India and her role in the 13th amendment to the Sri Lankan constitution.  A series of events perhaps contributed this: TNA delegation’s meeting with the new Indian prime minister and now the NPC Chief Minister’s letter to the Sri Lankan President invoking India’s role as a guarantor of Tamil interests.

Important to analyze Justice C.V.Wigneswaran’s letter to the Srilankan president because it is a calculated step. It fits within the strategies outlined by TNA leadership in public. First show the world that 13A is not sufficient and then ask for help in correcting it.  But unfortunately TNA leadership’s world (view) has shrunk just to Delhi:  A frog in the well world view.

The Chief Minister deserves credit for calling out the 13A for what it is: Impotent and hollow.  Better late than never.  He builds his case in the letter by highlighting “intransigence and the lack of political will and commitment on the part of the executive and the central government.”. As Hindu was eager to highlight, he also sought India’s active role.

There are two aspects, if one were to look deeper, that are troubling.

The letter is essentially targets the Srilankan president Rajapakse as the stumbling block. The letter does not include the historical facts of the similar issues faced by his predecessor and the well established pattern of Sri Lanka neglecting all democratic and legitimate wishes of the Tamil people.  The intransigence and lack of political will are not just a Rajapakse problem.  It is a Sinhala Sri lanka problem.  Rajapakse is just an other manifestation.  Varatharajah Perumal made his views known while the Indian military was still on the ground and even went as far as unilaterally declaring Independence. It is important to make this distinction between the current president and the state very clear.  He is only a tool. So as not to confuse the Deputy  to the Sheriff.  To quote from that post a year ago,

The farce that is 13A is unravelling as expected. The Sinhala hardliners have drawn their redlines.  If TNA is unable to make progress, it may take the path of supporting a regime change agenda that is underway in some quarters.  

This letter should not be the alibi for TNA’s support for regime change early next year.  It will certainly come up.  Even if you replace a Rajapakse with a Ranil, nothing will change.

As said in another post last year , on the eve of the NPC election results, is TNA being loud enough ?

“But the Sinhala Buddhist state has no reason to listen. It has no obligation to act. It never feels accountable, in any way, to the Tamils.

It will be no different this time. But despite the structural genocide against them, Tamil people have spoken loudly and clearly.

Can TNA now speak as loudly and clearly as the people who voted for them?

So loudly that it reaches the ears of the powers that pushed for the election. Scream so they are unable to go back to sleep on the Tamil issue as they did in 2009.”

How loud and clear is the Chief Minister being when he calls on India “ as a guarantor of  Tamil rights” to “actively participate and contribute in the negotiation process”?

There is no denying that India is indispensable when it comes to resolving the Tamil national question.  But thinking that she is inherently supportive of Tamil rights and is motivated to see a Thirteenth amendment Plus is only a wishful thinking.

The conflation of Indo-lanka accord with the Tamils interests is a dishonest act.  The Indo-Lanka accord has India’s interests. And the 13A has Sri Lanka’s interests. Neither has Tamils interests. More often than less, Eelam Tamil’s interests and India’s interests don't align.  Please see this post under the India’s regional policy section for India’s view of the 13th amendment.  TCSF’s Guruparan’s interview in Tamil here is a good listen on India’s view as well http://www.ctr24.com/archive/27082014-1423-%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%A3%E0%AE%95%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%AE%E0%AF%8D-%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%9F%E0%AE%BE-aug-27-2014-guruparan-k

13A is a consequence of the Indo - Lanka accord.  That is the only relationship.  India only has a moral obligation, if any, to see the 13A implemented.  What matters to India the most is the exchange of letters that preceded the accord.  An account by the then Indian ambassador JN.Dixit captures the importance of the letters.

“I pointed out that India's co-operation with Sri Lanka to solve the ethnic problem was predicated on Sri Lanka giving positive responses on these important concerns of India."

And the Indo-Lanka accord technically binds India with more obligations and with little room for it to intervene if the accord is not faithfully implemented by Sri Lanka. And India has consistently and faithfully kept to its part of the obligations under the accord. namely

1.1 Desiring to preserve the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka:

1.5 Conscious of the necessity of strengthening the forces contributing to the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka, and preserving its character as a multi ethnic, multi lingual and multi religious plural society in which all citizens can live in equality, safety and harmony, and prosper and full-fill their aspirations:

This language is still pervasive in all Indian official communications.  that all citizens live in equality, blah, blah.  

The binding resolutions of the accord only focus on the formation of the Provincial Councils for the Northern and Eastern provinces and the eventual referendum. There is nothing in there about its smooth functioning or if it functions at all.

If India had cared about the intent of the 13A, it would have intervened when the Srilankan Supreme court said the merger of the Northern and Eastern provinces was null and void.  But it did not.

On the contrary, Indian establishment has demonstrated multiple times that not going beyond 13A is even a higher policy priority than seeing the full implementation of the 13A.  India worked to undermine any possible opening to such an eventuality through a UN process. It diluted the resolutions against Sri lanka and then voted against the International Independent Investigations ensuring such a path stays shut for the Tamils. 

As the previous post showed through Dr.Destradi's work that India knew the Norwegian effort will not succeed as well. 

Sri Lanka has a much better read of the Indian position than the TNA leadership does. Or  is it that the TNA leadership is afraid to spell out the real truth to the people?  

Mavai and the CM continuing to pick on the NPC members who are trying to move the UN process towards investigation of Genocide are actually reflecting the Indian worry more than anything else. The Tamil Nadu assembly has passed far reaching resolutions on the Tamil genocide, sanctions against Sri lanka and on the referendum. Rather than rallying the people behind those initiatives and welcoming the NPC resolutions , as the UN team itself did in September, TNA leadership is busy worrying about not making Delhi upset.  With this TNA trajectory, Eelam Tamil are unfortunately stuck behind the agendas of regime change and fighting for the full implementation of the 13A.  Not much more.