INDIA SHOULD NOT ACT UNDER US PRESSURE - SWAMY

Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy today said India should not support the US-backed UN resolution for an inquiry into human rights violations by Sri Lankan army following alleged surfacing of video footage of the bullet-riddled body of LTTE chief’s son.

“India should not act under US pressure (to back the resolution). The slain LTTE chief himself used hundreds of kids as shields in his fight in Sri Lanka and the US is killing civilians in drone attacks in Pakistan,” Swamy told reporters.

Swamy said everywhere in the world such killings took place in the fight against terror. The alleged video, he said, was three year old and did not prove killing of LTTE chief V Pirabhakaran’s son by Sri Lankan forces. He criticised former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi for whipping up up “Tamil sentiments for a wrong cause”.

The report about the video in London’s The Independent came ahead of a crucial vote on US-backed UN Human Rights Council resolution for an inquiry into human rights violations by Lankan army.

It showed the bullet-riddled body of Balachandran, the 12-year-old son of Pirabhakaran, stripped to the waist with five bullet holes to the chest.

The footage dating from May 18, 2009, allegedly showed how the Sri Lankan army engaged in crimes against humanity in the last days of its war against LTTE. The Sri Lankan authorities, however, dubbed the report as “motivated and concocted”.

“In our view this is a tentative report, uncorroborated and not being authenticated. This has not been shared with us for us to check. It goes against journalism ethics. The report is motivated and is concocted,” Lankan High Commissioner to India Prasad Kariyawasam had told PTI after the report was published. (PTI)

India/US and Sri Lanka

By Izeth Hussain

Izethhussain@gmail.com

In my article Successes at Geneva (Island of March 7) I postulated a special relationship, a nexus, between India and the US in regard to Sri Lanka, more specifically in regard to our ethnic problem. I won’t recapitulate the whole of my argument as the article was published very recently. Instead I will pose a simple straightforward question: why should the US bother about our ethnic problem to the extent of playing the leading role in Geneva against us? It is not of vital or serious importance to the US, and it does not impact on international relations in a harmful way. So why attract opprobrium against itself as it has done in Geneva?

In my article I advanced two explanations. One was that in helping solve our ethnic problem the US would be making a contribution – albeit a small one – towards the establishment of a New World Order, an enterprise in which the US and India are seen as partners, and it would also be helping India in a matter of primordial interest to it, for the reason that as long as the ethnic problem is unsolved it could even come to pose a threat to India’s unity. In recent years another factor has entered the scene: the unavoidable emergence of China as the next pre-eminent super-power, a factor that dictates an Indo-US nexus whether they want it or not. So, the US has good reason to go out of the way to be helpful towards India, even to the extent of attracting some measure of opprobrium against itself.

In this article I want to suggest that the nexus goes as far back as the 1980s, and even that it was the major factor behind the Indo-Sri Lankan Peace Accords of 1987. I doubt that those Accords would have come about at that time if not for the role played by the US. I believe that the motivating factor behind the US role was remorse, that is to say remorse over having misled the Jayewardene Government into believing that in exchange for a special position for the US in Trincomalee the US would ensure Sri Lanka’s security against any threat from India. It is known, of course, that it was the apparent building up of a special US-Sri Lanka relationship that led to the wreckage of Indo-Sri Lanka relations. In the background of course was the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, which was given explicit approval by India. It seemed reasonable to suppose at that time that the US would go to any extent in making counter-moves in South Asia, including the securing of a special US position in Trincomalee, in the form even of a naval base.

I have no hard evidence by way of documentation or anything else to support my argument. My evidence is of an anecdotal order based on what I observed at first hand as second-in-command in the Foreign Office from the beginning of 1986 till towards the end of 1988. In that position I had plenty of interaction with Jim Spain the US Ambassador and other officials in his Embassy, interaction in the course of which I noticed there was an emphatic reiteration of one point: "We don’t want Trinco". I did not understand the point of that emphatic reiteration for some time because my supposition had always been that the US would not want – not really and seriously – a special position in Trinco because that would incur the eternal and unrelenting enmity of India. But the US could have pretended to want it for some years. However, there was no need for that pretence after it became obvious that Afghanistan was becoming the Soviet Union’s Vietnam. My supposition is that even so the JRJ Government went on assuming, ignorantly and stupidly, that getting US support against India in exchange for a special position in Trinco was still a viable option. It seemed to me retrospectively that the US could have experienced some degree of remorse over its having contributed to the wrecking of Indo-Sri Lanka relations, and hence a desire to help sort out our ethnic problem.

Some time before the Peace Accords were signed I found that some of the Ambassadors in Colombo were dropping hints about some sort of Indo-Sri Lanka agreement being in the offing. I found that such hints were being dropped also to Foreign Secretary W.T. Jayasinghe. When it became known that an agreement would be signed shortly, I told WTJ that so abrupt a volte-face from thoroughly unsatisfactory Indo-Sri Lankan relations to the entente implied by Peace Accords was very extraordinary and required explanation. My surmise was that a third force, a strong and determining third force, had come into play. WTJ attended the signing ceremony of the Peace Accords, and told me next morning that my surmise was correct. The first thing that happened after the signing ceremony was over was that the US Ambassador walked up to President JR and handed him an envelope. Almost certainly it contained a message of congratulations and goodwill from the US President. I believe that the rather ostentatious handing over of the envelope at that moment signified two things. One was that the US Government was already aware of the contents of the Peace Accords, and the other was that the Ambassadors present on the occasion were meant to infer that the Peace Accords had the full backing of the US Government. I must mention that the Foreign Report of the Economist (London) stated not long afterwards that the Peace Accords were not drafted in Colombo.

I must also mention something significant that happened on the morning of the air-drop. The US Ambassador sought a very urgent meeting with our Foreign Minister in order to convey a message of the highest importance from his Government. The message consisted of two parts. One was that in turning back the Indian flotilla bearing food the Government had missed an excellent opportunity of defusing a dangerous situation. The other was that the Indian Government was about to do something that could be very upsetting and the US strongly advised that we should not over-react in any way. It could be that the US Government was acting on information provided by the CIA. I believe that it is far more likely that it was acting at the request of the Indian Government.

The Indo-US nexus extends, therefore, over several decades. It probably dates from the mid-eighties, following on Rajiv Gandhi’s state visit to the US, and provides the rationale for the US going out of the way to present a Resolution at Geneva that can be construed as inimical to Sri Lanka, a Resolution which furthermore attracts to the US some measure of international opprobrium. Why does the US pick on Sri Lanka when its own record on war crimes is stupendously horrendous, and so are the human rights records of its Middle Eastern and other buddies? The obvious motivation is that it is going out of the way to help India in the efforts to solve Sri Lanka’s ethnic problem.

Need to keep implications in mind: India

Amid pressure from various parties to support a UN resolution against Sri Lanka, Government today made it clear that it will decide on its action keeping in mind the implications on the reconciliation process as it does not want deepening of confrontation in that country.

Making a statement in Parliament, External Affairs Minister S M Krishna said the issue was sensitive and India needs to consider the implications carefully.

"Any assertion on India's part may have implications on our historically friendly relations with a neighbouring country," he said in identical statements in both Houses.

"We are engaged with all parties in an effort to achieve a forward looking outcome that is based on reconciliation and accountability rather than deepening confrontation and mistrust between the concerned parties," Krishna said.

He said since the human rights allegations against Sri Lanka are yet to come up for formal discussion at the 19th Session of UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, India will take a view "as and when the time is finalised for consideration" of the draft resolution on Sri Lanka.

"We would also need to examine whether our actions will actually assist in the process of reconciliation in Sri Lanka, and enhance the current dialogue between the Government of Sri Lanka and Tamil parties, including the Tamil National Alliance," said Krishna.

AIADMK members were dissatisfied with his statement and its member A Elavarasan tore a copy of the statement in the Rajya Sabha. They later walked out of the House.

AIADMK along with DMK and Left parties are demanding that India should support the resolution moved by the US, France and Norway against the alleged atrocities committed on Sri Lankan Tamils during the civil war. (PTI)



Statement by External Affairs Minister in Rajya Sabha on "The Situation in Sri Lanka"

March 14, 2012


Honourable Chairman, 

I rise to inform the House on "The Situation in Sri Lanka". At the outset, allow me to convey that I fully share the concerns and sentiments raised by the Honourable Members of this august House regarding the welfare of Sri Lankan Tamils.

2. The end of the long period of armed conflict in Sri Lanka in May 2009, left around 3,00,000 Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) living in camps in Northern Sri Lanka and general devastation of infrastructure in the affected areas.

3. Since the end of conflict in Sri Lanka, the focus of Government of India has been on the welfare and wellbeing of the Tamils citizens of Sri Lanka. Their resettlement and rehabilitation have been of the highest and most immediate priority for the Government.

4. The Prime Minister, in June 2009 immediately after the conflict announced a grant of Rs. 500 crores for relief, rehabilitation and resettlement work in Sri Lanka. The Government of India has implemented and continues to implement a wide range of projects covering assistance projects for IDPs in the areas of housing, de-mining, education, connectivity, livelihood restoration, economic revival, etc. We have been informed by representatives of Sri Lankan Tamils that the tractors, seeds and agricultural implements gifted by the Government of India have greatly benefited the people in the area.

5. India also announced the construction of 50,000 houses, mainly for IDPs in Sri Lanka. During my visit to Sri Lanka in January 2012, I handed over first lot of completed houses to the beneficiaries at Ariyalai, Jaffna and Kilinochchi. These houses have been constructed under a pilot project for construction of 1000 houses. As of end-February 2012, a total of 365 houses had been completed, another 370 houses completed up to roof level and 230 houses completed up to lintel level. It may also be kept in mind that construction is taking place in largely inaccessible areas, which in many cases has to be freed of mines and other explosive ordinance and cleared of jungle.

6. In December 2011, the Cabinet approved the modalities for construction and repair of the remaining 49,000 houses. A Memorandum of Understanding for construction of these houses was signed between India and Sri Lanka on 17th January 2012 in Colombo. The project is expected to be completed within three years of commencement of work on the ground.

7. In addition to houses, I also gifted bicycles to IDPs and handed over hospitals and schools rehabilitated under the assistance of the Government of India in the Northern Province of Sri Lanka.

8. I would like to underline that it is mainly as a result of our constructive engagement with the Government of Sri Lanka and our considerable assistance programme that a modicum of normalcy is beginning to return to the Tamil areas in Sri Lanka. There has also been progress given the withdrawal of emergency regulations by the Government of Sri Lanka and the conduct of elections to local bodies in the Northern Province of Sri Lanka.
Honourable Chairman,

9. Our primary objective in all that we are doing in Sri Lanka is to ensure the welfare and wellbeing of Sri Lankan Tamils, including IDPs, and to assist in the reconstruction and development of areas affected by the conflict. Honourable Chairman,

10. Several Honourable Members of the House have raised the issue of alleged human rights violations during the protracted conflict in Sri Lanka and on the US-initiated draft resolution on 'Promoting Reconciliation and Accountability in Sri Lanka' at the ongoing 19th Session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

11. Concerns have been expressed by various quarters on allegations of human rights violations, including as shown in the Channel 4 documentaries; it is the responsibility of the Sri Lankan Government, in the first instance to investigate and inquire into them through a transparent process.

12. We understand that the Government of Sri Lanka has initiated a series of measures, including appointment of a Cabinet Sub-committee to monitor implementation of the proposals in the National Human Rights Action Plan (NHRAP) and reactivating the National Police Commission, in line with the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) report. Separately, the Sri Lankan defence authorities are reported to have appointed a Court of Inquiry to look into allegations of human rights violations as required by the LLRC report.

13. The Government of India has, nonetheless, emphasised to the Government of Sri Lanka the importance of a genuine process of reconciliation to address the grievances of the Tamil community. In this connection, we have called for implementation of the recommendations in the Report of the LLRC that has been tabled before the Sri Lankan Parliament. These include various constructive measures for healing the wounds of the conflict and fostering a process of lasting peace and reconciliation in Sri Lanka.

14. We have been assured by the Government of Sri Lanka, including during my visit to Sri Lanka in January this year, of its commitment towards pursuit of a political process, through a broader dialogue with all parties, including the Tamil National Alliance, leading to the full implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution, so as to achieve meaningful devolution of powers and genuine national reconciliation. We hope that the Government of Sri Lanka recognising the critical importance of this issue acts decisively and with vision in this regard. We will remain engaged with them through this process and in the spirit of partnership encourage them to take forward the dialogue with the elected representatives of the Sri Lankan Tamils.

15. Honourable Members may be aware that the Sri Lankan authorities had said they would be happy to receive an all-party delegation of Members of both Houses of our Parliament. We are working to undertake such a visit at the earliest. Honourable Chairman,

16. Several Members have raised the issue of a draft resolution initiated by USA at the ongoing 19th Session of the UN Human Rights Council at Geneva on the issue of reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka.

17. I would like to highlight here that on such sensitive issues we will need to consider the implications of our actions carefully. Any assertions on our part may have implications on our historically friendly relations with a neighbouring country. We would also need to examine whether our actions will actually assist in the process of reconciliation in Sri Lanka, and enhance the current dialogue between the Government of Sri Lanka and Tamil parties, including the Tamil National Alliance.

18. As far as our position on the resolution is concerned, we are engaged with all parties in an effort to achieve a forward looking outcome that is based on reconciliation and accountability rather than deepening confrontation and mistrust between the concerned parties. I may mention that the issue of human rights allegations against Sri Lanka is yet to come up for formal discussion at the 19th Session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. A view on this issue will be taken as and when the time is finalized for consideration of the draft resolution on Sri Lanka in the UN Human Rights Council. Honourable Chairman,

19. I, therefore, would like to inform this House that our objectives, as always, continue to remain the achievement of a future for the Tamil community in Sri Lanka that is marked by equality, dignity, justice and self-respect.

20. I may assure the House that the Government will bear in mind the views and sentiments expressed in this House, and once a final view is taken Government will keep the Parliament informed.

Thank you, New Delhi
March 14, 2012

Education is Child Resource Development

by Dr B.C.Perera

Retired Director of Education

Child is a resource with hidden talents. Any child with an average intelligence could learn. The abilities so inherited by birth have to be developed by ‘adults’. The adults are ‘parents’ and ‘teachers’. In other words, education is a joint effort of the family and the school. The foundation laid by parents in the early years of a child will have an influence on the education provided at school. The education received at the both levels will provide the basis to develop the vocational education and training at the tertiary level. By that stage the skills and aptitudes of the child would be clearly identified. It is the main responsibility of the tertiary level institutions to develop them. Therefore the main responsibility of the school is to identify the of the child’. We could give a definition as follows.

"Child Resource Development is an education process which develop the personality of a child for the adult life by general education institutes with the assistance of the family. In that process educational guidance will be provided to develop the identified skills and aptitudes at the higher education and training levels."

This could be taken as the basis for general education in any state.

The education of a child could be divided into main 3 stages:

1. Family stage – Foundation level up to year 5.

2. School Stage – General Education level from year 5 to 14.

3. Professional/Vocational Stage – Higher education or vocational training after year 15.

In this article the focus would be on the general education as the attention of every one at present rests on it.

As mentioned above every child is a resource. At the general education level mechanisms should be created to identify the skills or aptitudes every child has and to provide opportunities to develop them at the tertiary level. The responsibility of the state is to establish institutes to absorb every school leaver and to get the support of the private and other organization in that endeavour. In such a situation entering two or three percent of students to universities and few more to polytechnics and training colleges etc, and forgetting others will not arise. Without such a strategy revising the school curriculum to solve the unemployment problem will be meaningless.

Education should be complete

The education given for life should be complete. The aim of the general education should be to develop the personality of the child physically, mentally, emotionally to face any situation in his adult life so as to integrate easily with the society. The social skills development is not new to us. In the ancient times as well as in the recent past during the period of assisted schools, there was an emphasis on character development. When we read biographies of great personalities who were product of that system we could see how much influence the schools had exerted on them. With the emphasis on examinations we could see the erosion of such good qualities of education. But we could still revive them in the present system within the existing curriculum and co-curricular activities. I would like to emphasis the word ‘existing’, because we do not want mass scale curriculum revisions for that. The necessary social skills or as they call it now the ‘soft skills’ and related attitudes could be developed with the assistance of the subject specialists who could incorporate few activities or activate the existing dormant ones.

Cognitive development

There is a trend now for cognitive development in education. With the advent of ‘knowledge society’ concept the emphasis on cognitive skills is gaining ground. Some of the skills identified like creativity, working in teams or collaboration, problem solving have been in the educational objectives world over for some time. However achieving them is challenging to us even now. Knowledge society goes beyond them and have identified more challenging type characteristics such as ‘focus on abstract concepts’, the students ability to manipulate symbols’ ‘learn to work in global networked virtual teams’ etc, etc. They have been identified as necessary skills for the 21st century. The international tests such as ‘Programme for International Student Assessments’ (PISA) are testing them at present among 15+ students in the developed OECD countries. Our new projects like World Bank funded ‘Transforming School Education Project –TSEP’ and ADB funded ‘Education for Knowledge Society Project – EKSP’ have geared towards such tests.

According to a recent analysis of PISA results, it was found that in mathematics, more than a quarter of Shanghai’s 15-year-olds can conceptualize, generalize, and creatively use information. (It has to be mentioned that although China is not an OECD country Shanghai is participating in the test as a developed economic region.) New Zealand which is one of the countries rank high in PISA scores have their reforms named as "Thinking Schools and Learning Society" and have identified one of the key competencies of school education as ‘thinking’ which is termed as a ‘meta cognitive process’.

Challenges of new projects

Therefore the task we have embarked upon with above mentioned new projects is certainly a challenge and it is apparent we have a lot of ground to cover in that regard. What is important is the strategy we adopt to meet this challenge. The principles of ‘Child Resource Development’ would be helpful at this juncture. We have to accept all children cannot be ‘Einstiens’ or for that matter ‘Stephen Hawkings’ who is considered as a contender for the scientist of the 20th century title now. Neither could they be ‘Mozarts’ or ‘Don Bradmans’ or any other who have excelled in their chosen fields. But every normal child might have of at least one basic skill among those various fields. The question is, are we trying to push every child towards ‘Eientien’s path’, just because that is the path ‘knowledge society’ is leading us? Or are we going to provide every child the basic education up to a certain level which would develop basic cognitive, physical, emotional and social skills which would be useful for a citizen, while trying to identify their potentialities for which facilities would be provided to develop them at the tertiary level?

One might see this is an attempt to have dual type of education and trying to produce two types of students. Do not we have them now? Whatever the reforms we implemented what happened was the children with cognitive skills succeeded in public examinations while the rest became failures not only in examinations but in the real life too. That is why someone has defined examinations as ‘a system which legitimize the social imbalance by proving the majority are suitable only for menial jobs.’

What is attempted to say here is as much as we value children with cognitive potentialities we must not forget the vast majority who have hidden potentialities, if developed which we may be useful not only for them but for the country as well. It is a case of identifying them and providing the facilities to develop them. The Central Schools system introduced by late Dr. E.W.W. Kannangara was instrumental in providing rural children who were endowed with cognitive potentialities. Similar type of schools could be found in other countries too. "Navodya" in India (this should not be mistaken with ‘Navodya’ in Sri Lanka) and "Schools for Talented Children’ in Vietnam are two examples for such schools established for children who are called ‘bright’. They are the ones who will benefit from new initiatives in education and could provide higher ‘social rate of returns’. We must give them every assistance possible through the new projects. There is no question about it.

But what about the vast majority who would not be able to fit in with the new order? Are we going to forget them, as we used to do up to now, at the expense of the ‘ bright’ children? Do we have strategies take care of them? Are we prepared to identify that vast undiscovered resource? There are debates on at what level this identification could be done. Is it not possible to have a ‘cumulative record’ for every child rather than a ‘hit and run’ type test like "Examination for Grade V Scholarship’ which is a life and death event for parents especially for mothers and a dreadful affair for most of the young ones.

A cumulative record is not the School Based Assessment (SBA) practiced now. But the essence of formative and summative evaluations or even observations of teachers of all the activities children do in the classroom which would help the teachers and parents to identify his/her potentialities, aptitudes, interests etc. The report could be filled once a year and at the end of the basic education school could have a fairly useful ‘profile ‘ of each student. The profile then could be used as a tool for educational guidance at tertiary level. It could even be useful for potential employers.

That might be a more comprehensive report on students rather than the results of examination for Grade V Scholarships. Besides that will eliminate the drudgery of primary school children under go for the preparation of that examination. A lot of educationists complain about the pressure put on the primary level students and the mental agony they have to endure, sometimes from grade 1. Basic Education, especially primary education, should be fun for all the children. It should be filled with interesting activities, playing, singing, dancing, acting etc. which would helped to develop both parts of the brain as neurologists point out. Most important is that they would provide the opportunity for teachers to identify hidden talents, aptitudes of children. It is not the case now. They are burden with ‘bookish activities’. Could it be one of the reasons for the drop outs at primary level. How many education authorities know that the bulk of the homework given to these children are actually done by parents or their elder siblings or some adult in the neighbourhood. Do they know that these adults sometimes have to burn midnight oil to complete the homework with the students. It is high time some serious research is done on these homework. It is very unhealthy situation the educationists have to pay their attention on. There must be changes for healthier situation. The curriculum developers must take a lead in that regard.

Student profile

On the other hand, if there is something like a ‘student profile’ for educational guidance, students and parents may not go astray with few credits in of G.C.E (O/L) and try to go for streams at A/L not suitable for them. By the time the students and parents realize that, valuable time in their lives with lots of money have been spent.

As much as we look forward to preparing our education for 21st century we must not forget those children who will not be able to reach those high level cognitive standards. We must tap the resources of those students also and provide them the opportunities to develop them. Otherwise the drop-out rates in schools will be larger and on the other hand new sets of tuition classes will spring up which promise to take the students to 21st century education adding misery to our younger generation.

INDIAN PARLIAMENT ADJOURNED OVER SRI LANKA ISSUE

Politicians from Tamil Nadu have created a massive uproar in the Indian Rajya Sabha, demanding that the government support the UN resolution against Sri Lanka, in relation to human rights abuses allegedly carried out by the troops in the final stage of the war.

Speaker Hamid Ansari adjourned the house till 12 noon after DMK and AIADMK leaders refused to sit down until the Prime Minister made a statement explaining the government stand.

“We want an assurance from the government that India will vote against Sri Lanka”, said Venkaiah Naidu, a BJP MP. However AIADMK MP Maitreyan was the most vocal of the Tamil Nadu MP’s, demanding that the “Prime Minister open his silence on the Sri Lanka issue”. Naidu continued agitating, not allowing a Tamil MP from the Congress party to finish speaking. The MP had been saying that it would be dangerous to cut off ties with Sri Lanka because that would cut off access to the more than 3 lakh Tamil population currently in Sri Lanka, but was immediately shouted down. Speaker Hamid Ansari tried to calm things down, but was forced to adjourn the house when all attempts to restore order proved futile.

Earlier Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee made a statement with regards to India’s stand on the UN resolution. He said that India did not normally support country specific resolutions, but would take a decision in this regard after consultations with its Human Rights team.

The resolution seeks to draw attention to Sri Lanka’s absence of accountability in the aftermath of the war against the LTTE, FP reports.

Culprit Seeks to Elude the Indictment

Mysterious are the ways in which the UN system moves. Pitiable is the fate of those who deserve justice. The culprit gets around leaving the victim to waste away.

“The US is concerned that in Sri Lanka, time is slipping away”, said Mario Otero. Tamils say that it is the rogue state that is wriggling out and that too with consummate skill.

As recompense for the Tamils, international investigation was brandished first. The LLRC put paid to it. Sri Lanka will implement the recommendations, came the grandiloquent pledge. A whittled down draft resolution followed. Sri Lanka has started implementation, was the plaintiff’s response spuriously put across. Where? In the very citadel of the UNHRC itself. How? With nonchalance.

What form has governmental response taken? The leader of the EPDP, singled out by the LLRC for crime, a fugitive from justice, pursued by India but accommodated in the cabinet of Sri Lanka is now paraded in the UNHRC, an international forum of 47 nations. What a tragic irony. An arch violator of human rights recommended by the LLRC to be brought to justice, stalks into the arena of the very HRC that is urging implementation of the LLRC recommendation.

A war guilt government has the hardihood to place a prime culprit on display and the international community looks askance at his repulsive presence. How does the world take it? Cheat, chicanery or casuistry? This lapse would be invoked by the GOSL, to foreclose an inquiry demanded by the LLRC. After seeing such exploits, which rogue state will not pluck up courage to beguile the world or to diddle the UN? Who will continue to have faith in an international forum? It is not time slipping by, but Sri Lanka slithering away.

The LLRC urged in clear language that illegal armed groups should be dismantled. This was 15 months ago, in the Interim Recommendations, in a language that was unambiguous. Tamils have cried with their parched up throats that this be done. The TNA, the only authority mandated to speak for the Tamils, has voiced this demand repeatedly. The LLRC has reiterated the need explicitly in it’s Final Report in very strong terms.

Humanity would see it as the starting point of rule of law. The American Resolution while expressing disappointment that the LLRC had ignored certain important areas has glossed over a very crucial recommendation. The Commission had stated forthrightly that the menace of illegal armed groups be eradicated. The Resolution is conspicuously silent on this critical issue.

The Resolution is craftily worded. As if unaware of oriental cunning, an escape route is provided with just one phrase, ‘constructive recommendations’. The LLRC sought to bifurcate the diaspora into constructive and adversarial. Perhaps taking the cue from the Report, the UN Resolution ventures to bifurcate the recommendations into constructive and not so constructive. Sifting the grain from the chaff is left to the propensity of the culprit. How will a reluctant government take it otherwise than to turn it to it’s advantage.

Devolution is not constructive, but is destructive of Sri Lanka’s territorial integrity. So the argument will run. It is a precursor to separation will be the chorus. Dismantling the illegal armed groups is not constructive since without their murderous scrutiny, Eelamists will sprout and Tigers will reemerge. The politically mature would not touch such a destructive proposition, will be the cry of the wiseacre. Both ethnic entities of Sri Lanka work in inscrutable ways. Both groups know it well. Even after decades of exposure, the international community seems to be yet unaware of it.

Brigands of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your fear!

National integration: one nation, one people, one destiny

By Lionel WIJESIRI

National integration cannot be built by brick and mortar; it cannot be built by chisel and hammer. It has to grow silently in the minds and hearts of men - Dr. S. Radhakrishnan  

“The wish of all Sri Lankans was unity as one nation notwithstanding their racial, religious or caste differences but that was what Sri Lankan nation had failed to achieve even after 65 years of Independence,” President Mahinda Rajapaksa said recently. He added that there is an attitudinal change among the people and everybody has to make maximum use of this moment to create one nation.

In the context of President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s comments, I think it is time for us to address seriously the broader issue of national integration within the context of current political perception and vision to create one nation.

Meaning

National integration is the awareness of a common identity amongst the citizens of a country. It means that though we belong to different races, religions and regions and speak different languages, we recognize the fact that we are all one. It also means unifying all the forces in the country so as to give the idea of one nation. National Integration involves:- 1. The sentiments of nationalism, 2. The feeling of oneness, 3. Social, political, economic, linguistic and cultural unity, 4. Common ideas of life and common code of behaviour, 5. The ability to subordinate sectarian and parochial loyalties to loyalty of the nation.

National integration is a complex concept. It has social, political, religious, regional and economic dimensions. The three basic factors of national integration are; 1. Structural equality: equal opportunity must be provided for all especially those who are socially and economically backward, 2. Cultural unity: discriminations due to race, religion, and caste should be eradicated, 3. Ideological unity: awareness about ‘national objectives’ should be created among the people who hold divergent views on political and religious and similar other fields.

The societies that have been integrated into bonds of unity have always enjoyed peace, stability, prosperity and permanence. And those torn by mutual disruptive tendencies among various sections of the society have always been short lived and become non-existent.

Co-existence

Sri Lanka is a small country. We have only 20 million people speaking three languages and practicing four major religions. There are also great varieties in costume, food habits and social customs. Geographically our land is diverse and there are amazing differences in climate.

Despite these differences Sri Lanka is a political entity, every part of which is governed under the same constitution. We need to co-exist with each other peacefully, respect the culture and religion of our fellow Sri Lankans.

Our national symbols like the National Flag, the National Anthem, and the National Emblem help to remind us that we are all belong to one identity. These act as strong unifying forces both in times of celebration and adversity. Other forces like the communication system and the mass media help in the exposure to all the cultures of different regions of Sri Lanka bringing the whole country together as one nation.

Sri Lanka has been facing certain disintegrating forces from inside the country as well as outside the country. These elements’ primary loyalty is not ethnicity, not religion, not language but narrow political advantage. Some of these destabilizing groups are understandably supported by foreign countries.

Recent events show us beyond doubt that the threats of disintegration are staring us in the face.

If we do not sink petty differences our freedom is in peril. We should not forget that divisions on the basis of language or community will have serious repercussions.

Turn to Indian experience. India is hailed by many as a shining example of a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic democratic state, which has successfully weathered many internal threats of disintegration. But still, the assertive face of multiple ethno-cultural identities has worried many observers.

According to reports, analysts have hinted at India’s diminishing capacity to address the developmental aspirations of the multiple ethno-national groups. The unfolding internal divisions, characterized by lack of trust (if not distrust) among diverse ethno-cultural groups, have threatened to wreck India from within.

No right-thinking citizen would want this to happen in Sri Lanka.

Ways of integration

How do we bring about national integration? There are few proven ways.

It can be forced out, or can be made to strengthen from within the core of our hearts. The result of force would always be weak, unsuccessful and it would be for a temporary phase only. But when the sense of national integration stems from within our hearts, it would be strong stable and ever-lasting. History speaks for itself, the British government brought about national integration when they ruled Sri Lanka. They never forced it on us. It came naturally.

The national integration was strengthened when our country fought a united struggle for freedom. In our struggle for freedom people from different communities participated, keeping one thing in mind that they all are Sri Lankans first. It proves that emotional integration is the basic foundation on which the main structure of national integration can be created.

Challenges

We need today synthesis of the power of the mind that can give rise to a vision of the whole and oneness. The school and university teaching material should be suitably revised wherein importance and need of oneness should be emphasized. From one end of the country to the other end, regular long distance tours must be conducted, so as to, foster emotional integration among the young students of our country.

We cannot afford to be parochial, narrow-minded, provincial and communal because we have a great mission to accomplish. Political integration has already taken place, but emotional integration is a must for national integration. Political freedom has brought in its wake new forces of narrow fanaticism which threaten to destroy the concept of one country and one people. In their theory, attachment to community is given priority over devotion to the motherland.

Another key challenge facing Sri Lanka today is the mainstreaming of values and ethical behaviour that will promote national cohesion. In this regard, there is a need to urgently develop a policy on a national values system. I am optimistic that such values will have a positive influence on the work ethics and productivity of all Sri Lankans.

In addition to helping create national integration, these values will also result in substantial improvement in the quality of leadership, management practices and efficient utilization of national resources at all levels and sectors of the economy.

I also wish to suggest that the government initiate a ‘National Integration Day’ as India has done. India observes November 19, the birthday of former Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, as National Integration Day. Its main aim is to promote among the people unity, peace, affection and brotherhood. Indira Gandhi was the victim of the demand for the separation of Khalistan.

In India, the National Integration Day is celebrated to bring people, especially youths of different religious background, different economic, social, cultural and education, together and in common platform so that these young people will understand and learn about each other. The Indira Gandhi Award for National Integration is the prestigious award accorded by the Indian National Congress. This Award is given annually starting from 1985 to distinguished persons or institutions for promoting national integration of India.

Through national integration, we can prosper and flourish; we can carry with us, power, strength and solidarity and the element of cohesion which will give us further permanence to stay strong in present struggling world.