|
 
Chandrika - LTTE Talks: 1994/95
LTTE Leader Mr.Velupillai Pirabaharan
interviewed in Tamil Eelam, On the collapse of the Peace Process
by Ms. Aananthi Sooriyapragasam, British Broadcasting Corporation,
London
27 April 1995
Q. Mr.Pirabaharan, why did you decide to withdraw from the peace
negotiations and from cessation of hostilities at a time when there
was hope in the country that peace would be restored in the
NorthEast and the Tamil problem would be resolved?
A. We made this painful decision at a time when our people had
lost all hope that peace would be restored to the Tamil homeland and
the Tamil question would be resolved.
At the beginning we entertained a hop that peace and normalcy
would be restored and the Tamil national question would be resolved
by political negotiations. Based on this belief we entered the peace
process and agreed to a cessation of hostilities.
In the talks we argued that talks should proceed stage by stage
and that the urgent and immediate problems of our people should be
resolved at the early stages of the dialogue. The government agreed
to this. The Tamil people have been subjected to enormous suffering
as a consequence of the economic embargo, fishing bans and the
blockade on traffic imposed by the previous Government. In the peace
talks we requested nothing other than the removal of these bans to
alleviate the suffering of our people.
The Chandrika government, which came to power with the pledge
that justice would be done to the Tamils, should have, on its own,
removed the injustices imposed on our people.
Sri Lanka approached issues in a military perspective
But the Chandrika government didn't do so. Instead of viewing
these issues as constituting the problems of the Tamil people, the
Government took them as specific demands of the LTTE. Furthermore
these issues were approached within a military perspective. We
were told that these issues were linked to national security and any
attempt to resolve them would spark off military repercussions. We
were disappointed with this response.
It was under these circumstances that we issued an ultimatum to
the Government. We pointed out that the continuation of the peace
negotiations would serve no meaningful purpose if the problems of
our people are not resolved. As a consequence of this pressure, the
Government assured us that it would remove the bans.
We extended our deadline, but Government delayed implementing
its pledges
We extended our deadline for three weeks to allow time for the
Government to implement its pledges. But the Government delayed the
implementation of its decisions and postponed the resolution of
other issues. We felt that the Government was not sincere and
truthful in this matter. It committed an act of bad faith as the
previous Sinhala Governments. It is because of this, we and our
people have lost faith in Chandrika's government. Therefore, we came
to a decision that no meaningful purpose would be served in
continuing the peace negotiations.
Q. Why did you decide to discontinue the peace negotiations even
though President Chandrika lifted the economic embargo and removed
the ban on fishing and offered several concessions?
Giving pledges
and implementing them are two different things
A. I wish to make a point here. That is, giving pledges and
implementing those pledges are two different things. In the past the
Tamil people have been betrayed by previous Sinhala regimes.
Agreements were made but not implemented. Pacts were signed and
abrogated. This is our history. Chandrika's government is not an
exception.
We stipulated a deadline to the Government to provide a time
frame to implement its decisions. The Government did not take our
deadline seriously. They tried to evade it. It is wrong on the part
of President Chandrika to claim that she has given concessions to
the LTTE. We did not ask for any concessions but raised the
problems of our people. The rights that were denied to our people
should not be categorised as concessions.
If there was a genuine will on the part of the Government the
bans could have been lifted in 24 hours
Q. Don't you think that you should have been a bit patient since
the delay in the implementation of the lifting of the economic
embargo could have been caused by administrative hurdles?
A. We have showed enough patience. We could say that we
reached the brink of tolerance. In so far as the day to day problems
of the Tamil people are concerned the Government dragged its feet
for more than six months. On these issues, there were four rounds of
talks and more than forty letters exchanged.
Furthermore, we gave a two weeks deadline and that was further
extended to three more weeks. Do you think this period of time
inadequate?
If there was a genuine will on the part of the Government it
would have lifted the bans and proceeded with the implementation
within 24 hours. I think that if the Government had been sincere
there would not have been any delays or difficulties.
If this Government had a genuine concern for the welfare of
the Tamil people, it would not have re imposed the bans
Q. What do you feel about the Government's decision to reimpose
the bans?
A. This action has made one thing clear. That is so far as the
Tamil issue is concerned there is no fundamental difference between
the present Government and the UNP regime. This Government is
perpetuating the injustices committed by past Governments. I do not
see any difference between both Government in their strategy to seek
political gains by imposing economic and military pressure on the
Tamils.
If this Government has a genuine concern for the welfare of the
Tamil people, it should not have re imposed the bans. This action
demonstrates the fact that the Government is only concerned to
secure the interests of the military and to utilise the problems and
predicament of the Tamils to seek political advantage.
The Government chose to ignore the meaning and purpose of our
ultimatum and now attempts to lay the blame on us
Q. Under the terms and conditions of the Declaration of the
Cessation of Hostilities, you should have given 72 hours notice if
you wished to terminate the agreement. Why didn't you give that
period of time?
A. We have given the Government ample time. A period of five
weeks was given to the Government since the first deadline which was
later extended. The Government chose to ignore the meaning and
purpose of our ultimatum and now attempts to lay the blame on us.
We deeply regret the haste in which the Governments have
issued condemnations without studying the issue in depth
Q. Several foreign Governments have condemned you for having
terminated the peace negotiations and the agreement on the cessation
of hostilities. This has given rise to the view that the LTTE is
opposed the peace process. What do you say to this?
A. We are fully aware that the international community is
genuinely concerned about the Tamil issue. We are also aware that
the world community wants the conflict resolved through peaceful
means and a political settlement is reached. I think that accurate
information with regard to the problems, difficulties and set backs
that arose in the negotiating process has not reached the outside
world.
Some foreign countries have chosen to condemn the LTTE on the
basis of the one sided story provided by the Government without
recognising the legitimacy of our position. We deeply regret the
haste in which the Governments have issued condemnations without
studying the issue in depth.
Q. President Chandrika has made it clear that she is determined
to pursue the peace process with or without the cooperation of the
LTTE. What is your response to this?
A. If it is practicable to achieve peace without the
cooperation of the LTTE, let her continue her effort.
Our doors for peace are still open
Q. The International Secretariat of the LTTE in London has issued
a statement recently that the Tigers have not closed the doors for
peace. What steps do you expect the Government to take to resume the
peace initiative?
A. Our doors for peace are still open. It is true that we are
dissatisfied and disillusioned with the approach of the Government.
We are convinced that the Tamil national question can be resolved by
peaceful means.
It is the Government which should take the initiatives to resume
the peace process. As a constructive measure the Government should
lift the reimposed bans on economic items and on fishing and should
ensure implementation. This action should be viewed as fulfilling
the needs of the people rather than as concessions granted to the
LTTE.
If Chandrika's Government makes favourable decisions on the other
issues we raise and is prepared to implement them, we will be
prepared to cease all hostilities and return to the peace process. |
