|
Selected Writings by
Sachi Sri Kantha
Being an Eelam
apologist in the Lanka Guardian magazine
27 June 2006
|
Mervyn de Silva |
June
22nd had just passed by. I remembered that it marked the 7th death anniversary
of Mervyn de Silva, the founder-editor of Lanka Guardian magazine. Until now,
only a handful of Sinhalese had positively influenced my life and thoughts
personally and Mervyn de Silva was one of them. But I never had the opportunity
to meet him even once. My interactions as a correspondent presenting the Eelam
Tamil point of view in unsolicited short letters were conducted solely by the
post.
Mervyn de Silva�s Lanka Guardian, the fortnightly magazine of opinion, made its
first appearance in May 1, 1978. My first letter to the Lanka Guardian was
published in the March 1, 1981 issue, and it was related to my impressions as an
eye witness at the 5th International Tamil Research Conference Seminar held in
Madurai. It also initiated my twin role as an Eelam apologist in the Lanka
Guardian magazine and as an unsolicited voluntary educator to Mervyn de Silva on
Eelam theme. I explicitly use the word �apologist� here in the original Greek
meaning of the word �apologia�, which refers to �a speech in defense�, and not
to its convoluted contemporary meaning in English relating to �a statement
expressing regret for some error or offense�. Until 1996, a total of 43 of my
short letters passed Mervyn de Silva�s scrutiny and appeared in print. Another
20 odd letters went unpublished, among which I�ve opted to provide few excerpts
below for record.
The Merit of Mervyn de Silva
Mervyn de Silva was undoubtedly a giant among the Sri Lankan journalists. Unlike
other contemporaries of him, one could easily grasp from his commentaries that
he also had a marked degree of empathy to the Eelam cause and respect to the
leadership skills of the LTTE leader Pirabhakaran. Why? He kept one of his eyes
�open�. He was a living proof to the aphorism, �In the world of the blind,
the one-eyed guy is the king�. Among the conceptually blind Sinhalese
journalists of Colombo, Mervyn de Silva had a functional �objective� eye, which
he used to his best advantage. It was my modest intention to stimulate his other
�subjective� eye also for reception to the Tamil cause.
What I liked Mervyn de Silva as a commentator-analyst was his polished command
of English and his knack of linking threads from diverse sources, which
testified to his voracious reading skills. He was also a master journalist in
the use of metaphor, simile and syntax. In my forty-odd letters which Mervyn de
Silva chose to publish in the Lanka Guardian magazine, I wrote ultra-brief
eulogies to Trotskyist politician Edmund Samarakkody and scientist Cyril
Ponnamperuma; commented on the Tamil history from Ravanan through Chelvanayakam,
Thondaman and MGR to Pirabhakaran; quipped on the political follies of
J.R.Jayewardene, Premadasa and Chandrika Kumaratunga. I also satirized the
gumshoes of Indian underground diplomacy. Excluding a handful, the rest of my
published letters in the Lanka Guardian were comments and rebuttals to the
articles and commentaries of other Sri Lankan pundits. Whenever I found that the
Tamil point of view was lacking or distorted, I made a concerted effort to
correct them, in the pages of Lanka Guardian. Occasionally I crossed swords with
regular contributors to this magazine like Izeth Hussain and H.L.D.Mahindapala.
The space permitted for my unsolicited letters to the �Correspondence� section
did not exceed more than a page, in a slim 24-page journal. I had to present my
thoughts with pungency and/or subtle sarcasm within the allocated space of
300-500 words. It wasn�t that easy. But I loved the challenge Mervyn de Silva
granted to me.
Personal Letters
 Apart from the letters I (as a reader) sent to the Lanka Guardian, I also
expressed my views to Mervyn de Silva, in a few personal letters. In a letter
dated Feb.4, 1992, on the aftermath of ex-MOSSAD agent Victor Ostrovski�s
exposure of Sri Lankan purchase of arms on the aid money from international
agencies, I wrote to him as follows:
�Dear Mr.Mervyn de Silva: I read with interest your commentary entitled, �The Rise of the New Right�, in
the LG of Jan.15 [1992]. In it you have stated, ��Sinhala Political
Establishment could have projected a positive image to two crucially important
audiences�key sources of aid (Japan)��. Do you think that Japanese are such
gullible fools, who cannot comprehend what is really going on in Sri Lanka?
Please do not underestimate the Japanese. Do you know what damage the exposure
of Victor Ostrovski did to the Japanese aid program to Sri Lanka?�Though the
Japanese authorities have rejected Ostrovsky�s allegations, they did trim 40% of
the allocated aid to Sri Lanka, after the release of the book in December 1990,
under a different pretext. I wonder whether the Sri Lankan government sources
have released this information�.�
Subsequently, I received a registered letter from Mervyn de Silva, dated March
17, 1992. To quote the contents:
Dear Mr.Sri Kantha, The Lanka Guardian, I regret to say, is running into financial trouble �
inflation. I am asking a few friends and regular readers to help us with
subscriptions. Enclosed are 5 forms. Is there any Foundation in Japan that helps
little independent journals to survive? A few thousand dollars will go a long
way. With best wishes. Yours sincerely,
Mervyn de Silva�
I couldn�t provide him an encouraging message, in the reply I sent, dated March
31, 1992. To quote,
�Dear Mr.Mervyn de Silva: Thank you for your letter of March 17, which I received here on March 28. It is
not with delight that I read your message about the financial trouble faced by
the Lanka Guardian. Well, I will try to provide some information which you have
solicited, which may be fruitful, if luck is on your side. Herewith I�m
enclosing a copy of my details of Japanese Foundations and Institutions, culled
from �The World of Learning 1991�. If the activities of some of these
Foundations appeal to you, please try them�Regarding the enrollment of new
subscriptions, I will write to you in the next letter. With best regards.�
Then, I wrote to him another letter dated April 4, 1992, as follows:
�Dear Mr.Mervyn de Silva: Hope you would have received my previous letter, mailed a few days ago, written
in response to your letter soliciting help in enrolling new subscriptions to the
Lanka Guardian. Having been a reader since its inception in 1978, I thought I
should comment about the current format of the LG to you. Of course, my comments
do not in any way mean to suggest that what you have achieved for the past 14
years or so with the LG is worthless. I am trying to be the �devil�s advocate�.
Hope you will take it in the spirit it is made. I have subscribed to the LG and will continue to subscribe to it, for reasons
which are personal in nature. But I don�t think I can convince my friends
(Japanese or non-Japanese) to subscribe to it, for the following reasons. (1) Not very many Japanese are interested in reading much English. Only those
who have some specific interests in the South Asian region may find it of some
interest. (2) By this premise, LG has to compete with other international magazines (Time,
Newsweek, Economist, Asiaweek and Far Eastern Economic Review) for providing
fresh perspectives. This I doubt very much that LG has attempted to do, and even
if it attempts, whether it can succeed. (3) Even for those non-Sri Lankan readers, the contents in the LG would not seem
much appealing. First, you reprint so much of what already has been published in
other magazines (Time, Newsweek, Economist, FEER, Asiaweek etc.). So, the
originality in contents is just around 30-40% in the LG. Secondly, whatever is
original (especially those related to Sri Lanka) are couched in words and
sentences only Sri Lankans can comprehend. Even your commentaries and analyses
are filled with (relating to names) dimunitives, first names (such as Lalith,
Gamini etc.) and phrases in Sinhala language, which are incomprehensible to
non-Sri Lankans. At least you should make an effort to eliminate the dimunitives
and first names, if you want to attract foreign readership. Time or Newsweek or
Economist do not refer to Dick (Nixon) or Maggie (Thatcher) in reporting about
them. I wish I can give you a more optimistic message. But I couldn�t. With best
wishes.�
What I liked about Mervyn de Silva, was his occasional use of banter, with
respect to the published letters in his magazine. Once [to pacify an irate
correspondent who saw some of his/her choice sentences have been pruned], Mervyn
de Silva retorted in a foot-note, �Writers write, editors edit�. A few of my
letters also did receive their share of editorial foot-notes. Once, he subtly
exposed my then ignorance between the difference of words, �wither� and
�whither�. On another occasion, he defended his use of the Tamil word �thottam�
(literally, garden), which I had criticised as having derisive connotation. To
rebut his defence, I sent him a letter dated July 4, 1994, as follows:
Dear Mr.Mervyn de Silva:
I thank you for publishing quite a number of my letters in the LG. I read with
interest your foot note in my recent letter on language usage, where I raised
the issue on the usage of the word �thottam�. If I read your point, since
Minister Thondaman loves the phrase �Thonda�s thottam�, and that other Tamil
readers did not raise any objections, the objection I raised was not of much
relevance. Not quite correct though.
Other Tamil readers may not be well versed in ethnic slurs, or that they may
have attained a �pseudo-immunity�. For your information, herewith I�m enclosing
a copy of my paper on ethnic slurs, which I presented at the Annual Sessions of
the Sri Lanka Association for Advancement of Science in Dec.1979. In this paper,
I analysed the ethnic slurs used by the Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims and Burghers.
Since then, I have been an active student of linguistics. Regarding Thondaman�s
acceptance [of the word �thottam�], I will respond with an anecdote. When
Churchill described Gandhi as a �half-naked fakir�, Gandhi was magnanimous in
not responding to that racial slur. But, will you convince me that the word
�fakir� was not a slur which Churchill used to put down not only Gandhi, but
also the population of the Indian subcontinent whom Gandhi represented. In the
same vein, I reiterate, that even if Thondaman may accept the usage, the word
�thottam� was definitely used by Jaffna Tamils in particular, to put down the
so-called Indian Tamils.�
On the �Rashomon Effect� and Ranjan Wijeratne killing
Mervyn de Silva was also a human with a prestige to protect; thus occasionally
he chose not to publish my letters, which tried to expose his factual slips or
lack of depth in interpretation. I provide one example.
Following the killing of former Foreign Minister and Deputy Defence Minister
Ranjan Wijeratne (1931-1991) in March 1991, Mervyn de Silva wrote an eulogy
(captioned �Death of a Soldier�) to him, under his pen name Kautilya. He had
incompletely annotated his eulogy with the Rashomon story popularized by the
Japanese movie director Akira Kurosawa. First, I provide excerpts of this
eulogy:
�Rashomon Effect: Akira Kurosawa�s first movie �Rashomon� not only introduced the Japanese master
to western audiences but invited serious critical attention to a hitherto
neglected Japanese cinema. Both movie enthusiasts of my generation as well
today�s cognoscenti know �Rashomon� for its brilliantly structured presentation
of a dramatic event as perceived by four persons; different versions of the same
reality, though only a single, shocking and gruesome incident. Each person
sticks to his/her story faithfully, convinced that it is the whole truth, the
only possible. Each is plausible, and quite convincing. And yet each is somehow
�coloured�, unconsciously distorted by the �mind� rather than the eye that sees. So with the assassination of poor Ranjan Wijeratne, a plain-speaking man, a
planter somewhat lost in the dubious and devious ways of power politics. A party
loyalist he served Sri Kotha so loyally that President JR [Jayewardene] trusted
him with the most sensitive task of all � consulting party branches to find out
who the UNP �machine� felt was the strongest candidate to fight
Mrs.Bandaranaike. A stern disciplinarian, he brought to his ministerial office,
the manners of the planter and the simple regimented life-style of a vanishing
planter Raj. That discipline was a close cousin to the military manner. That was the secret
of his success as State Minister of Defence. Quite unknown to him perhaps, he
was something else too. In a society torn by divisive conflict, the violent and
the unseen, and by both steadfast allegiances as well as by changing loyalties,
Ranjan, unknown to him, became a point of intersection between these contending
forces, competitive claims diverse and fierce issues. To name a few, military
solution/political settlement; old UNP/new UNP; Sinhala nationalism/Thomian
liberalism; �law-and-order�/dissent, opposition; army/party etc. etc. No wonder so many theories, from the Singapore connection to LTTE/EROS,
DJV/EROS; inside-job/and any �mix� of these.� [Lanka Guardian, Colombo, March
15, 1991, pp.6-7]
Mervyn de Silva continued further to passingly mention the Indian interests and
their �spin� on the Sri Lankan events as well, as follows:
�What interested me was how each individual and opinion group, often quite
dispassionately, almost pre-selected as salient this or that detail which suited
best his/her version. The Rashomon Effect. And this was often complemented and
supported by seemingly disinterested non-Sri Lankan groups which also presented
their �interpretations�, but more deliberately I felt, than subconsciously. What
I would call putting a little spin on the ball.� [Lanka Guardian, Colombo, March
15, 1991, pp.6-7]
I sent a letter (captioned �Rashomon Effect�) to the Lanka Guardian, dated March
31, 1991, criticising this Kautilya commentary. Since Mervyn de Silva chose not
to publish it then, I provide the complete text here, for record.
�Akira Kurosawa�s first directorial venture was not �Rashomon�, as stated by
columnist Kautilya in his eulogy to Minister Ranjan Wijeratne (LG, March 15). In
1943, Kurosawa made his movie directorial debut with a film titled, �Sugata
Sanshiro�, about a judo master. His first popular movie �Yoidore Tenshi�[Drunken
Angel], starring Toshiro Mifune as a sick gangster, was released in 1948.
�Rashomon� was released in 1950.
Rashomon did introduce Kurosawa and the Japanese cinema to the Western
audiences. But giving undue credit to Kurosawa for the Rashomon theme is like
asserting that Cecil B.de Mille authored the Bible. The Rashomon movie was based
on two short stories �Yabu no Naka� and �Rashomon�, authored by Ryunosuke
Akutagawa (1892-1927), who committed suicide at the age of 35 years. Akutagawa
also adopted these two short stories from two tales of the 11th century Japanese
anthology, �Konjaku Monogatari�. So much for the origin of Rashomon.
Columnist Kautilya, in reminiscing on Rashomon to impress his readers, subtly
implies that Minister Ranjan Wijeratne is the samurai Takehiko (the murdered
person of the movie). And with extensive citations from the Indian newspapers
�Hindu� and �Dinamani�, who have their own axes to grind, Kautilya also focuses
on the LTTE as the robber Tajomaru (presumed villain of the Rashomon story). One
can be surprised by the fact that author Akutagawa�s portrayal of robber
Tajomaru resembles the logic presented by the LTTE for their past killings. �To me killing isn�t a matter of such great consequence as you might think�Am I
the only one who kills people? You, you don�t use your swords. You kill people
with your power, with your money. Sometimes you kill them on the pretext of
working for their good. It�s true they don�t bleed. They are in the best of
health, but all the same you�ve killed them. It�s hard to say who is a greater
sinner, you or me��, confesses Tajomaru in his defence, to the High Police
Commissioner. Did Kautilya notice this sequence perceptively in this movie? I�m also simply amused that Kautilya has failed to grasp the meaning of the
final sequence of the Rashomon story. The murdered samurai�s version (as told
through a medium) implies that he committed suicide. Remember Akutagawa also
committed suicide 12 years after Rashomon story was published. If this is so, is
the analogy between Rashomon theme and the death of Ranjan Wijeratne is
credible?�
Limitations of the Lanka Guardian magazine
Now that the Lanka Guardian magazine had passed into history as a �one-man
show�, it is time for a more realistic evaluation of its role as an educational
forum on Sri Lankan-Eelam affairs. While many of Mervyn de Silva�s admirers have
provided bouquets on the performance of Lanka Guardian for two decades, someone
has to present the unpleasant news as well. Afterall, Mervyn de Silva created
the motto [�Other News, Another View�] for the magazine in 1978. So, let me be
the critic. I present five limitations of Lanka Guardian magazine in numbered
sequence.
(1) Blurred Focus
The Lanka Guardian magazine carried the image of an academic journal of
commentary, a pulp fortnightly magazine and a propaganda brochure of Leftist
thinking. This was akin to an athlete trying to impress simultaneously as a
100-meter sprinter, a 5,000 meter runner and a marathoner. This strategy as the
�journal of all angles� hurt its market value in attracting subscriptions in any
one group of the target audience.
As a subscriber-reader, the absence/omission of complete details [especially the
date and place of publication] in the Lanka Guardian magazine for the
�reprinted� materials from other journals and magazines was irritating for me.
As a reader with academic background, I felt that this exercise was rather
amateurish from Mervyn de Silva�s stature as a complete professional. But, I
could understand his angle for this practice. Mervyn de Silva was primarily a
journalist, who by training, would benefit much by protecting [or hiding, is the
better word here.] the sources of his news from competition. Thus, providing
incomplete details became the norm, even when it was hardly necessary.
A predilection for permitting (by design or laxity unbecoming of a serious
editor) excessive pseudonymous contributors by Mervyn de Silva devalued the
worth of Lanka Guardian magazine as a serious journal of social commentary. The
select list of pseudonyms which have paraded the pages of the Lanka Guardian
magazine include, Andare, Arden, Chintaka, Rapier, Samudran, Zuhail and �A
Special Correspondent� (that ubiquitous spineless wimp, whose territory spans
both India and Sri Lanka).
(2) Accomodating tripe and mixing tripe with half truths
Especially in the early 1990s, the Lanka Guardian magazine has published
disgraceful sound bites emanating from India�s gumshoes (the notorious RAW and
its siblings) or those who worked in tandem with India�s gumshoes as the wisdom
of the Oracle. I couldn�t digest why Mervyn de Silva had to accommodate such
tripe in the Lanka Guardian magazine, unless he had a specific compulsion to
receive bits of intelligence from the corridors of the India House in Colombo.
Here is an example which appeared under the name of Mervyn de Silva.
�The story that the Sri Lankan �Tigers� had Chief Minister MGR on the hit list
may be somebody�s fanciful yarn. Yet it is no secret that the Tigers (and some
of the TULF leaders) are much closer to Karunanidhi�s DMK than to MGR�s ADMK
which has warm contacts with Mr.Thondaman.� (Lanka Guardian, June 15, 1982, p.3)
That the TULF leadership and the TELO militants of early 1980s were closer to
Karunanidhi�s DMK was a truth. But, that the then Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MGR
was on the �hit list� of �Tigers� was nothing but a tripe.
Mervyn de Silva was gracious enough to publish the following letter of mine,
relating to a RAW-generated tripe from India, on the Rajiv Gandhi assassination
case. To quote,
�I thank you for publishing in detail the �Final Report in
RC9/S/91/CBI/SCB/Madras � (Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case) Under Section 173
Criminal Penal Code (LG, Aug.15, 1992). What strikes me vividly is its
selectivity and superficiality in regurgitating the political events which
happened in Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka. For instance, nothing of the following has
been included in this document.
The role of Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) in training the Tamil militant
groups in Tamil Nadu.
The assassination attempt on Rajiv Gandhi in Colombo, after the signing of the
Indo-Sri Lankan Accord on July 1987.
The training and arming of the Tamil National Army by the Indian Peace Keeping
Force.
Maldives invasion by the PLOTE mercenaries and the Indian �assistance in
restoring peace.�
Even for a non-lawyer like me, it is apparent that the so-called �Final Report�
resembles the field note book of a RAW agent, than a legal document.� [Lanka
Guardian, Oct.1, 1992, p.5]
(3) Penchant for mischievous and erroneous highlights
Mervyn de Silva�s penchant for fandangle should not be underestimated. Though
this essay is not the appropriate location to evaluate Mervyn de Silva�s
writings on the Eelam militant movements (especially LTTE) which deserve an
in-depth study, I provide below three examples of his mischief and diversion
from facts.
�Though MGR is Mr.Thondaman�s friend, the pressure of his opponents and local
sentiment forced him to identify himself with the Eelamites.� (Lanka Guardian,
March 1, 1983, p.3)
�International opinion too has swung in Colombo�s favour. The [Rajiv] Gandhi
assassination has been too deadly an essay in international terrorism for the
international community to tolerate.� (Lanka Guardian, Aug.15, 1991, pp.3 & 6).
��Dr.Subramaniam Swamy, leader of the Samajawadi Party, and the man who told
�India Abroad� paper in Washington that it was he who used his Harvard contacts
(he is a visiting professor) to get David Kimche, the Director-General of the
Israeli Foreign Ministry, to channel Israeli assistance to the LTTE, including
expertise in landmines, as we now know from Viktor Ostrovski and Jane�s Defence
Weekly� (Lanka Guardian, Oct.15, 1991, pp.2-6).
The validity and merit of each of these three assertions by Mervyn de Silva have
been disproved by subsequent developments. That MGR had a conviction to support
the LTTE and its Eelam goal turned out to be true. However intelligent he might
have been, Mervyn de Sila was an ignoramus on MGR�s strategy. Mervyn de Silva�s
spin and anti-LTTE bias was overtly evident in his Aug.15, 1991 assertion on
Rajiv Gandhi assassination, when even the Indian authorities were clueless on
who were the masterminds behind that crime. Even 15 years later, the real truth
remains hidden. Saner thoughts should have dried up for Mervyn de Silva to
swallow the yarn spun by supreme self-promoter Subramaniam Swamy in 1991 about
his dubious role as a broker between Israel and LTTE!!
Also, see below the text of my very first contribution to the Lanka Guardian
magazine of March 1, 1981.
(4) A podium for Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyist harangue
Another drawback of the Lanka Guardian magazine which irked me was the abuse and
clogging of valued space by a few of Mervyn de Silva�s pet contributors.
Especially Dayan Jayatilleka (Mervyn de Silva�s son) and Izeth Hussain suffered
from cryptoracism, anti-LTTE bias and logorrhea (abnormally frequent evacuation
of words on everything under the Sun). The hair-splitting harangue on the
ephemera of Soviet-era Stalinism by Dayan Jayatilleka (and his alter-ego
Chintaka) was nauseating to many reader-subscribers. The pompous prose Izeth
Hussain belonging to Victorian era was nothing but repulsive to the tastes of
Tamils in particular.
(5) Pirabhakaran Envy
Though a talented Sri Lankan journalist with no parallel among his peers, Mervyn
de Silva arguably suffered from a milder form of �Pirabhakaran envy� malady. It
is my contention that he couldn�t believe before his eyes the reality of
watching the success of Pirabhakaran as a militant rebel, the one who created
his own successful army from zilch. There was no comparable precedence in Asia
in the 20th century, excluding Mao�s People Liberation Army formed in 1927.
Though Mervyn de Silva had portrayed this unusual achievement of Pirabhakaran in
complimentary terms on numerous occasions (Otherwise, his credentials as an
objective analyst of contemporary events would suffer), he would also
cryptically paint Pirabhakaran as a �one-dimensional militarist� and provide
subtle spin to demonize LTTE�s deeds.
See for example, the above-cited eulogy of Mervyn to Ranjan Wijeratne. A
penchant for strong discipline and military manners in a Sinhalese politician
appear as positive traits in the eyes of Mervyn de Silva. But the same or even a
higher degree of �strong discipline and military manners�, when demonstrated by
Pirabhakaran, was pejoratively equated by Mervyn de Silva to terrorist mindset.
Dayan Jayatilleka and the Lanka Guardian magazine
It is notable that Dayan Jayatilleka (Mervyn de Silva�s son and a long-time
Stalin admirer) now suffers seriously from this �Pirabhakaran envy� malady since
he could turn out to be only a �failed militant� of 1980s who �was on the run�
for years and could save his neck only by pleading for clemency. In my last
letter to Mervyn de Silva, dated Oct.20, 1996, I wrote as follows:
�Dear Mervyn: I noted with interest the change in the editorial mast-head of the LG, from the
Sept.1, [1996] issue and hence thought of writing to you. Now that Dayan
Jayatilleka has taken over the routine editorial job, I wish to express my
thanks for you personally, for the �job well done� for the past 18 years in
directing the path of LG. I have remained one of the loyal readers of the LG
since its inception, though I do not agree with all the views which were
expressed in its pages� Now a comment on your LG [Oct.1] salutation to �J.R.[Jayewardene] at 90�. I
believe that its time that you cut out the crap about massaging the bloated ego
of the old man, relating to his 1951 San Francisco [Peace] Conference and his
pleading on behalf of Japan. He has given you guys a rope and Sri Lankan
journalists have swallowed it and been quacking like a duck ever since. In my
years of living in Japan, I have never come across any comment or appreciation,
made by a Japanese politician, academic and even knowledgeable folks, on the
significance of J.R.�s message in a book, journal or a newspaper article. Sure
he made a �great� speech, but it did not affect Japan or Japanese that much.
Japanese are sincere to the thoughtful efforts made by the Americans and the
Indian judge Pal, who made a dissenting judgement against the war-time leaders
of Japan, at the Tokyo Trial. But, J.R.�s speech is just insignificant. It�s
time that you understand this issue in proper perspective. Prof.Kingsley de
Silva�s two volume hagiography on J.R. is a puff job. I wonder why LG has not
published a critical review on this. With best wishes.�
I also sent a letter to Dayan Jayatilleka, dated March 26, 1998, on the issue of
Tamil National Question. By then, he had become the editor of the Lanka Guardian
magazine. To quote from the contents of this letter, referring to the items
which had appeared under his by-line in the Feb/March 1998 issue of the
magazine:
�The Tamil National Question Revisited: I�m amused by your venomous commment on V.Prabhakaran as �South Asia�s Hitler�.
In the same page, you tag the Tamils who live beyond the Sri Lankan borders as
�Tamil Zionist� lobby. Can�t you grasp the irony of this illogical oxymoronic
comparison? In my reading of the world history, Hitler and Zionists were opposed
to each other in their goals. So, how come, Prabhakaran and those who subscribe
to his goals can be tagged as opposing parties? Boy! There is no doubt that you
can write polemics and you have a passion and skill for this type of verbal
pyrotechnics. Sad to say, you are a pauper in logic and rationality. What a
waste of your talents!
The name Hitler has become a putty in the hands of paranoid politicians and
petty journalists to thrown on their opponents. George Bush [Sr.] used it
effectively on Saddam Hussein, while killing innocent 200,000 Iraq citizens, to
satisfy his ego. The mere fact that Prabhakaran did not gie false premises to
win a nation-wide election to elevate himself as a leader shows that the
comparison of him to Hitler is inappropriate. On the contrary your political
mentor [President] Premadasa, or for that matter his bete noire Sirimavo
Bandaranaike behaved like Hitler in killing thousands of civilians (Sinhalese
and Tamils) after winning the general elections with false promises.
As far as the non-Sinhalese citizens of Sri Lanka are concerned, the Gestapo
state exists in reality in the southern Sri Lanka. Recent experience of
journalist Iqbal Athas highlighted in the international press (or for that
matter what happened to Richard de Zoysa) are examples of Gestapo style attacks
on the human rights of Sri Lankan civilians. Unknown to elites like you is the
fact that, thousands of non-Sinhalese civilians suffer from this type of
humiliation. I speak with first hand experience, since two years ago, my father
who lives in Bambalapitiya and has passed the biblical span of three score and
ten years was taken in the middle of the night by security forces and detained.
I was informed later that he was released only after our kind Sinhalese neighbor
went [to the police station] and strongly protested against such illegal
detention.
As a reader of LG from its date of inception, I�m glad that the next issue will
turn out as the 20th anniversary issue. I�m also glad to learn that your short
tenure as the editor of LG is also coming to an end. I want to shoot straight.
Mervyn de Silva is a great journalist and a good editor. You are a great
polemicist and a bad editor. Despite your self-congratulatory gloating, I feel
sad that you had turned the LG (a journal, one of its kind to bloom in Sri
Lankan soil), during your short tenure, into a �Premadasa Pooja Brochure�. You
killed the vibrant correspondence column, which Mervyn de Silva nurtured
diligently. Instead, we poor readers have been continuously served with insipid,
bloated commentaries and vituperative insults on readers intelligence from the
serviles of Premadasa (you, H.L.D.Mahindapala and Tisaranee Gunasekera).
You are entitled for your views on Eelam. But if you read widely and think
pragmatically, you will comprehend that the global political trend is for
self-determination and separation of oppressed ethnic groups, and not toward
integration with their perceived oppressors. This happens in Tibet (against
Chinese domination), Chechen (against Russian domination), Kashmir (against
Indian domination), Quebec (against Canadian Anglo domination), Scotland
(against English domination), Palestine (against Israeli domination), Kurdistan
(against Iraq-Iran-Turkey domination) and East Timor (against Indonesian
domination). So you make a fool of yourself by predicting a �strong, centralized
State: a unitary state�, as �the way out for the Sinhala speaking people.�
If you are a progessive thinker, I request that you publish this critical letter
of your commentary on Tamil National Question, in the pages of LG. I bet, you
will not.�
With this letter, my unsolicited role as an Eelam apologist in the Lanka
Guardian magazine came to an end. Mervyn de Silva passed away on June 22, 1999,
and with his departure curtain dropped on the Lanka Guardian magazine as well.
Appendix
Observations on the Madurai Tamil Conference
by Sachi Sri Kantha
[courtesy: Lanka Guardian, March 1, 1981, p.15]
I write in reply to your comment under �News Background� on �MGR and Tamil
sub-plot� (LG, Feb.1, 1981). Since this comment contains so many inaccuracies,
and as a Sri Lankan delegate who was an eye witness to many of the scenes which
had been referred to in the comment, I am compelled to reply for the benefit of
the LG readers.
Prior to commenting on the incidents which occurred in Madurai, I would like to
draw the attention of the readers to a sentence which gives a serious
misinterpretation of events which occurred in 1974. I categorically deny your
statement that, ��In 1974 at the last Conference several persons were killed in
Jaffna when Police fired on demonstrators shouting slogans against the
Bandaranaike government and demanding Eelam�. Firstly the columnist had erred in
equating the incident of Jan.10, 1974 with the demand of Eelam. Eelam demand had
not been originated [emphasis as in original] at that time, if political records
of this island have to be believed. This demand was first put forward vehemently
by S.J.V.Chelvanayakam, the leader of the TULF, when he contested the KKS [i.e.,
Kankesanthurai] by-election, held on the 6th February 1975. Eelam demand was
officially adopted for the First National Convention of the TULF held at
Vaddukoddai on 14th May 1976.
Secondly, regarding the incidents of 10th Jan.1974, I would prefer to quote from
the �Report of the Commission of Inquiry, on the Tragedy of January Tenth 1974�,
published on 18th Feb.1974. The Commission consisted of Mr.O.L.De Kretser,
Mr.V.Manicavasagar (both former Judges of the Supreme Court) and the
Rt.Rev.Dr.Sabapathy Kulandran (former Bishop of Jaffna). To quote the inferences
made by this Commission,
�The irresistible conclusion we come to is that the police on this night was
guilty of a violent and quite an unnecessary attack on unarmed citizens. We are
gravely concerned that they lacked the judgement which we expected of policemen
in a civilian police force whose duties call for tactful handling even in the
most difficult situation. The evidence establishes that this was not all that took place that night. The
police in their armed might roved the city, assaulting whomsoever they came
across for no better reason than that the people were doing what they were
entitled to do. We are of the opinion that those who suffered physical injury and material
damage, and those who lost their lives were the innocent victims of a chain of
events set in motion by a completely wrong and unwise decision on the part of
the police officer who made it. We can find no justification at all for the
police assault on defenceless and innocent citizens.�
These inferences made by the learned Commission, do not vindicate the assertion
made by the LG columnist that, �Police fired on demonstrators shouting slogans
against the Bandaranaike government and demanding Eelam�. I give the choice for
the LG readers to pick out which is correct.
Regarding the events at Madurai Conference, being an eye witness, I agree with
the LG columnist, that �pro-TULF Tamil expatriates sought to internationalise
the issue, and to a greater extent they had succeeded.� Though the exhibition
stall organised by the Eelam supporters who travelled from UK and USA, was
demolished on the instructions of Tamil Nadu government, the administration
could not stop the activists pasting the posters depicting the �Jan.10 incidents
of 1974 Conference� all over the Madurai city, again on 7th night.
As a matter of fact, large crowds converging to Madurai city, gathered around
the places where these posters were pasted; the posters themselves were
different in colour, content and appeal. In fact most of the commoners were
blaming the MGR administration, for not allowing them to know what had really
happened in the 1974 Tamil Conference.
It is strange that LG columnist had not been informed of the speeches made by
our two Tamil �Generals� of J.R.Jayewardene. If Amirthalingam delivered a very
restrained address at the Opening Ceremony on the 4th of January, it seemed to
us, the Sri Lankan delegates, that Thondaman had played the role what Amir was
expected to play. Thondaman�s address at this function was more political,
exceeding the limits warranted for; and mindyou, he was pleading for the Tamil
minority community. He went to the extreme of quoting General de Gaulle�s
sympathy towards the French-speaking Canadians living in Quebec.
Though our Speaker of Parliament had been recognised by the LG columnist, as the
Tamil-speaking Moslem MP, in my opinion, he did not perform well to bring repute
for this compliment. Bakeer Marker, made a smattering speech in Tamil, mainly
reading a lengthy text with awkward accent and unwarranted pauses. Many of our
colleagues commented that Professor Asher from the University of Edinburgh
delivered a better impromptu address in Tamil for a full fifteen minutes!
|
