|
To those following Tamil affairs in this country, two events that took place
over the past week would strike as somewhat odd. On Sunday, March 17, the Ceylon
WorkersO Congress (CWC) organised a ponguthamil elurchchi (Tamil awakening) in
the heart of hill country, Nuwara Eliya, attended by more than 15,000 people. At
the meeting CWC Leader Arumugam Thondaman said, OUpcountry Tamils should extend
their whole-hearted support to the north-east Tamils to win their rights.'
On Tuesday, March 19, at a massive ponguthamil rally in Trincomalee, the leader
of the Upcountry Peoples' Front (UPF), which is the second most popular
political party in the hill country addressed the 50,000 strong public. P.
Chandrasekaran said, 'Tamils in Sri Lanka today live with self respect because
of the sacrifices made by thousands of Tamil youths in armed liberation
struggle. V. Prabhakaran ... is today unanimously endorsed as the saviour of the
Tamils in the island.'
What springs to the mind is that both Thondaman and Chandrasekaran are ministers
in the government and were largely instrumental for seeing the Tamil-dominated
central highlands swinging towards the UNF at the last general elections.
The ponguthamil festival was successfully conducted in 2001 in a number of towns
in the north-east. It was instrumental in mobilising support for the overthrow
of the PA regime that was represented in the north-east by the EPDP. The
festivals focused basically on two sets of demands ¥ the right to
self-determination of the Tamils and the unilateral declaration of a ceasefire
by the LTTE to commence negotiations.
Around the same time last year, members of the 10 party alliance, which could be
said to have been the predecessor of the Tamil National Alliance (TNA),
participated in a fast in Hatton that was spearheaded by the CWC and the UPF.
The fast however was in sympathy with the wage demands of the plantation workers
and not a ponguthamil elurchchi.
The implications of a festival that was once primarily a political event
celebrated by the Tamils of the north-east now 'spreading' to Tamils of recent
Indian origin in the hill country is, to say the least, very significant. The
reason probably is that to an important regional actor in a game that is fast
attracting local, regional and international players, a series of agitation
based on a Tamil identity that brings together all Tamils in Sri Lanka will be
advantageous for leverage in the on-going peace process.
There has been an attempt to portray the recent ponguthamil in the plantations
as a mobilisation for peace. Though interpretations might differ from festival
to festival depending on what the organisers want to emphasise, the thrust of
ponguthamil is ethno-nationalist. It is essentially a mass movement that gains
strength by celebrating unity derived from oneness.
This does not mean however that the thrust of the celebrations at the other
festivals was war. It should be noted that ponguthamil became a factor in Sri
Lankan politics only after the LTTE declared its first unilateral ceasefire in
December 2000 as a precursor for talks. Tamil political forces used the festival
to highlight issues that had to be addressed in a situation where there was an
absence of war.
It was during the series of festivals last year that the basic four-point agenda
was drawn up that was later used by the TNA as its political platform during the
campaign for general elections. The agenda called for the LTTE to be the Tamils'
sole representative at the peace talks, for a de-proscription of the Tigers, a
ceasefire to be declared between the two combatants and for negotiations to
commence between them. The ponguthamil elurchchi also stated that any settlement
reached on the basis of talks should be founded on the Tamils' right to
self-determination and a homeland.
It can be seen therefore that the festivals that have been held regularly from
early 2001 articulated certain fundamental Tamil demands of a political nature
in events that also celebrated the cultural and linguistic aspects of Tamil
identity. A similar Tamil revivalism was seen at the 'Tamil is our life; that
life is Prabhakaran' festival at Mutharipputhurai near Mannar in early February.
The DMK's political agenda in Tamil Nadu in the 1950s and early 1960s was very
similar.
The ponguthamil elurchchi has created a degree of apprehension in the minds of
the Sinhalese. There have been a number of factors that have caused such
misgivings. One is that Sri Lanka is primarily a Sinhala-Buddhist country, where
ethnic minorities should not be given the space to assert their individual
identities as it erodes the unity of the Sri Lankan nation. Two, the
proclamation of Tamilness in such an assertive way could destabilise the fragile
peace process. In other words, what is called for today is moderation and
restraint, not militant revivalism.
Three, the publicity and media coverage the festivals receive make the events
very public and very much in the face of the other communities. This is
specially so because the media coverage includes vivid visual images of the
attendees, decorations and speakers. Four, there is a fear that if not checked
on time, a ponguthamil will be celebrated in Colombo, the seat of government and
thereby of Sinhala hegemony.
Threading together these four reasons for Sinhala suspicion is the fear that
ponguthamil is created and orchestrated by the LTTE for its own aggrandisement,
thereby legitimising its militant form of politics. In other words, ponguthamil
celebrates the support the Tigers have among the Tamils.
There are a number of considerations that one has to bear in mind before rushing
into such conclusions. Firstly, it will be instructive to view ponguthamil in
its historical perspective. Those observing events in the political arena after
1977 will say that Sinhala - Tamil relations were primarily worked out only
through an armed struggle. It was arms that determined the contours of the
relationship ¥ either arousing acrimony, or allowing for accommodation.
Others who have been observing politics from the pre-1977 era have forgotten
that inter-ethnic relations during that period were worked out through mass
mobilisation that took on different forms - sometimes even civil disobedience.
The action of the Federal Party (FP) in the 1950s, 60s and early 70s was based
purely on mass mobilisation. The agitation surrounding the language issue, the
national flag and 'Sri,' and various attempts at conflict resolution such as the
B-C pact and D-C pact involved mass mobilisation. And the anger provoked even by
events not strictly of a political nature but involving large scale celebration
of Tamilness may be seen in the World Tamil Conference of 1974, which ended in a
police - civilian confrontation and an accident that took four lives.
Significantly, the FP in these years also organised rallies and agitation in the
plantation areas because its agenda included demanding the restoration of
citizenship rights to Tamils of recent Indian origin. It was only after the
formation of the TULF and its campaign taking on a Tamil separatist agenda after
the Vaddukodai Resolution in 1976, that Saumiyamoorthy Thondaman decided to part
company with his Tamil brothers of the north-east.
Therefore, ponguthamil that follows the tradition of non-violent agitation,
including mass mobilisation, is nothing new in the Sri Lankan political arena.
It follows precedents that were first tested in an era where the political
contest between the Tamils and Sinhalese were not based on armed struggle -
either of a guerrilla nature or conventional one.
The second issue relates to that of the TNA's political programme that was
conceived, and articulated freely before the last general election. The TNA
leaders are on record that Tamil struggle for their rights in the absence of war
would be through mass mobilisation and an active participation of the public in
the campaign for political concessions. Therefore, it is not correct to say that
ponguthamil was sprung on the Sri Lankan public - ample notice was given
earlier.
The third set of issues concern the character of the state and the issues of
hegemony and multiculturalism. The Indo-Lanka Accord of 1987 states clearly that
Sri Lanka is a multi-ethnic, multi-lingual and multi-religious state. What this
means is that all communities should have the right to hold their festivals,
celebrations and rallies as long as it does not disturb the peace and is not an
infringement on others' rights. And ponguthamil is expressly such an event.
Despite the peaceful nature of the festivals there have been concerted efforts
at branding them as LTTE propaganda. Arumugam Thondaman described this
phenomenon succinctly when he said in his address last week, 'While I was in
Nuwara Eliya, there were telephone calls that I was attempting to create
communalistic upheavals here and that I was the biggest Kottiya...'
A telling incident that further highlights this intolerance was last week when
with scant regard for Tamil sensitivities, the 23-3 (Batticaloa) brigade
commander accosted peaceful Tamils who were building a monument to commemorate
the sacrifice of Annai Poopathy, a martyr who fasted to death protesting the
IPKF's depredations in the east.
The Tamils and their political leadership are very conscious of one thing: that
a ceasefire does not mean peace or that all their demands have been won. It only
means that armed conflict has been temporarily brought to a halt. The demands
and the grievances remain, which have to be addressed in a non-violent
atmosphere and through non-violent means. The mode of the struggle has changed
to involve mass mobilisation and non-violent agitation that does not contravene
the law. In other words, just because there is a cessation of hostilities it
does not mean the political processes have come to a stop too.
Finally, we have to realise that in the past 25 years an Eelam has been created
in the minds of Sri Lankans - especially the Tamils who feel alienated from the
state. If they are to be brought back into thinking as Sri Lankans, an
accommodation of their cultural and political festivals is a must. Because we
cannot conceive of devolution of power to Tamil majority areas, or regional
autonomy without creating a mindset in the south that is accommodative of
diversity.
To feel that ponguthamil is an over-visible and militant rallying cry of Tamil
forces is a manifestation of Sinhala hegemony that has helped to ruin this
country for over half a century. And earlier steps are taken to check this
unfortunate tendency, and agree to a spirit that views Sri Lanka as a
multi-ethnic state, the earlier would the emotional environment be created to
accept what the peace process might end up offering.
|
