Issues At Stake In Sri Lankan Crisis

 Prakash Karat

THE political crisis in Sri Lanka has drawn international attention. It should be of serious concern for India and in particular for the Left and democratic forces. President Chandrika Kumaratunga has divested the ministers of defence, interior and media of the Wickremesinghe government of their portfolios. She also prorogued parliament for two weeks and assumed charge of national security. This action of the president, who has executive powers under the constitution, took place when prime minister Wickremesinghe was on an official visit to the United States. The president belongs to the Sri Lanka Freedom Party while the prime minister, who won the parliamentary elections in December 2001, belongs to the United National Party. The crisis was precipitated by the divergent views held by the two leaders on how to proceed with the peace talks with the LTTE.

Twenty months ago, with Norwegian mediation, a ceasefire was declared putting an end to the ceaseless fighting between the Sri Lankan armed forces and the LTTE. Talks began to resolve the longstanding and chronic problem of how to accommodate the Tamil minority aspirations within the framework of Sri Lanka. After a few rounds of negotiations, the talks got stalled in April 2003 when the LTTE refused to carry on, accusing the Sri Lankan government of violation of some of the agreements. The Norwegian mediators backed by the United States and other European countries worked to revive the stalled talks. As a result, the LTTE submitted its proposals for an “Interim Self-Governing Authority” (ISGA) for the north-eastern region. This is the first document prepared by the LTTE which sets out what it considers to be the framework for a negotiated settlement.

DIFFERENCES ON TALKS

It is this proposal which has precipitated the current round of confrontation between the president and the prime minister. The Sri Lankan constitution provides for an executive presidency which was ushered in by President Jayawardene who belonged to the UNP. Under this dispensation, defence is directly under the president. President Kumaratunga has been voicing her concern throughout the negotiations at the manner in which the LTTE is being allowed to consolidate its position in the north-east without decommissioning its armed forces. She had seriously objected to the Norwegian proposal to allow the LTTE certain naval facilities. Recently she called for the removal of the Norwegian mediator envoy the negotiations.

It is on the vital question of defence and control of the armed forces that the current confrontation is centred. The Supreme Court, on a presidential reference, has upheld the president’s powers on defence matters. It has held that the defence minister cannot take substantial decisions bypassing the president.

The forthcoming parliament session which was scheduled to open on November 12 would have seen a confrontation on this question including a threat by a section of the ruling party to move for the impeachment of the chief justice of the Supreme Court.

It is in the background of the widening differences between the president and the prime minister that the LTTE’s proposals for the interim authority sharply escalated the confrontation. The Wickremesinghe government had reacted cautiously stating that the LTTE proposal can be the basis for further talks while commenting that the proposal went beyond the proposals of the government. President Kumaratunga, on her part, has strongly opposed the interim authority proposal, rejecting it as inimical to the unity and integrity of Sri Lanka.

President Kumaratunga stepped back from imposing a state of emergency and called upon the government to continue with the peace talks. The Wickremesinghe government retorted that parliament be convened immediately as it alone is competent to decide on the talks. Kumaratunga in response called for the formation of a government of national unity consisting of all political parties. The Wickremesinghe government has stated that it is not in a position to conduct the talks with key ministries such as defence and interior out of its purview. It has asked the president to take charge of the negotiations. Thus the tussle goes on.

LTTE PLAN FOR DE FACTO STATE

The LTTE proposal for an interim authority is nothing but the prelude to the setting up of a separate state of eelam. A study of the document shows that the powers demanded for the authority go outside the framework of the Sri Lankan state. The LTTE wants an absolute majority in the authority with some Muslim and Sinhala participation. A five-year term is proposed for the authority till a final settlement is reached. The LTTE wants the appointment of an independent election commission to conduct elections under international supervision for the authority at the end of the five-year term. During this period the ISGA would have the powers to raise taxes, maintain law and order and establish its own legal system. The document says “separate institutions for the administration of justice shall be established for the north-east and judicial powers shall be vested for such institutions.” The LTTE does not say what will be the status of its armed forces but it provides for its naval forces operating in an indirect way. The document states the authority should have control over the marine and offshore resources of the adjacent seas and the power to regulate them. This can be undertaken only with a naval force.

In the case of a dispute between the authority and the Sri Lankan government on the agreement, if it is not resolved through discussions or Norwegian facilitation, then the dispute should be referred to a three-member panel for arbitration. If there is disagreement on who should be the chairperson, then the president of the International Court of Justice will be asked to appoint the person. The Sri Lankan state and its institutions will have no role in settling such disputes. The LTTE’s proposals negate a federal structure with substantial regional autonomy. It is a blueprint for a separate state.

It is understandable that such a proposal would alarm those who are committed to Sri Lanka being a united entity. The Wickremesinghe government does not overly seem concerned about the threat posed by such a plan. With the European countries and the United States backing his peace efforts, the prime minister in his political battle with the president has not addressed this vital question.

US SUPPORT FOR THE PM

The United States has announced that it supports the prime minister in the name of backing the peace process. In the recent period, especially after September 11, the United States has shown keen interest in intervening in the Sri Lankan situation and the ethnic conflict. It should also be remembered that Norway is part of the NATO alliance. The doctrine expounded by the United States and certain European countries that state sovereignty should be subordinated to problems of human rights and solution of ethnic conflicts is also at work in aggravating the complicated nationality problem in Sri Lanka.

AUTONOMY WITHIN FEDERAL SYSTEM

The stand taken by Sinhala chauvinists of denying any autonomy based on a federal structure and the separatist stand of the LTTE which admits “One State two nations” have to be rejected. The CPI(M) and the Left forces in India have consistently advocated for the recognition of the genuine rights of the Tamil people. For decades the ruling classes in Sri Lanka have pandered to Sinhala chauvinism and denied the Tamil minority their democratic rights. The solution for this has to be found by institutionalising regional autonomy within the framework of Sri Lankan unity. This requires a federal framework and a change over from the current state and constitutional structure.

The Indian government will do well to adhere to the position set out in the joint statement during the recent visit of Ranil Wickremesinghe: “Any interim agreement should be an integral part of the final settlement and should be in the framework of the unity and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka.”

Chandrika Kumaratunga as president in 1997 had come out with a set of proposals which recognised this reality. In 2001 a diluted version of this was set out with the concurrence of the UNP which was rejected by the Tamil parties. It is unfortunate that neither the SLFP nor the UNP, the two biggest parties in Sri Lanka, have been able to come to an understanding on the federal/devolution proposals which alone can be the basis for a democratic solution.

LTTE THREAT

The LTTE is now dominant in the Tamil areas. It has eliminated other political forces and intimidated those who remain, into submission. The quest for a separate Tamil eelam has not given the Tamils justice or equal rights, instead it has brought great suffering and disruption in the lives of ordinary people.  Unlike many politicians in Tamilnadu who blindly support the LTTE’s demand for eelam, the Left and democratic forces must recognise the perils of breaking up a country like Sri Lanka which is India’s neighbour and partner in South Asia.

For the last one and a half years, the cessation of hostilities has brought relief to the people, both Tamil and Sinhala, who have lost 64,000 lives in the civil war. The desire for peace is strong and neither the president nor the prime minister can ignore this reality. That is why both have reiterated that the peace process should go on. At the same time, it is undeniable that the LTTE has consolidated its grip in the north and is extending it in the east too. The conflict between the two major parties will only benefit the LTTE. There is no escape for both Kumaratunga and Wickremesinghe. Either they strive for a common front to conduct the negotiations, or early elections will have to be held for parliament to get a fresh mandate.