TAMIL GRIEVANCES - A FRESH PERSPECTIVE
The leader of
The
Sri Lanka is with the rest of the world, searching for a constitution and
a form of government that can best serve the individuals within the Sri Lankan
community. But constitutions and forms of government whatever they be, cannot
serve "best", all the People in all the communities within one nation
state. The implication then is that some individuals are less served than
others, often, not in an absolute measurable form, but more in a relative and
emotively perceived sense.
Of all the factors that contribute to a "well-functioning"
society, the most significant one seems to be the ability to include the
individual in the process of governance. Such inclusion makes the individual
aware of the dynamics relating to the issues at the national level, and
empowers the individual to develop the necessary understanding for compromise.
This awareness prepares the individual for any sacrifices needed for the
well-being of the national community.
Had issues relating to language, colonization schemes, and
standardization, the most contentious issues at the heart of the Sri Lankan
Tamil community's grievances, been debated publicly, the outcomes in all
likelihood may have been different. Discussion even at this stage will reveal that
the legislation that was unacceptable to the Sri Lankan Tamil community is
being practiced by the very countries in which they have sought refuge. The
principles involved were internationally practiced, and certainly not
discriminatory. The absence of public debate and discussion permitted the
political leadership to misrepresent the legislation as attempts to victimize
sections of the society. Unless these impressions are corrected, the ethnic
will persist. Towards correcting these misrepresentations, the three issues,
language and medium of instruction, standardization, and state sponsored
colonization are reviewed in relation to practices in other countries.
LANGUAGE AND THE
MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION
Language is a vital factor that binds people together in a concept of
nationhood. With a view to creating national consciousness and greater
political participation, countries endeavor to legislate the use of a single
language, as seen even in multi-ethnic societies as the
Canada, on the other hand, has 25 percent of its population speaking
French, while the remaining 75 per cent speak English, both of which are
official languages. The population of
Sri Lanka too started with prospects of Sinhala and Tamil as the Official
Languages to replace English in 1944, but over time, changed to Sinhala only in
1956, to the "reasonable" use of Tamil in 1958, to Tamil becoming a
national language in 1978, and finally, to Tamil enjoying equal status with
Sinhala and English as the official languages of Sri Lanka. Sinhala and Tamil
are the languages of instruction in the schools, and in some, both Sinhala and
Tamil media exist in the same school, thus indelibly impressing the ethnic
divisions from the early ages. Countries like Canada, Belgium, and Sri Lanka
who have similar problems relating to language have to resort to other means to
establish "common bonds" between their citizens because forging
national identity through language would not be possible.
If a language enjoys regional status, a citizen could conduct his or her
business in comfort. On the other hand, a citizen from outside the region would
have to depend on the facilities available in his or her particular language to
transact business. If the language enjoys national status every citizen is
entitled to expect the availability of facilities anywhere in the country to
transact business. The difference between reality and expectation is what is
often experienced by divided societies, whether it is
Sri Lankans, like citizens of any other country in similar circumstances
must accept the inherent operational realities of multi-lingualism. Since
minorities must necessarily be in contact with the larger sections of the
society for greater opportunities, there is greater likelihood for the
infrastructure to fail. The reverse process is likely to be less frequent.
This, unfortunately, is the dynamics of the situation, and is a constant lament
expressed as a grievance, whether it is a French-Canadian outside
A French-Canadian in one of the Western provinces of
Similarly, in the field of employment, whether it is a French-Canadian, a
Walloon, a Fleming, or a Sri Lankan Tamil, a person versed only in the language
of the region can hope to find employment only within the region.
Traditionally, Sri Lankan Tamils sought employment outside Tamil-speaking
areas, even seeking employment outside the country, due to the dismal prospects
within their region. In order to extend their prospects beyond the region they
had to equip themselves with a second language, but knowledge of English alone
without Sinhala would have limited their employment to the Private Sector.
The sense of isolation brought on by language causes a community to be
inhibited when it comes to political participation at the national level.
Issues are perceived in terms of the regional dimensions alone; the larger
national perspectives are invariably missed, because of the inability to
participate in the dialogue at the national level. Access to outside opinions
are denied through the barrier of language. It is perhaps for these reasons
that the
STANDARDIZATION IN
The
Whether diversity was introduced by private universities with a view to
improving the quality of education, or by state funded universities to be more
representative of the society in which the university operated, measures such
as Affirmative Action and Standardization were in the best traditions practiced
by the leading educational institutions. The principle at issue is that no
elite whatever its composition, ethnic, religious, or social class, is entitled
to a disproportionate or unreasonable share of privileges. During the five year
period prior to the introduction of Standardization in Sri Lanka the number of
Tamil students entering the Engineering and Medical faculties were in fact MORE
than the number of Sinhalese students, despite the ratio of Sri lankan Tamils being
only one sixth of the Sinhalese. (Daily News, May 10, 1996: article reproduced
from a book by V.P. Vittachi).
Under these circumstances, the
To quote the Chancellor of the
The claim by the Tamil youth that selection should have been on the basis
of "raw marks" has no place in the admission practices in any of the
leading educational institutions in the world. In a letter to the Editor of the
New York Times, the Deans of Admissions at Dartmouth College and Princeton
University stated that, "Beyond a student's own record of achievement, it
is the input from high school counselors and teachers that we treat as the most
valuable and reliable sources of information"(April 24, 1996). In fact,
from the inception until the early sixties the basis of selection to the University
in
Many Tamil youth evidently joined the militant movements because they
perceived standardization as a deliberately crafted measure to discriminate
against them, and the leadership exploited the situation to gain the maximum
political advantage. Even at this late stage, instead of attempting to explain
the issues associated with Standardization, statements such as "The
skewing of higher education in favor of the Sinhalese majority was a climactic
step of felt discrimination among the Tamils and finally drove the Tamil youth
movement for Eelam to take up arms and engage in militant confrontation"(Tambiah,
1992, Buddhism Betrayed?), are disingenuous because they perpetuate narrow and
misguided conceptions, and vindicate and justify the violence.
These remarks are a far cry from concepts of Dharma which are central to
the Hindu-Buddhist theory of justice. Concepts of obligation and responsibility
to others, other than oneself, are attitudes handed down from the ages. It is
this sense of justice and responsibility that frowns on any elite, whether
ethnic, religious, or social class that claim as a right an undue share of the
resources. The history of man is replete with instances where societies have
adopted measures to correct the skewing of benefits to elites. The fact that
not one Tamil has acknowledged the existence of the larger issues involved means
that the Tamil community will continue to live their lives under the delusion
that it was a "climactic step" that was conceived with deliberate and
insidious intent. At least for the sake of those Tamil youth who laid their
lives in the belief that standardization on the grounds of media or district
was a wrong practice, it is necessary that evidence be cited of institutions
that admit students only on the basis of "raw marks". In the absence
of such evidence, they and thousands of others would have perished in vain, for
which, those who failed to explain the larger issues involved, and continue to
do so, must take full responsibility.
COLONIZATION
SCHEMES
In a publication by the International Centre for Ethnic Studies titled
Control of State Land, Mr. Sunil Bastian states that the implementation of
these colonization schemes was motivated by a desire to "to protect the
smallholder peasantry as a class... and serving the interests of large-scale
capital also have a close link with Sinhala nationalism". Tambiah
(Buddhism Betrayed) states "The Dry Zone was the ancient site of a much
glorified Sinhala Buddhist civilation...and a return of Sinhalese peasantry to
the area is seen as a recreation of that past". Continuing, Tambiah adds
that "it was inevitable that the Sri Lankan Tamils would see the massive
migrations of Sinhalese into the Dry Zone as an intrusion into their alleged
"homelands"".
These remarks reflect the sentiments of the Tamil community as a whole in
regard to these colonization schemes. If "recreating the past" and
protecting the "smallholder peasantry" was the primary motivating
force as popularly believed, then restoration of these ancient irrigation works
was only a massive Archeological exercise. Unlike other Archeological
monuments, irrigation works have a utilitarian value and because of this value
serious efforts were made by the Dutch and the British to restore these
irrigation schemes long before the 1920s (Bastian, Tambiah) because of the economic
benefits to their community. But they failed in their attempts, and many have
recorded their frustrations, the primary cause for which was the the lack of
manpower to harness the land.
S.V.Balasingham in his book "The Administration of Sir Henry
Ward" !855 - 1860, states "His (Sir Ward) observations on his tour of
the Tamankaduwa areas had convinced him that colonisation was the first
essential. "Why repair Kowdelly Tank or Padiwel Colum and pour streams of
water that we cannot use, for want of hands to till the soil? Colonise or do
nothing". After referring to reports by Governor Tennent and Secretary of
State Earl Grey, Balasingham states, "the two greatest obstacles to be
surmounted were finance and lack of labour, for restoring these works... Thus, Ward
decided to give up the undertaking, as an Utopian task".
Incontrovertible evidence of this nature and many other sources confirm
that the British interests in reviving the agricultural potential of the
country was prompted by economic considerations and not by a romantic desire to
"recreate a past". The situation was even more adverse at the time of
independence, and it is for economic reasons that the impetus given by the
British to the agricultural policies was continued at an accelerated pace. As
President Bill Clinton said, "it is the economy, stupid". Other
countries too built multi purpose schemes as part of a diversified economic
policy. Unlike the
But, as stated by the colonial administrators, where were the colonists
to come from? The claim that these colonization schemes were revived with some
diabolical scheme in mind to justify "the massive migration of
Sinhalese" and thereby achieve the ultimate goal of altering the
demographic composition of "alleged homelands", is absolute paranoia.
Was the expectation that these "alleged homelands" were to be kept in
their pristine form, untouched, in order to maintain the demographics? If not
for the pioneering spirit of the Sinhalese "peasantry" that was
driven by a hunger for land, these territories would still be under the mantle
of the jungle, because the Tamil "peasant" could not be pursuaded to
endure the hardships involved (S. Peiris quoting B.H. Farmer has dealt with
this subject area extensively). Such exclusive expectations, where a potential
resource is to be kept unutilized so that the demographics remain unaltered,
are unacceptable by any standards. The obvious solution is to find a mechanism
that would retain the level of representation for the Tamil community despite
the altered demographics of a region, and there is nothing exotic about these
mechanisms as they are ongoing processes in other countries due to continual
demographic changes.
CONCLUSION
Published opinions and attitudes continue to express that the major areas
in which the Tamil community at large has been wronged is in regard to
language, standardization, and the colonization schemes. As explained, these
opinions have more to do with perceptions than reality. As regards language,
the ability to communicate in a common language contributes to greater
cohesion, inclusion, and participation in the democratic processes of a nation.
The two language policy in
Many young Sri Lankans have been fortunate enough to gain admission to
foreign universities. If most of them are under the delusion that they got
there on the strength of their "raw marks" they are mistaken. Not
only are they there by virtue of the fact that most institutions believe in the
merits of diversity, but also by being selected, they are inevitably denying
more qualified students from the host country from entering these institutions
on the basis of "raw SAT marks" . If the Tamil youth were made to
believe in the justice of selection based on "raw marks", they have
been misguided by their elders, and those elders who are fully aware of the
practices in these countries are continuing to delude them by their silence.
Although the Sri Lankan authorities were aware that the number of Tamil youth
entering were excessive, the basis of selection was altered to standardization
ONLY after the numbers became unacceptable by any standards. One may question
the merits of the particular mechanism chosen, but no one can deny the
principle that no section of any society should have the opportunity to enjoy
an undue share of the benefits at the expense of the others. The principle of
the issue involved must be recognized and accepted.
With regard to the colonization schemes, the allegation continues to be
that Sinhala nationalism was the primary motivational force for reviving these
ancient schemes. Even the colonial powers realized the inherent potential to
the economy if these resources could be exploited to their full potential, but
could not accomplish their objectives due to lack of manpower. They even
contemplated the use of compulsory labor as suggested by Governor Torrington
(Balasingham, 1968). In the absence of compulsion, persuasion was tried, and
just as much as
The effort needed amounted to a social revolution, and the leaders of
many newly independent nations exploited the deeds of the past to motivate
their people, and the Sri Lankan leaders were no different. But to refer to
these colonization schemes as "high-handed political aggression" and
"One race... should not encroach upon the land of another race living in
the same country" (A.J.Wilson, 1994, S.J.V. Chelvanayakam: quoting
Chelvanayakam), is totally off the mark and a gross misinterpretation of the
bona-fides of the Sinhala leadership. The issue was how to exploit the
potentials of a resource for the benefit of a whole nation. If as a result of
exploiting these resources the Tamil community was affected adversely because
of demographic changes, the solution was to address those issues but certainly
not to halt or alter the development of the resources of the country.
These views are brought to the attention of the reader with the intent
that there would be a paradigm shift in the manner in which these three issues
are perceived. It is only discussion, debate, and public participation that
helps a society to better understand issues. Had these issues been discussed
openly by the public in
Neville Ladduwahetty, August 4, 1996
Go to Polarization of the Tamil Community
Return to the LAKBIMA Home Page