Tamils are the oldest inhabitants of the sub-continental region...
I am truly happy to be in your midst identifying myself with your hopes and aspirations. When the meeting started, it was done in a very picturesque and poetic manner with the lighting of a lamp and it reminded me of a Vedic hymn which is very appropriate when we remember the struggle which is taking place in Sri Lanka.
When there is a conflict, truth is the first casualty. The first line says, 'lead us from untruth to truth', the second, 'from darkness lead us into light', and the third, 'from death lead us to immortality'. I think everyone who has died in this struggle has become immortal.
The Tamils are the oldest inhabitants of the sub-continental region; this is accepted by historians peeping into the mists of time. There is evidence to show this in the inscriptions of Harappa and Mohenjo Daro, the Indus Valley civilisations. They are supposed to have moved down further south with more powerful invasions and, don't make a mistake, the successful invaders are usually the barbarians. Throughout history, civilised nations have been conquered by barbarians, not by the civilised. So the Tamils moved out and populated further southerly parts of the Indian sub-continent. So to try and deny them the right to their own homeland, when all others who had come after them were already there, is the height of irony. I believe that this is the root of the problem which we see today, that is, the world does not recognise the injustice which is sought to he done to the Tamils of Sri Lanka.
I think the Tamils taking to arms in Sri Lanka was more than justified...
What has been the character of the Tamils? Generally speaking, in the sub-continent, we have been a peace loving and law-abiding people. The Tamils have been especially so; even amongst the sub continent we are e the most peace-loving and the most law abiding people. So what has made the Tamils now from that earlier categorisation to be described almost as a martial race. Why are they fighting? Why are they dying? What is behind their struggle?
I believe that it is a gross injustice which has been done to them. The fact is that their rights have been totally removed, and that they have been humiliated. Pacts have been made only to be broken. So in this situation what will not justify a person taking to arms. I think the Tamils taking to arms in Sri Lanka was more than justified.
And as an Indian I feel ashamed that under the Indo Sri Lanka agreement, our forces are fighting with Tamils whom they went to protect. Speaking of blaming the Indian soldiers, soldiers are meant to carry out commands, but I do believe that in our own Indian ethics, soldiers are not merely meant to carry out commands because if you look at the history and the mythology and the culture which is Indian, we do not believe in the British concept of the Charge of the Light Brigade, 'Theirs is not to reason why, theirs is but to do and die'. No. We are supposed to fight only for Dharma. Only if the war is righteous shall you fight it.
The Indian Government had betrayed its own culture and ethics...it is a dastardly business..
By that yardstick I believe that the Indian Government had betrayed its own culture and ethics. For the first time, it had sent out soldiers to fight when there was no cause for us to fight. There was no purpose for us to fight. When I speak to the Indian army officers, whom I know and who have come back after serving in Sri Lanka, they are the most puzzled and most unhappy people because they do not know the cause for which they are fighting.
The guilt, therefore, rests entirely on those who sent them to do this dastardly business of fighting in Sri Lanka against our Tamil brothers and sisters.
And why should this have happened, despite repeated knowledge of the nature of the gentleman with whom our Prime Minister has signed the Accord, that he is the most slippery customer, that he has consistently over all the years of his life (in which I don't think he has really achieved a single constructive creative thing), always gone back on his word?
We know that Mr. G.Parthasarathy, Chairman of our Policy Planning Committee, went to Colombo after the atrocities were committed on the Tamils all over the island, (and these atrocities were clearly inspired by the Sri Lankan Government and many lives were lost and many displaced from their homes) and that Annexure C scheme was agreed upon between President Jayewardene and Mr Parthasarathy and no sooner had Mr Parthasarathy come back immediately after concluding this understanding than Mr Jayewardene went back upon it..
In the two or three years when I dealt with the affairs of the foreign office in Delhi, there was not a single instance where the Sri Lankan side had not gone back after giving certain assurances...
In the two or three years when I dealt with the affairs of the foreign office in Delhi, there was not a single instance where the Sri Lankan side had not gone back after giving certain assurances concerning the situation of the country.
It was a regular feature and it really puzzles me and strains my credulity as to how anybody could take this gentleman's word at its face value. When I was at my desk, we did send the TULF delegation twice to Colombo. The reason for that was that the TULF members represented the parliamentary constituencies of the Tamil people of Sri Lanka. They had discussions, some of which appeared hopeful and worth pursuing but on which the Sri Lankan side began sliding back. Then on 19th December 1986 there was a ministerial delegation which went to Colombo led by Mr Chidambaram and certain under standings were reached but not implemented. When the Indo- Sri Lanka Accord was suddenly concluded, what was agreed upon in 1986 was further changed.
I am not sure whether many of you know that the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord came about in a matter of two weeks. The first draft came from Colombo. There was not really too much for negotiation on it. That itself should make any normal person very suspicious as to why there had been a change of heart in a gentleman who had not been willing to give even a fraction of what is in the Accord, at least in words, earlier. The reason became very clear for the Accord, because in the December 1986 discussions the maximum that could be achieved was the agreement on the part of the Sri Lankan Government that there would be an association between the Northern and Eastern Provinces but the Eastern Province would be minus the district of Amparai. As you know, Amparai had a much less Tamil population than the other two districts of the Eastern Province. So there was a fair chance that such a union could survive.
All right, even if it looked generous on the part of Mr Jayewardene that the agreement included this Amparai district when the Accord was being concluded, anybody should have had alarm bells ringing in his head when a further clause is put in the Accord that there would be a referendum taken regarding union by the end of 1988.
Of course, none of the points which had been included in the Accord has really been implemented. In fact, the developments in the Accord have been most tragic in the reverse direction than in the direction which people were hoping things would move. So in a sense what happened to the Accord was a self destructive agreement. The Sri Lankan side is ensured that they get merit for doing something which they knew well before hand would not work, but would blow up. And this is exactly what has happened because I don't think anyone, even the most optimistic observer anywhere in the world, can say that the Accord has succeeded in what it set out to achieve.
It is a grotesque travesty that the Indian Peace Keeping Force should he now so clearly on the side of the Sri Lankan Government in its oppressive actions....
The story of the conflict with the IPKF is also equally disastrous. It started on 10th October, after the arrest of 17 LTTE cadres by the Sri Lankan Navy. The President requested them to be sent to Colombo; they all swallowed cyanide capsules and 14 of them died. The result of this action was the inflammation of opinion and the fighting which started then has not ceased. But I have never understood how when you have a peace keeping force, the efforts of the peace keeping force are to continue this conflict. In any peace keeping force anywhere in the past, under the UN now, the peace keeping force would shoot back only if it were shot at. A peace keeping force also by definition never took the side of one party or the other. So it is a grotesque travesty that the Indian Peace Keeping Force should he now so clearly on the side of the Sri Lankan Government in its oppressive actions.
I am afraid that what is happening now would lead to bitterness for many decades to come, in our own kith and kin in Sri Lanka and ourselves. Barbara Tuchman, the well known historian, in a recent book called 'The March of Folly', makes a comment. She says a phenomenon noticeable throughout history regardless of the place or period is the pursuit by governments of policies contrary to their own interests. She defines folly as 'the pursuit of policy contrary to the self-interest of the constituency or state involved'. I think the Government of India's action in this particular. ease-comes very clearly into the definition of folly as stated by Barbara Tuchman.
Where do we go from here?...
One last word before I leave you in peace and that is "where do we go from here?" I think the only way we can go is to have an immediate cease-fire. There was a cease-fire in Sri Lanka some months ago at a time when I believe some 18 Indian soldiers were being handed back by the LTTE which was received with very grudging acceptance by the Indian side which again was most peculiar. In fact they even went on saying that they were dead and would not be handed back. When they were handed back I do not think there was even a sense of appreciation, or let alone appreciation, of even acceptance that something decent had been done. But at that time there was a 48 hour cease-fire and after the 48 hour cease-fire the fighting was resumed; not by the LTTE, it was resumed by the IPKF.
Pirabaharan has sent a number of messages asking for a cease-fire and there have been messages from civilian groups in Sri Lanka asking for a cease-fire and they are falling on deaf ears. Here I believe what is necessary is a greater effort on the part of the Sri Lankan Tamil community in educating the Tamils in Tamil Nadu. They have done a good job educating Tamils in the United Kingdom and in organisations in Europe and other countries.
But the biggest group of Tamils obviously lives in Tamil Nadu and unless that effort is made, a true Tamil consciousness cannot develop and unless that true Tamil consciousness is developed inside India we would not be able to get the constituency in India which we need to strop this kind of situation which has taken place due to the Indo Sri Lanka Accord.
The only way that the Government in India can be made to move in the proper direction would be by influencing opinion in Tamil Nadu which has changed a bit already because earlier there was a chief minister of Tamil Nadu, Mr M G Ramachandran, who was not keeping good health and he was persuaded to go along with the policy of the central government. At that time since the people in Tamil Nadu adored him, they felt that going against what he felt was right would be an act of disloyalty to him. But he is now dead and many are now struggling to take his place.
This is the right time for you to take initiatives. Tamils from all over the world, not only Tamils from Sri Lanka, should carry the message to the Tamils in Tamil Nadu that they are being fed a type of lies through the television, the radio and the press. One-sided pictures are being presented to them and they have really no way of understanding what the truth is. But if people who have connections, relations, friends, speak to them, write to them, it would make a very big difference and once that tide starts to develop I do not believe that the Government, even the Government of India under the present Prime Minister, can carry on such a foolish policy
"...as an Indian I feel ashamed that under the 