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.