The CFA and the A9 Road
One result of the Geneva II talks was to focus attention on the A9
road. This had hardly been spoken of explicitly in connection with
the separatist conflict even though it subsumes very admirably what
is at the centre of the current stage of this conflict. It symbolizes
the surrender of national sovereignty for which both sides of SL politics
have been responsible. In a way the recent SLFP-UNP accord acknowledges
publicly that both these sides are guilty of the national betrayal
we are witnessing. Both sides probably feel that it is better for
both to share the blame rather than it being heaped on one side as
the foolish cyber "patriots" have been doing blaming only
RanilW and CBK. However it is the LTTE that has raised the A9 issue
although they are the ones who should theoretically lose by bringing
this problem to the forefront. However as often happens in SL it is
GoSL which has lost the more due to its greater foolishness.
The A9 issue is the central issue discussed in the following article
by Tisaranee Gunasekara. As a long time apologist for the so-called
"non-LTTE Tamils" the matter should of great interest to
Tisaranee. But as usual with her wrong grasp of the problem in SL
she fails to understand the full significance of this issue. As usual
Tisaranee is more interested in feeding the Jaffna population than
in determining the right policy on this issue. GOSL too is not interested
in asserting its sovereignty over A9 but in trying to skirt around
it but using the naval route or begging for help from India. Tisaranee
suggests opening the A9 only for food convoys under international
supervision. But this exacerbates the problem of sovereignty. It is
GoSL that is placed in the horns of a dilemma. Its alternative of
the naval supply or Indian help does not do anything about the fact
that it has lost sovereignty over A9 but at the same time it puts
it at a greater expense and exposes the naval forces to LTTE suicide
boats.
The A9 issue is intimately connected with the continuance of the
CFA. Tisaranee is right in saying that now it is GoSL that is more
interested in the CFA than the LTTE. Of course in 2002 the LTTE needed
the CFA more than the GoSL. But now they feel that they have asserted
their de facto sovereignty over the region conceded to them, and it
is now their aim to legalize what has been given to them, and to extend
its reach. For this they feel that they should challenge GoSL more
aggressively. This is what they had been doing since the election
of Mahinda Rajapakse. Tisaranee reminds the readers that it was the
LTTE that enabled the election of MahindaR by interdicting the Tamils
from voting for RanilW which they would have done if they had been
allowed to. And after MahindaR was elected the LTTE resumed their
attacks on the armed forces and their ethnic cleansing in earnest.
As is well known MahindaR's response was to turn the other cheek,
and to forgive everything. This was temporarily reversed after the
Mavilaru incident leading to the victory at Sampur. But the LTTE seems
to feel that these defeats have been cancelled at Muhamalai and Habarana.
So GoSL did not raise the continuance of the CFA at Geneva II, that
is MahindaR seems to have gone back to the pre-Mavilaru mode. In fact
their performance at Geneva II was pathetic as my analyses of these
talks have shown.
There is one other matter in Tisaranee's essay that deserves a word
of comment. This is the pursuit by GoSL and its "Committee of
Experts" of the so-called pancayat system in India. A good deal
of money has already been spent in sending these "experts"
to India to study this system. the pancayat system is a system of
local government in parts of India and it is not the system of Indian
"Federalism" (even if you can call the Indian constitution
a Federation). Certainly the LTTE, and not even the "non-LTTE
Tamils" who are backed by Tisaranee are in favour of this system.
It is totally inapplicable as a solution to the SL problem. The LTTE
has not even backed the Indian model of Federalism even though it
may be in favour of adopting it as an interim measure. They will then
use it as a better jumping board for their Eelaam when they get control
of the Elaamnadu-government. However they know that with sufficient
pressure from them and their international allies they may get their
Eelaam served on a platter.
Tisaranee uses her code word "Sinhala supremacists" to
denote the devotees of the MR cult such as the tar-brush gang and
its dhanapalist leader. But these people are simply engaging in verbal
rhetoric trying to revive the Sinhala Only slogan of the Great Hela
Revolution. But they should know that they have no chance of implementing
their Nam Gam Potha in the North and the East as the SLFP-UNP will
not have a bar of it. Nor is there any other political grouping like
the JVP that have underwritten it, except perhaps the JHU (but even
that is doubtful). But both Tisaranee and her "Sinhala supremacists"
are wrong in their assessment of the situation. There is no other
real alternative than to follow the solution that I have proposed
for the separatist insurgency at its current stage (see www.vgweb.org/acslu/resolution.htm).
