Should
We Go the Indian Way to Chaos or the Malaysian Way to Prosperity?
Dilrook Kannangara
Political solutions have taken the centre stage again though there
is no accepted solution out yet. Some moderate separatists try to beat
the LTTE by getting the Tamil Elam first. Many separatists fear that
if the LTTE is exterminated in the North, there won’t be much support
for a political solution thereafter.
The great myth about political solutions
Most supporters of this elusive political solution assume and take for
granted that only shades of federalism can become a political solution.
Where is it written that only a federal/devolution/decentralisation
system can be considered a political solution? This is completely wrong;
there are many other political solutions apart from different shades
of federalism.
India is a classic example of federalism
India had ethnic tensions and continues to have; there are a few dozen
separatists fighting for separation from India. Was federalism successful
in keeping India in one piece? No; it was India’s huge military
force and the paramilitary forces that did the job. Sheer brutal force
unleashed by these groups is evident in the manner many uprisings were
put down. Even the IPKF’s conduct in Sri Lanka was much more brutal
than the local army, to say the least.
However, India faces the threat of disintegration. From Assam, Manipur,
Bihar, Kashmir to Tamil Nadu separatism is hyperactive in India. In
an undisputable show of the willingness to separate, Tamil Nadu politicians
have started to patronise the Sri Lankan terror leader; they consider
him to be their leader in an alignment to the much anticipated Tamil
Nation as opposed to India. Constant policy conflicts between the Indian
Central government and Tamil Nadu have erupted centring the Sri Lankan
conflict and water issues with Bangladesh and other Indian states.
How can one explain intermittent but persistent bomb attacks in India?
Federalism has failed to bring peace to India.
Is this what we should strive to achieve in Sri Lanka through a political
solution? Definitely not.
India’s economic growth has nothing to do with federalism; on the
contrary, it was the Indian Central government that laid down the foundation
for it ICT revolution in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Rajiv Ghandi
was a pioneer in setting the stage for India’s ICT boom. However,
this did leave some states behind as they had their own priorities.
However, India’s staggering economic growth cannot put under the
carpet the real issue which it will have to face sooner than later.
Its jackboot control of the media mostly using unofficial means and
blind complice has hidden its manyfold divisions. A good example is
the scant amount of details revealed about the Mumbai train bombings.
Surely it is the tip of the iceberg and the group has many ore followers
than those arrested.
The bottom-line is federalism has failed India; it has accomplished
nothing significant to keep India together. Federalism has failed to
solve the problem: how to keep India together so that people of different
ethnicities can live peacefully in one undivided country. Its disintegration
process would have been accelerated if it had many national languages.
In that case there would not have been any cohabitation of Tamils and
Thelingus, etc. together; they would have gone in their own ways.
There is no justification why Sri Lanka should follow India into chaos
just because a bunch of terrorists go around bombing, shooting and terrorising
the populace. This is the time to think before leaping into the Federalism
trap in which India is nicely entangled today.
Malaysia is a good example of integration
Malaysia had similar problems as we face today. It’s Chinese and
Tamil/Indian minorities were actually fighting for separation. This
issue cropped up on a number of occasions once during the British rule
and later after gaining independence. The matter culminated in a violent
riot in the 1970s that forced the free thinkers to come up with a solution
that will address the core issue: how to keep Malaysia together so that
people of different ethnicities can live peacefully in one undivided
country. Malaysia as usual didn’t yield into outside pressure;
they knew what is good for their country. And they came up with a very
successful solution. The thinking and logic behind it is simple but
highly intelligent.
Defining the problem
What is the problem we should attempt to solve?
From the point of view of the Tamils - Tamils want a separate country.
From the point of view of the Chinese - the Chinese want a separate
country.
From the point of view of the Malays – Malays want a fair share
of the economy.
However, these aspirations are not necessarily Malaysian aspirations.
From the point of view of Malaysia – Malaysia should be an undivided
country where “all of Asia” can live together. When this point
of view is taken, the other three views are subjugated and cannot coexist
with this view. Therefore, the right perspective should not be a racial
one, but rather a national one. After successfully defining the problem,
the root causes of the problem were considered.
Root causes of the problem
There are forces working to disintegrate Malaysia.
There are forced working to keep Malaysia together.
These root causes were the lowest level causes of the problem as defined
above. Grievances of each group in not a consideration as regards the
Malaysian point of view. Hair splitting analysis of these ‘grievances’
do not add any importance to the already defined problem and can only
lead to King Kekille (a mythical king who traced root causes of events
in extreme detail in order to solve a crime, ended up delivering a bizarre
verdict) style absurdity.
Solutions
Weaken the forces working to disintegrate Malaysia.
Strengthen the forces working to keep Malaysia together. Full stop
Armed with this factual realisation, its leaders searched for avenues
to do it. Bumiputera law came into being as a result in the 1970s. It
identified ethnic Malays and aborigines as those forces behind a unitary
Malaysia and it also identified ethnic Chinese and Indians behind the
forces to disintegrate the nation. However, in the case of Sri Lanka
it is not so simple as there are separatists of all three major races
and equally there are patriots of all three races. Therefore, what we
need is a demarcation that is not based on race but rather based on
congruence of aspirations with that of the nation.
Under Bumiputera Law preferential facilities were provided to ethnic
Malays and aborigines as regards to higher quotas for the admission
to government-owned educational facilities, higher chance of getting
qualified for public scholarships, positions in government entities
and mandatory ownership in business entities.
There were a lot of criticism against the new law but Malaysia stood
firm as majority of its people supported it and international pressure
was NOT used to make policies. Within months the forces for integration
got strengthened and the other forces collapsed. Attempts to terrorise
the nation in order to reverse the new law was met with brutal force
and was quickly put down.
What is Malaysia’s balance sheet? It has grown from strength to
strength and is a major economic power in the ASEAN region and a very
peaceful country. It should be noted that Malaysia was already in the
process of disintegration before the Bumiputera Law as Singapore broke
away in 1967. However, after the Law, that process reversed. Today there
is no threat whatsoever to disintegrate Malaysia. This is in marked
contrast to India which is still struggling with the same old problem
of disintegration just as 60 years ago.
Sri Lanka at cross roads
We can select either with widely different repercussions. We can follow
federalism as India did an continue with the problem and compromise
further and further into Tamil Elam, Malayanadu, Nazzerstan, Saafistan,
etc. or we can follow Malaysia into one integrated country with no more
problems of disintegration.
However, we do not have free thinkers at the decision making level;
we borrow every decision and policy from abroad not knowing that foreigners
have their own agenda for Sri Lanka’s resources, people-human resource
and its strategic location. However, we should look up to foreigners
– the right ones – to craft our own way out. We should know
where to look; there are two contrasting examples before us. Unfortunately
we are again heading in the wrong direction knowing too well that federalism
cannot solve any of our problems.
What’s more, it is going to be a ‘race-based-federalism’
from the look of things. It is by no mistake that Malaysia ejected the
leader of Sri Lanka’s Federal Party (ITAK in Tamil) and it is also
by no coincidence that such rejects established an influential political
career in Sri Lanka.
We must follow Malaysia to prosperity and not India to dire straits.
|
|
|
Disclaimer: The comments contained
within this website are personal reflection only and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the LankaWeb. LankaWeb.com offers the contents
of this website without charge, but does not necessarily endorse the
views and opinions expressed within. Neither the LankaWeb nor the individual
authors of any material on this Web site accept responsibility for any
loss or damage, however caused (including through negligence), which
you may directly or indirectly suffer arising out of your use of or
reliance on information contained on or accessed through this Web site.
All views and opinions presented in this article are solely those of
the surfer and do not necessarily represent those of LankaWeb.com. .
BACK TO LATEST
NEWS
DISCLAIMER
|
