Reviving the Moribund Concept of the Merger
A Betrayal of the National Interest

by H. L. de Silva
Courtesy The Island 20-02-2007

There have been in recent weeks somewhat forlorn attempts to revive the idea of a merged political unit, comprising the Northern and Eastern Provinces, for the ostensible purpose of vesting the elected representatives of this territory with autonomous powers of government. This move is currently sponsored by (1) Members of Parliament of the Tamil National Alliance ( the alter ego pf the LTTE) (2) the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe) and some M.Ps of the residual UNP and (3) incessant promptings of the present Indian Administration whose predecessor originally coerced President Jayewardene to consent to such a device under the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement of July 1987. It is the active interest displayed by the 2nd and 3rd parties that would cause concern and apprehension to many Sri Lankans.

As will be seen none of these three sponsors seek to advance any credible or coherent reason for the acceptance of this far-reaching proposal although the underlying purposes are all too clear and that fact alone is sufficient reason for its rejection. All that is stated is that it is the foundation or the corner stone for the peace process. The following comments are relevant in evaluating its merits and discerning the hidden agendas behind these political moves.

Firstly, the objective of the TNA is traceable to the foundation of the so-called Federal Party (which is a mis-translation of the Tamil version, Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi) – the Tamil State Party) that claimed the Northern and Eastern Provinces as the traditional Tamil homeland and envisaged this area as the territory of the projected Tamil State. This was reiterated in 1976 with the adoption of the Vaddukoddai Resolution by the TULF which explicitly set out the establishment of Tamil Eelam as its objective. This was followed in 1986 with the declaration made at Thimpu by all the Tamil groups including the TULF which, without clearly specifying the territory, described the area as "the identified Tamil homeland" in which the Tamils as a distinct nation (which following Marxist terminology was described as "a nationality") were to exercise their rights of self-determination. The further stipulation as to the guarantee of the territorial integrity of the Tamil homeland in the Thimpu Declaration left one in no doubt that what was contemplated was the achievement of a separate statehood.

In (Dec 1986) a communication by the TULF was addressed to Prime \ minister Rajiv Ghandhi in which it was urged that the Northern and Eastern Provinces should constitute a single territorial unit for the purpose of devolving governmental powers ( citing the Cleghorn Minute in support of the demand.) in any constitutional scheme for a solution

(As shown below, this demand was categorically rejected for reasons stated, by the UNP Administration in office in its response sent in January 1987 to Prime Minister Rajiv Ghandhi. It is not thought necessary here to set out these reasons for rejecting the theory of the Tamil homeland as corresponding to this territory, as that question has been subjected to careful analysis by reputed scholars and demonstrated by them to be nothing more than a fictitious claim invented claim to substantiate the territorial basis for statehood and no attempt has been made to counter these criticisms. In fact the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement of July 1987 implicitly abandoned "the traditional Tamil homeland" claim by substituting for it the words "areas of historical habitation of the Tamil speaking people"

(which linguistic classification of the group included the Muslims as well) and the new formulation went on to add "along with other ethnic groups" which thereby impliedly admitted the claims of a Sinhala minority of approximately 25% in the Eastern Province and thereby negated the claim of right to exclusive Tamil possession of the territory.

But what is of paramount importance is that the Indo Sri Lanka Agreement of 1987 made the proposed amalgamation of the Northern and Eastern Provinces conditional on (a) the complete surrender of all arms and ammunition by all armed groups by a specified date and (b) the cessation of hostilities in the area. These were to be imperative requirements for the merger to be effected. In the absence of the non-compliance with these obligatory pre-conditions, it is idle to complain about a culpable failure of the GOSL to effect the merger. Quite apart from this, the merger was stated to be a temporary provision which needed to be confirmed by a poll to be held in the Eastern Province at the end of one year, So despite all the importuning and blandishments directed at Mr. V. Prabhakaran at the Ashok Hotel in New Delhi, it must have been clear to everyone that the LTTE would not tamely make a complete surrender of their arms and ammunition. This was about as realistic as an expectation that the Tigers would dutifully turn out to be vegetarians and eat grass.

The TNA must surely be under no illusion as to whether the LTTE would ever agree to a de-militarization and a de-commissioning of arms before entering the democratic process at the Provincial Council elections that are expected to be held. Or are they expecting the Provincial Council’s Act to be now amended to delete these mandatory requirements before an order of merger is to be made? That would be as realistic as hoping that control of Sampur and Vakarai in the Eastern Province would be handed back to the LTTE by the Army. Ever since the claim was made that the Northern and Eastern Provinces should be amalgamated to form one political unit, the Tamil groups have steadfastly maintained the position that this was "a non-negotiable demand" which meant any discussion of the question was foreclosed and no arguments to the contrary would be entertained. Of course, one suspects that the real reason for this hardline stand was that there were no credible arguments that could be advanced in support of the claim. As one judge once remarked when no reasons are given for a decision, it is because there are no reasons to give!

I think the real reason why the demand is described "non-negotiable" is because the disclosure of the real reason for the demand would mean a frank and public confession of the real purpose, namely – to achieve the objective of a separate State – since the establishment of a defined territory is an essential element to constitute statehood under the Montevideo Convention and thought to be necessary for international recognition. In fact this inadvertently came to light at a conference held in France - a reference to which is made by Dr. V. Suryanarayan, who says:

"Tamil legal experts Rudrakumaran and Sornarajah- both participated in the recent Paris conclave to finalise the LTTE response to the government’s proposal on interim administration have argued that devolution and autonomy are stages en route to the final destination of an "independent sovereign Tamil Eelam. He continues to quote Sornarajah: "The making of a confederacy recognizes the distinctness of the Tamil people and their homeland. It will also lead to the demarcation of the boundaries of the homelands in a constitutive document. These are gains to be had. It will bring the war to an end, and ensure that the confederate arrangement works, as there is a threat of the resumption of war… Strategically, a confederation may be considered for the reason that it gives a breathing space for some time. Generally, confederation as a solution has not worked"

(Sri Lanka – Peace Without Process – pg 109)

The clear and manifest object of the demand of the merger for the grand of autonomy is to establish the territorial boundaries of the new State of Eelam on an expanded scale to avoid any later argument or dispute with the remainder State of Sri Lanka.

Presumably, it is thought that there would otherwise be difficulties in establishing that dispersed Tamil communities in non-contiguous parts of the Eastern Province with their separate customs and cultures are a single community with the Northern Province Tamils and accordingly forms an integral part of the Tamil homeland.

These may be overcome more easily once the two provinces are merged as one political unit and the Sinhala and Muslim minorities in the Eastern Province, if no ethnic cleansing takes place would then be a less significant element with a dominant Tamil presence in the amalgamated territory. All these tend to show that a merger would be politically expedient from the standpoint of Tamil interests, but disastrous to the rest of the nation. Once a territory which has an appreciable degree of ethnic or cultural distinctiveness with separate powers of internal administration of an asymmetrical kind ( as has been so thoughtfully recommended by the majority report of the Experts Panel) then it would have reached an advanced stage in the progression towards independent statehood. In fact one International Lawyer (O’Connell) has described the process of granting autonomy through devolution as "evolutionary secession". Hence, the reservations of controlling powers at the Centre in order to prevent such a consequence are salutary provisions against creeping secession. It will be seen that the period would be surprisingly short if the LTTE was left in control of the territory with its authoritarian style of government, goes on to arrogate greater powers than what are conferred by law and makes a unilateral declaration of independence.

Although the smallness of territory is no impediment to becoming a separate and independent State, a political unit that acquired autonomous jurisdiction over one third of the Island’s territory equipped with a world famous harbour and a long coastline adjacent to the Indian Ocean and entitlement under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea to an extent stretching over five hundred square miles of the continental shelf appertaining to the land mass, and the exclusive economic zone, thrown in for good measure, would be greeted like manna from heaven and would be not a simple adjustment of a provincial boundary (I have elsewhere outlined the highly detrimental and adverse effects of the loss of this extent of territory to the remainder State of Sri Lanka in the event of secession and these are not repeated here). With the entire Eastern region from North to South of the Island in the hands of a hostile State the strategic defence of the Country would be a near impossibility. \ One wonders whether those who advocate this merger have taken leave of their senses. For it would herald the irreversible slide into the abyss. Perhaps this is the "infallible negotiated settlement" which the UNP, the NGO inspired Sri Lankans and the peace-niks are dreaming about. One is reminded of the words of Konrad Adenauer, the First Chancellor of post-war Germany who while speaking on the response to the Soviet designs in Europe said:"An infallible method of conciliating a tiger is to allow oneself to be devoured!."

Secondly, the conduct of the UNP in seeking, without adducing any reason therefore to re-introduce the merger of these two provinces is even more inexplicable, having regard to its consistent opposition to this idea as seen in the trajectory of historical events of the past half century. In responding to the TULF request addressed to Prime Minister Rajiv Ghandhi to secure a merger as part of the constitutional reform, President Jayewardene sent a detailed memorandum, inter alia, refuting the claim. This document was prepared by the team of lawyers who represented Sri Lanka at the Thimpu talks and among them were Messrs H.W.Jayewardene, Mark Fernando, L.C.Seneviratne, S.L.Gunesekere and myself. This is reproduced in Hansard and is part of the Parliamentary record. Does the UNP think these reasons are no longer valid? If not surely the public must be informed of the reasons for this volte face? President Jayewardene having signed the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord under pressure, clearly demonstrated his opposition to it when immediately after the ceremony he declared on national television that it was a temporary arrangement and that he himself would canvass against it at the poll to be held to decide on its future continuance.

But what has happened now? According to a report in the Sunday Leader of the 4th February 2007 – when the UNP delegation met the Indian Prime \ minister Manmohan Singh on the 30th January the Opposition Leader is reported to have said:

"This (the merger) has nothing to do with the LTTE but with the Tamil people getting their political rights and the Government de-merged the provinces for political pruposes "

The UNP delegation appears to have suffered from a self-induced collective feeling of amnesia as to the consistent stand adopted by the Government. Perhaps a gesture of support for the merger is the last hope of sitting on the Presidential chair with Indian aid! From the failure to point out the true reason why the merger cannot be effected as intended, it is apparent that the UNP is prepared to merge the two Provinces regardless of the surrender of weapons by the LTTE. It is hard to imagine a greater degree of naiveté in a political leader than this.

Thirdly, in regard to the stance of the Indian Government as in most questions, its position on the merger is bewildering. On the one hand the official reason for the Indian Government declaring "the LTTE to be an unlawful association in India" under its laws is the LTTE’s declared objective of a separate homeland (Tamil Eelam) for all Tamils, including those in India. This is plainly inconsistent with it’s urgings for the immediate merger of the two Provinces without first ensuring the complete surrender of arms and ammunition by the LTTE as provided under the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement which it wants implemented. The surrender of arms by the LTTE alone would defeat the objective of creating Tamil Eelam. The Indian stand on this issue is veritably as inscrutable as the face of the sphinx. Prime Minister Mohan Singh says that "the merger was an integral part of the solution and the starting point of the peace process" but overlooks the fact that a fully armed LTTE would destablise the peace-process by eliminating its rivals, establish a one-party dictatorship in the merged territory which would be the consummation of his dream of Tamil Eelam on India’s doorstep

Some time ago a former Ambassador of experience (Mr. Izeth Hussain) speculated on the question whether India had ideas of creating a situation analogous to the establishment of the Northern Turkish Republic of Cyprus by portioning off this region, which I then thought was unlikely. With current developments the idea of a satellite state on India’s southern extremity, with the active support of the nationals of the UNP, does not seem so far-fetched now.

But that would not be the end. The domino effect of separatism would lead to the demand for self-determination by the Malaiyaha Tamils of the Nuwara Eliya and Badulla Districts and irrendtist claims of ethnic Tamils living in non-contiguous areas of Sri Lanka not excluding similar demands by Muslim enclaves, which cannot be ruled out, would follow.

Not long ago the U.S. President Bill Clinton in a speech on the Canadian Separatist Movement in Ottawa said.

"If we are to divide all the countries on ethnic lines, we would end up with something like 8000 political entities. This would clearly be bedlam, which is unexpected. In this day and age where economic globalization calls for bigger and for more effective political units, anything which takes us not one step, but ten steps backwards, would be a retrograde step and an unacceptable situation"

Now that President Rajapakse has provided for a Ministerial portfolio of National \ heritage, it may not be out of place to remind our countrymen and politicians that long before the neologism of "Tamil Eelam" of yesteryear, down the centuries, this land was traditionally known by names that encapsulated the idea of an Island – entire and whole, which despite foreign incursions, has remained unblemished by dismemberment. The following names which the Country bore testify to this: Sihadvipa, Sihaladvipa, Heladiva, Lakdiva, Serendib, Lankadeepa and many more.

Likewise the name Dhammadipa signified its historic connection with Buddhism – the religion of the majority in this Country. Its ancient chronicles – the Deepavamsa and the Mahavamsa bear testimony to this fact. Stephen Grossly (Professor of Philosophy and Religion, Clemson University) drawing attention to parallel phenomena in ancient Israel, Japan and Sri Lanka says:

"The central place of Buddhism in the constitution of the Singhalese territorial relation of a nation goes back to the Sinhalese histories of the fourth and fifth centuries of the Christian era, the Dipavamsa and the Mahavamsa. There one finds the myth of the visit of the Buddha to Sri Lanka, during which he freed the Island of its original supernatural and evil inhabitants, the Yakkas. As a result the Buddha had sanctified the entire island transforming it into a Buddhist territory. These histories thus asserted a territorial relation between Sinhalese and Buddhism, the stability of which was derived from a perceived order of the universe, that is, the actions of the Buddha. The reaffirmation of that relation may be observed to-day in the shrines throughout the island at Mahiyangana, where the supposed collarbone of the Buddha is kept, at Mount Samantakuta, where the Buddha’s supposed fossilized footprint may be seen and the most important one at Kandy, supposedly containing the relic of the Buddha’s tooth.

("The primordial, kinship and nationality". "When is the Nation?" Edited by Atsuko Ichijo and Gordana Uzelac Routledge (2005) pg 68

Considerations of this kind, often unfairly vilified as evidencing Sinhala supremacism, hegomonism or chauvinism, which are embedded in the national consciousness of the majority, seem to weigh lightly in the mindset of the Country’s current generation of the westernized and denationalised intellectual and political elites in their pragmatic yet insensitive approach to the solution of the national problem. This probably explains the failure of successive governments to secure the consent and general acceptance for their constitutional proposals by the majority of the People whose thinking and outlook is not and cannot be expected to be a purely cerebral exercise unaffected by emotions which cannot be easily laid aside or jettisoned with the promise of tinsel joys in lives of affluence.