Opinion - Editorials   

Choices before the LTTE

It is entirely in keeping with the character of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam that, faced with the real prospect of a ban by the European Union, it has threatened to take "a hard-line individualist path." For much of the period since the ceasefire agreement was signed in February 2002, the extremist organisation's negotiating stance has been: "negotiate with us on our terms, or else... " Apprehension about the "or else" led the Sri Lankan Government and the international community to adopt a policy of toleration bordering on appeasement. With `mediator' Norway pushing the limits of tolerance, barbarous acts of terrorism and human rights violations were overlooked for the sake of keeping the peace. But where did all this lead? The LTTE's refusal to attend peace talks after a few rounds; its assassination of political enemies and other acts of terrorism; its continuing abuse of children; and its over-the-top demands for setting up an interim self-governing authority that would function virtually as a separate state, and for having its sea wing acknowledged as a `navy' — these were enough to tire all but die-hard champions of Tigerism. The European Union's decision, taken in the wake of the assassination of Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar in October 2005, not to receive official LTTE delegations was the first concrete indication that the most permissive section of the international community no longer wanted to carry a flag for the group. In recent weeks, the LTTE's ceasefire violations, renewed claim of sovereignty over the waters, air space, and territory of North-East Sri Lanka, and warning to international ceasefire monitors to stay off Sri Lanka Navy vessels in the North-East have eroded tolerance. Europe is now a heartbeat away from outlawing the LTTE, with the European Parliament resolution calling for a freeze of LTTE assets in member countries.

Is the LTTE's threat just bluff? It is doubtful that the terrorist organisation, although armed to the teeth, retains the politico-military capacity for a sustained military engagement with the Sri Lankan state. For one thing, the Karuna revolt has exposed its vulnerability in eastern Sri Lanka. For another, the Sri Lankan Government has shown the necessary firmness and resoluteness in punishing Tigerism. But what has turned strategically against the LTTE is the international situation. If it is to get out of this hole, it needs to demonstrate a sincerity and commitment to the peace process that will be totally out of character. At the same time, the Sri Lankan Government must refrain from any triumphalism that might provide encouragement to those driving a hard-line Sinhala nationalist agenda. Regardless of how the LTTE behaves, President Mahinda Rajapakse — who has demonstrated sturdy realism in a difficult situation — must lead from the front in crafting a just political settlement based on devolution of power within the framework of keeping Sri Lanka as one country.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Making Wonderland real
Choices before the LTTE
Teheran poses a difficult choice for Washington
The BSP's amazing journey
Broad-mindedness on Huai Hai road
The reservation debate: missing components
Corrections and clarifications
Dangerous trend
BJP isolated
Futile exercise
Heed PM's appeal
Commendable

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu