SRI LANKA

`A spectre called Prabakaran'

"Those days when we used to read Marxism, we saw self-determination as separation... But if you carry out a complete study of Marxism, it is clear that secession is only one of the means of self-determination."

Thirunavukkarasu Sritharan, 46, politburo member of the Eelam People's Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF-Varathar), joined the student militant movement in 1979 and has been engaged primarily in political work. Currently, he is a senior leader of the EPRLF-V.

On the current status of Tamil nationalism:

In the early 1980s there was an upsurge of Tamil youth against state atrocities. They wanted change. The multiple militant groups were broadly left- and nationalist-oriented. After 1983, we were referred to as "boys". But after the LTTE's attacks on the other groups - starting with TELO in April 1986 and ending with the EPRLF in December 1986 - the people lost confidence. After that everything changed, even voluntary enrolment dwindled. The Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement was the best time, as the physical destruction was not so severe, not so irreparable.

Now they [the LTTE] say that it is the LTTE that took forward the struggle and brought us to this position. What is this current position? They say the main issue is nationalism; democracy and other principles can come later. The current position is that part of the north and the east is like a graveyard. Their anti-democratic moves have made enemies of our friendly neighbour, raised suspicions all over society. This is the situation. Is this an achievement? The LTTE is not talking about its demands, not those of the people. The Tamils do not have freedom of speech or political activity.

There was a time when we all favoured armed struggle, it had mass support. But its ugly phase started in 1986. The LTTE has taken it to a very destructive phase.

On the impact of the armed struggle on nationalism:

The present Tamil nationalism has not accommodated all the Tamils of the north and east. The Karuna factor arose because there was no accommodation. Karuna is not an individual, but a social and economic phenomenon. How can one call anything that makes enemies of a section of its own people nationalism?

When nationalism started there were discussions and greater participation. Now everything has been destroyed and a spectre called Prabakaran has emerged. The symptoms are similar to the ones witnessed during the prelude to the rise of the Nazis. There are several problems, but what is happening now is not reflecting the aspirations of the Tamils, but an authoritarian state. This nationalism has culminated in the society being moulded according to the whims and fancies of Prabakaran. As a result, all the people with potential have left. Only a weaker society will remain.

On his interpretation of self-determination, then and now:

Its interpretation varies according to time and context. Those days when we used to read Marxism, we saw self-determination as separation. A drawback among middle-class Tamil Marxists was the exaggeration of phrases. But if you carry out a complete study of Marxism, it is clear that secession is only one of the means of self-determination.

Now to call Prabakaran as "Suryadevan" or venerate him reflects the sickness in the society. What is tragic is that there was a major non-violent struggle in this region, but here the exact opposite is unfolding. The LTTE cannot be compared to liberation movements, but to groups like Al Qaeda. This is not nationalism, but its converse extreme - fascism.

On the path ahead for Tamil nationalism:

I think it is on a suicidal and destructive path, not to meet Tamil aspirations, but to establish hegemony. However, there are generational changes, technological changes. There are shifts globally and locally. The crowds at the LTTE's overseas events are thinning and there are problems within. Such an unscientific move will destroy society. There is no rational content. It has no comparison to the Dravidian movement in Tamil Nadu. The next generation, however, is widely read. The global situation is changing. I think technology will make a change, but the question is, will the LTTE allow it?

On the Sinhala responses to Tamil nationalism:

The core issue, which saw the rise of Tamil nationalism, continues to exist. In the Sinhala polity, anyone who takes the initiative to solve the national issue is even now referred to as a brave person. The southern psychology has not changed. The southern indifference is a key factor to the rise of Tamil terrorism and fundamentalism. That cannot be denied.

After the Agreement, which was forced by India, there have been gradual changes. The government should bravely set out what it offers for the Tamils. It should not play politics with the offer. There is a need for a radical change. With changes in the global systems and technology, I am confident that there will be change.

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