The Sattahip peace talks generate a sense of optimism in Sri Lanka with the People's Alliance also welcoming the process in overall terms, but the challenge is to translate the euphoria of a possible conflict resolution into action.
THERE is a sense of elation in Sri Lanka over the direct talks held by the government with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) at the Sattahip Naval Base in Thailand between September 16 and 18. To disturb this mood would be construed a spoiler's act. However, given the strong linkage between domestic politics and conflict resolution, the positions taken by important political players in the country become significant. The common viewpoint among the major political parties is that the commencement of the talks is a welcome development.
As Sri Lanka's ethnic conflict also has the bipartisan political dimension of a bitter rivalry between the ruling United National Party (UNP) and the Opposition People's Alliance (P.A.) the positions taken by these two major players are important markers for the manner in which the peace process is bound to unfold. More relevant in the present moment is the P.A.'s response to the negotiations. Given the past experience of all attempts at conflict resolution being thwarted by the Opposition party of the day, the P.A.'s position assumes importance. The significance is even greater in the context of the present cohabitation government, as President Chandrika Kumaratunga, who wields considerable executive powers, is also the leader of the P.A.
The initial reaction from the P.A. was that it welcomed the commencement of the talks. Towards the end of September, its position became clearer: the P.A. would continue to place caveats on the unfolding negotiations.
To put it in simple terms, the P.A.'s support to the process would not amount to a "blank cheque''. The Senior Adviser to the President on Foreign Affairs, Lakshman Kadirgamar, announced the position of the party formally on September 27. The P.A., he said, would under no circumstances be a spoiler for the sake of any immediate political advantage, but remain a "watchdog'' of the nation during the ongoing peace process. "We will do nothing to disrupt the peace process,'' Kadirgamar, a former Foreign Minister, said at the first press conference by the P.A. after the Sattahip talks.
Recalling the detailed work done by the P.A. administration, and the role played by Chandrika Kumaratunga, he said that both the President and the P.A. "greatly welcome'' the talks. This was what Kumaratunga and her party had "looked forward to for many years''. It was the President, he emphasised, who initiated the peace process, under very difficult circumstances.
Yet there was also a clear signal that the party will indicate its concerns "in a constructive spirit''. Reacting to the position taken by the LTTE's chief negotiator Anton S. Balasingham that the Tigers would settle for regional autonomy and self-governance, Kadirgamar said that there was a need for clarity on the points made. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe, he pointed out, had rejected the LTTE's ``homeland'' concept. Counselling caution on the possibility of "euphoria'' becoming "anaesthesia'', Kadirgamar said that there was "always a possibility that'' the process may "go out of hand''.
Despite the latest stance of the Tigers, imponderables continued, he said. One of the subtleties that emerged from Sattahip was the manner in which the P.A. administration was referred to by the delegations. While the team from Colombo gave credit to the President, the Tigers referred to the previous P.A. administration as intransigent and faulted it for following a policy of war for peace. Taking strong exception to this, Kadirgamar wondered if all the actions of the previous government such as introducing the draft Constitution, initiating the negotiations process, engaging the Norwegian facilitators and continuing with the process even after an attempt was made to kill the President could be construed as intransigence.
Kadirgamar said: "It is sad to note that Mr. Balasingham said that the President is intransigent. It is President Kumaratunga who started and ran a courageous campaign with a slogan of negotiated political settlement."
The important caveat set by Kadirgamar, on behalf of the P.A., was that the talks should not drag on for years. It was time real issues were addressed. "The longer you take, the [more the] situation on the ground will harden,'' he said, while not specifying an ideal time-frame for the completion of the process. Instead of accepting the present thinking that conflict resolution would take years, efforts should be on to settle issues "in the course of next year'', he suggested and called upon the parties concerned "to set that as a target''. As the issues that had to be addressed were not entirely new ones, it was time to "get on with the task of the day''. "I am not saying that the government should make it clear in two weeks, but it should not be in too many years,'' he said
Kadirgamar, who as Foreign Minister had invited the Norwegian facilitators, was now "reasonably optimistic'' that a solution could be arrived at. However, he was not in favour of the concept of a "solution at any cost''. Terming such an approach as "dangerous'', Kadirgamar added a note of caution: "The price to be paid is going to set the destiny of our country."
On the possibility of a peaceful settlement, he said that the negotiations were "an evolving process and I am prepared to say I am reasonably optimistic of success now compared to six months ago." Hard bargaining, he said, should begin.
The other key player in the peace process is the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC), which represents the island's Muslims at the negotiating table. Post-Sattahip, Rauff Hakeem, the SLMC leader, struck a conciliatory note when he downplayed a key demand of Muslims that there should be a separate administrative entity for the community. Given the manner in which the talks had commenced, he was cautiously optimistic that the aspirations of the community would be "rationally met'' when a final settlement is reached. "What I feel is that trying to jump to geographical definitions too fast is not going to contribute to bridge-building," Hakeem said, when he was asked at a press conference about the status of an earlier Muslim demand for a separate administrative council.
A separate administrative unit, tentatively referred to as a southeastern council, was seen by Muslims as being a part of the larger effort to safeguard their interests in the backdrop of strained LTTE-Muslim relations. The SLMC's latest position comes against two recent developments: the LTTE's announcement that it would settle for "regional autonomy and self-governance'' and the recognition by the Tigers that Sri Lanka's north-east is the homeland for the island's "Tamils and Muslims''. The latter observation is in sharp contrast to the position taken by the LTTE over a decade ago when it ordered all Muslims out of the northern Jaffna peninsula.
The negotiations, Hakeem said, should "work towards the end result''. On the issue of political power, he said that while "most people try to define power by territories'', he would "define power by power itself''. This would be in terms of how much could be effectively done by power. The key issue, he said, was to "avoid dominance''. The solution was to "avoid one side dominating the other and try to achieve structural and institutional formulas to define that power, which each community can enjoy''.
SRI LANKA has witnessed confidence-building measures in the form of exchange of prisoners held by the LTTE and the government. However, this end-September act of bridge-building was soon eclipsed by the news that seven government troopers were held hostage by the rebels in eastern Sri Lanka. This latest development, unless handled with the sort of sensitivity that marked the past many months of the ceasefire, could spark a conflagration.
Given the heady start that the latest peace bid has received, the challenge now is to ensure that the euphoria is translated into action.
COMMents
COMMents
SHARE