The LTTE’s proposals of November 1, 2003 and the president’s actions in dismissing three key ministers brought Sri Lanka to the edge of yet another precipice. Fears of war between the LTTE and the state were rampant in spite of the president’s assurance that the cease-fire would continue. Peace talks have been suspended since April last and now may not restart anytime soon. Sri Lanka has reached another defining moment in two decades of polarisation and conflict in which tens of thousands of people have lost their lives. Two basic problems have operated against any solution. One is the polarisation between the two main political parties, one headed by the president and the other by the prime minister. In Sri Lanka’s unique constitution this makes bipartisan agreements extremely difficult. The second polarisation is the one where the LTTE has held sway with guns and imperilled successive attempts to find a solution within the framework of Sri Lanka’s unity, while Sinhala ethno-nationalism has been less than ready to go by the democratic principle. It is in this context that one must see the LTTE’s recent proposals for an agreement to establish an interim self-governing authority for the north-east of the island. This was seen as an “extreme” position, given the apprehensions of the president that the LTTE was pushing for separatism rather than a solution within the framework of Sri Lanka’s unity, integrity and constitution. The LTTE proposal seeks to establish an Interim Self Governing Authority (ISGA) and clearly talks about the right to a homeland by bringing eight districts from the north-east under it. The proposal demands independent elections held “at the expiry of five years of the coming into force of this agreement, if no final settlement has been reached and implemented by the end of the said period of five years. An independent Election Commission, appointed by the ISGA, shall conduct free and fair elections in accordance with international democratic principles and standards under international observation.” The ISGA proposes to set a time limit for election by itself with the “independent election commission” and the elections to be held in accordance with the “international democratic principles and standard” rather than the Sri Lankan constitution. The proposal, thus, aims at complete political autonomy. The leader of the political wing of the LTTE, S.P. Tamilselvan, reportedly said at the press conference in Killinochchi that, “The basis of our struggle is to regain the lost freedom for the Tamil people and bring them on par with our Sinhala brethren, enabling them to enjoy human liberty and dignity and the recognition as a distinct nation of people.” Though the Tamil Tigers, in a concession during the initial rounds of peace talks, agreed to settle for regional autonomy in the north-east after dropping their demand for a separate state the new proposals bring out their intentions of political and administrative separation very distinctly. The LTTE proposes that the ISGA would have the “plenary power for the governance of the north-east including powers in relation to resettlement, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and development”, and also “separate institutions for the administration of justice shall be established for the north-east, and judicial powers shall be vested in such institutions.” The proposal suggests complete autonomy in aid and trade. The proposal brings a question mark to the political structure of the country. It is difficult for any administration to accept the proposals in their present form. It is also not clear whether these proposals can form the basis of further negotiations. The issue now revolves around the nature of accommodation that the two leaders in Colombo can arrive at. The president’s offer for the formation of a national government for at least one year has been rejected by the PM’s party. Ideally, the two must adopt a joint strategy. If they are unable to do so, the LTTE may well raise the stakes, pushing for further divisions among the Sri Lankan political parties by launching an offensive. The politics of Sri Lanka appears like a tug of war for power where the real losers are the people who have paid heavily and are tired of war. (The writer is Associate Fellow at the Centre for Strategic & International Studies. She is currently in Colombo)
