Indian Rulers and the Sri Lankan Ethnic Conflict  Hitskin_logo Hitskin.com

This is a Hitskin.com skin preview
Install the skinReturn to the skin page

Coffeehouse for desis
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Indian Rulers and the Sri Lankan Ethnic Conflict

Go down

Indian Rulers and the Sri Lankan Ethnic Conflict  Empty Indian Rulers and the Sri Lankan Ethnic Conflict

Post by Kayalvizhi Wed May 28, 2014 7:14 pm

Indian Rulers and the Sri Lankan Ethnic Conflict (by Thanjai Nalangkilli)
http://www.tamiltribune.com/04/0203.html

This writer has always held the view that the Indian Government would be against the Tamil minority of Sri Lanka obtaining their full legitimate rights within a truly federal Sri Lanka or in an independent country. Indian Government has done everything diplomatically, financially and militarily to thwart the Tamil minority win a military victory and establish an independent country or the Tamil minority get meaningful devolution through peace talks with the Sri Lankan Government. Some of Indian Government's anti-Tamil activities are discussed in References 1-4.

Reasons for Indian Government's active opposition to the Tamil minority of Sri Lanka obtaining their full legitimate rights has nothing to do with India's security or national integrity. Reference 5-7 systematically demolished these arguments. These articles clearly showed that even the formation of an independent country in northeastern Sri Lanka is in no way a threat to India's security or integrity. So the question of a truly federal Sri Lanka (with the northeastern Tamil region getting maximum possible devolution) being a threat to India's security or integrity does not arise at all. However India seems to be out to covertly sabotage such a peaceful settlement through talks.

What is the real reason for Indian Government's hostility to a peaceful or military solution that would allow the Tamil minority to live as first class citizens in a federal Sri Lanka or an independent country? To understand the real reason, one should understand who the real rulers of India are. Real power in India is in the hands of Aryan-Hindian politicians from the "Hindi belt" of northern India. Prime Ministers come and go, political parties win and lose, but the real power always rests with the Aryan-Hindian politicians who directly or indirectly hold the reigns of the major all-India parties such as the Congress Party and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Reference 8 provides some insight into how Hindian politicians control the Indian Government.

True or not, much of the Hindian population consider themselves to be the descendents of Aryans who migrated in small numbers into northern India a few millennia ago. The Aryan-Hindian rulers of India identify themselves with the Sinhala majority of Sri Lanka, and not with the Tamil minority although more than 50 million Tamils live in southern India (in the state of Tamil Nadu). While Tamils are racially Dravidians, the Sinhalse consider themselves to be descendents of Aryans. An Aryan prince is said to have come to Sri Lanka from northern India millennia ago and Sinhalese are the descendents of the then local population and the Aryan prince. The "brotherhood" of Hindians and Sinhalese because of their Aryan origin is the real reason for Indian rulers' anti-Tamil (anti-Dravidian) and pro-Sinhala (pro-Aryan) policies towards ethnic conflict between the majority Sinhalese and the minority Tamils in Sri Lanka.

Indian rulers are not only opposed to the creation of an independent country "Tamil Eelam" in the northeastern regions of the island, they are opposed to any meaningful devolution of power to the minority community in the northeast. While the India-Sri Lanka Peace Accord, that India pushed through in 1987, mentioned devolution,   it pointedly left out what powers should devolved. Thus the accord is an empty document as for as devolution is concerned. It was to be negotiated between the Sri Lankan Government and the Tamil minority after the Tamil militant groups totally disarm. While the Indian Government did not say what would be the minimum amount of power to be devolved, it issued statements through surrogates that Indian would not accept anything more than what is devolved to states in India. Such a devolution would never be acceptable to the Tamil minority. What right has the Indian rulers have to set a maximum limit of devolution on the Indian model? Why not Switzerland or other countries that have successful federal structures?

Kayalvizhi

Posts : 3659
Join date : 2011-05-16

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum