Le 10e Congrès de l’association française de science politique

Le congrès annuel de l’association française de science politique (AFSP) aura lieu du 7 au 9 septembre 2009 à Grenoble. Cette année, le congrès et organisé par Sciences Po Grenoble, et le 10 congrès AFSP est tenu simultanément avec le 3e Congrès international des associations francophones de science politique.

Le Congrès annuel de l’AFSP est le plus important des événements universitaires dans le domaine des sciences politiques en France. Il est composé des 52 sections thématiques suivants :

ST1 L’Europe sans constitution : quelle communauté politique en construction ? Proposée par la SEE de l'AFSP
ST2 Sociologie politique de l'action extérieure de l'Etat dans la nouvelle multipolarité. Proposée par la SEI de l'AFSP
ST3 L'Etat de la France. La "fin d'une exception" mise en perspective comparée. Proposée par le groupe SPCA de l'AFSP
ST4 Economie du politique et politique de l'économie. Proposée par le groupe ArP de l'AFSP
ST5 Etudier les comportements électoraux : bilan de la recherche francophone. Proposée par le GAEL de l'AFSP
ST6 Le métier politique à l'épreuve de sa féminisation. Genre et (re)définition des rôles politiques. Proposée par le groupe Genre & Politique de l'AFSP
ST7 Naissance et mort des partis politiques. Proposée par le GEOPP de l'AFSP
ST8 Aux marges des mouvements sociaux : les arts de la résistance. Proposée par le GERMM de l'AFSP
ST9 Républiques. Trajectoires, historicités et voyages d’un concept. Proposée par le GRESCOP de l'AFSP
ST10 Chronologie, périodisation, temporalités. Proposée par le GRHISPO de l'AFSP
ST11 Les assemblées du Parlement : la séance, les commissions et les groupes. Proposée par le GRPP de l'AFSP
ST12.1 Regards critiques : le local comme objet global ? Proposée par le groupe Local & Politique de l'AFSP
ST12.2 La démocratie urbaine et régionale en débats. Proposée par le groupe Local & Politique de l'AFSP
ST13 Variables, Individus, Contextes. Comment observer et analyser leurs interactions ? Proposée par le groupe MOD de l'AFSP
ST14 L’analyse des politiques publiques existe-t-elle encore ? Proposée par le groupe Politiques Publiques de l'AFSP
ST15 Genre et politiques publiques : de la découverte mutuelle au dialogue.
ST16 Science politique et sexualités en francophonie : un état des lieux.
ST17 L'européanisation des systèmes partisans en Europe.
ST18 L'académie européenne : experts, savoirs et savants dans le gouvernement de l'Union européenne.
ST19 La Présidence du Conseil de l'Union européenne dans tous ses Etats.
ST20 Transferts institutionnels et convergences étatiques. Vers une sociologie comparative post-institutionnaliste de l'Etat?
ST21 Les politiques de défense : une redéfinition des contours régaliens de l'Etat ?
ST22 Les formes contemporaines de la biopolitique : Etats, "nouvelle santé publique" et politiques publiques comparées.
ST23 Les politiques sociales : mutations, enjeux, théories.
ST24 Les politiques de recherche : entre traditions nationales et tournant néo-managérial ?
ST25 L'analyse des politiques publiques à l'épreuve de l'Amérique Latine.
ST26 Les ambiguïtés de l'action publique face aux inégalités socio-spatiales. Etat des travaux francophones au regard des "urban studies".
ST27 Action publique et parcours de vie. Nouvelles inégalités et nouvelles approches des inégalités.
ST28 Acteurs, référentiels, instruments et énoncés : la spécificité d'une approche "francophone" des politiques publiques en débat.
ST29 Pour une analyse des politiques publiques de l'éducation.
ST30 L'hydropolitique et les relations internationales.
ST31 Les terrorismes : un objet pluriel pour un champ restreint ?
ST32 Le mouvement des institutions internationales.
ST33 L'action collective des élites économiques.
ST34 Représentants et représentés : élus de la diversité et minorités visibles.
ST35 Du fait colonial à l'immigration contemporaine. La représentation des groupes minorisés, de l'Outre-mer français à l'hexagone.
ST36 Mobilisations « ethniques » et comparaison internationale.
ST37 Partis politiques et mouvements sociaux à la croisée des approches : interdépendances, transformations et traits communs.
ST38 Ruptures biographiques, bifurcations collectives et rapports au politique.
ST39 Les mobilisations ethnolinguistiques en Europe.
ST40 Le temps de l'écologie politique.
ST41 De la protection de la nature au développement durable : les mutations de l'enjeu environnemental.
ST42 Des valeurs politiques en mutation : analyse quantitative comparée.
ST43 Les "sciences" dans l'Etat : perspectives comparées.
ST44 Sociologie et histoire des mécanismes de dépacification du jeu politique.
ST45 Formes de compétence et savoirs de gouvernement.
ST46 Sociologie historique des "changements de régimes".
ST47 Les combattants : approches sociologiques et socio-historiques.
ST48 Maurice Duverger aujourd'hui.
ST49 Une science politique camérale : pratiques et contraintes du champ politologique au Maghreb.
ST50 Que faire des idées en science politique ?
ST51 Repenser l'anthropologie politique de la démocratie.
ST52 La liberté à l'épreuve de la démocratie. Regards de la théorie politique.

Le site officiel du 10e congrès de l’AFSP est accessible en cliquant ici. Vous y trouverez aussi des informations sur les inscriptions.

Violence, abuse and impunity: GOSL’s Madness at its highest

It is no secret that the government of Sri Lanka has been categorically rejecting allegations of human rights violations in the internment camps of the Vanni region and other parts of the Northern Province. Nevertheless, for someone who has observed the behaviour of Sri Lanka’s military forces, it may not be difficult to understand that there certainly is no smoke without a fire. The gang rape and murder of Krishanti Koomaraswamy in 1996 was a an act of extreme violence and barbarity that should never be forgotten by all thinking Sri Lankans. Krishanti had just passed her GCSE with excellent results, and the 16 year-old was gang-raped and then assassinated by a group of Sri Lankan army soldiers in an army camp in the Northern Jaffna Peninsula. It is widely known within Sri Lankan (especially Sinhalese) society that sexual violence against women is dramatically rampant in the Northern and Eastern provinces of the island. During the years of intense war between the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the state military forces, rape was a key weapon used by the latter in attacking the enemy. In fairness to the LTTE, it provided military training to both men and women, and granted young Tamil women the opportunity of taking up arms and fighting alongside their male counterparts. In a strongly male-dominated society, this in itself constitutes a remarkable achievement, and a factor that transformed Tamil society. It is widely popular in Sinhalese society that whenever a female LTTE soldier was captured, she was raped by ALL the soldiers in the army camp she was taken to, starting from the hierarchical chief.

Whenever the issue of sexual violence is brought before the Sinhalese community, its political leadership (particularly the types in the present-day Rajapakse administration), they literally ‘bluff it off’, and start enumerating the atrocities committed by the LTTE. It is indeed undeniable that throughout its existence, the LTTE committed innumerable acts of violence and atrocity. One can notice a pattern in its acts of violence, which were almost in all cases pre-planned and orchestrated. They developed the guerrilla strategy of suicide bombing, and in the larger number of cases, the targets were political elites and high level military and civil service personnel. A large number of massacres of ordinary people (the most famous being that of Anuradhapura (city in north-central Sri Lanka – a sacred lieu of worship for Sinhlaa Buddhists) in the mid/late 1980s, when a large number of Buddhist devotees were assassinated by the LTTE. The LTTE also upheld an anti-Mulsim policy, and all Sri Lankan Moors living in the Jaffna Peninsula were forced to quit the region in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The list of LTTE atrocities is quite extensive, and is extremely well-documented, with plenty of online resources.

One key factor that every single observer (Sri Lankan and non-Sri Lankan) should most importantly remember is that – the LTTE was not the entity that started the problem in the first place. If an ailment is to be remedied by medication, the root cause of that ailment needs to be discovered and deciphered. Then only can a competent medical professional attend to the remedying process. In understanding political conflicts, it is essential to locate where it originated, how, due to what core reasons, and what the original contentions were. In Sri Lanka, the most daunting challenge to resolve the ethnic question is that the ‘original root causes’ of the conflict are constantly being ignored, ‘bluffed’, misinterpreted, misread, and in many cases, easily forgotten (and made to forget) by those determined to impose majoritarian politics, dictatorship, military control and extensive chauvinism.

The LTTE came to being as a result of massive discrimination against the Tamils by successive Sri Lankan governments since political independence from Britain in 1948, and especially by the government headed by the late Sirima R.D. Bandaranaike between 1970 and 1977. Strict policies of restricting the entrance of Tamil students to Sri Lankan universities, restrictions on the official usage of the Tamil language, the widely held discriminatory views about the Tamil community among Sinhalese – all culminated in developing a movement of militant Tamil nationalism. Some scholars, such as Dr Dayan Jayatilleke, Sri Lanka’s current Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva, have highlighted that Sri Lanka’s Tamil politics had a right-wing current and a more left-wing (i.e. leftist-leaning) current. The latter, more conciliatory in its willingness to collaborate with the Sinhalese leadership, loss its ground towards the early/mid 1970s, giving way to the right-wing current (i.e. those who upheld an essentially ‘federal’ settlement to the Tamil question – and later strong ideological exponents of Tamil self-determination and the concept of Thamil Eelam, - a separate state for Tamils in their traditional Homeland – i.e. the Northern and Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka). Analysts like Dr Dayan who strongly uphold majoritarian politics are inevitably more sympathetic towards the so-called left-wing Tamil politics, and splinter groups. As it gained prominence and increasing military strength, the LTTE developed a policy of strict action against any Tamil political group that opposed it, or had contrary ideologies and political views. As a militant organisation fighting for a clearly defined cause, this was part of their strategy to gain centre-stage in Tamil politics.

As pure reality amply demonstrated in the last three decades, and as all analysts and observers fully agree, the LTTE developed itself as the strongest of all Tamil political and militant groups in post-Independence Sri Lanka. Did this mean that the LTTE was largely favoured by the majority of Tamils in the Northern and Eastern Provinces? To a undeniably substantial extent, the answer to this question can be observed as a clear ‘yes’. But, the LTTE did employ violence and vandalism in developing its organisational strength. It has been notorious in the recruitment of ‘child soldiers’, i.e. underage children who were given minimal training in using weaponry and sent to the battlefront. More recently, widespread accusations were levelled against the LTTE of using ordinary people as ‘human shields’, i.e. not allowing them to move towards government controlled areas during intense military activity. While accepting that these accusations do carry a certain weight of truth, it is important to ponder of the ‘circumstances’ under which the LTTE ‘used’ child soldiers. Most of the recruits were from the poorest and the most deprived levels of Tamil society (a society strongly divided on the lines of caste, class and wealth). In a region, which has not seen any socio-economic development since 1948, and with ongoing military activity, these deprived children and youth had no other alternatives than being part of the Tamil militant movement. This writer had the good fortune of hearing a young man from Jaffna who obtained excellent results at his Advanced Level examination, and was accepted at Cambridge for his undergraduate studies. He did succeed in accepting the offer and coming to Cambridge, with the financial support of his immediate and extended family, based in the United Kingdom and in several other Western destinations. His case would give the impression that educational opportunities have not been taken away from the Tamil youth in Northern and Eastern Sri Lanka. But, it needs to be stressed that this young man hails from a high caste Tamil household (of the Vellalar caste), and three quarters of his family is part of the Tamil Diaspora. It is his social background that enabled him to be successful; if he were as intelligent, but hailed from a poorer and more deprived background with less contacts and wealth, his future would have been a far more grimmer one.

The LTTE provided an opportunity for such young people to be part of a struggle, which they valued. For the women who were victims of sexual abuse by the Sri Lankan armed forces, the LTTE provided the only safe haven, which restored their dignity. They were mentally prepared to give their lives to the Tamil struggle for self-determination. The female suicide bombers that authorities in Colombo and in Sri Lankan diplomatic missions abroad talk about with such contempt, where products of the Sinhalese military, whose treatment of Tamil women has been, and continues to be the most humiliating, violent and disgusting treatment of women on the face of this planet.

In my previous post (read below in the blog), I have posted a video of two speeches delivered by Dr Brian Senevitratne, a Sri Lankan Australian activist. Dr Brian notes that he has credible information that women are systematically abused in internment camps in the Vanni region. Pregnant mothers are being aborted, while young girls are being sterilized. The Sri Lanakn government, and its high command, may categorically reject these claims, but that parrot-like rejection only confirms these allegations. By putting thousands of people in internment camps, surrounded by barbed wire with prohibition to leave, by separating families, by taking young men and women to undisclosed locations and leaving their parents in a living hell without informing where the young lads are being kept, the government’s ultimate stance and objective are crystal clear: they see a ‘terrorist’ in every Tamil man and woman (especially among the youth); therefore, every unborn child is a future terrorist – hence the necessity of abortion. The northern Tamils are seen as a race to be ‘eliminated’, hence the sterilization of young women. It is a widely supported idea among the Sinhalese Diaspora and the Sinhalese community in Sri Lanka that the people in these internment camps should all be murdered, and done away with. It is clear that the state, and especially those at its high command, fully endorses this view. But such mass murder cannot be committed without a clear allegation of genocide and war crime. Hence the government’s initiative to conduct the mass extermination of Tamils in internment camps in secrecy, behind closed doors, at a slow pace, so that they can fool right-minded Sri Lankans (of all ethnic groups) and the international community while doing their deed.

This is what is happening in present-day Sri Lanka. The Rajapakse administration is clearly guilty of mass war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. The rape of innocent women, extensive use of sexual violence, assassination of children, abortion of pregnant mothers, separation of young men and women from their families are all hideous crimes against humanity. The Sinhalese community does not understand this, and some Sinhalese clearly do not want to consider the dirty side of Sri Lanka’s anti-Tamil euphoria. Many Sinhalese are prevented from viewing their history, the ethnic question, the armed struggle and the present situation in a critical eye, due to massive publicity and propaganda, developed by the Rajapakse administration. And that’s not all: when one grows up in contemporary Sri Lanka as a ‘Sinhalese’, one is fed with stories of Sinhala superiority over the Tamils, highlighting the inferiority of the Tamils, anti-Tamil and anti-ethnic minority racism and xenophobia, and a strongly negative view of the Tamil people. This is what makes Sinhalese mobs act with such violence in Australia (as it was seen in the last few months). This is what makes the Sinhalese (especially young people) insult Tamils with abusive words in many parts of the world. When the Tamil protests were underway at Parliament Square in the City of Westminster (London UK), Sinhalese youth used to drive past in at nightfall, waving Sri Lankan flags, and throw bags of dirt at the Tamil protestors. This is highly suggestive of the way in which Sinhalese people are educated and the manner in which their conceptions of ethnicity are shaped. As in any act of violence, gross ignorance of the ‘Tamil’ side of the story, the tremendous contributions rendered by Tamils to Sri Lanka, the richness of Tamil culture, language, literature and civilisation, is at the heart of Sinhalese arrogance. This has made the Sinhalese a deplorably racist and xenophobic ethnic majority.

The political leadership in Sri Lanka fully supports and encourages this mass ignorance, as it enables them to remain in power and avoid elections through unconstitutional and unlawful amendments to the Constitution. In the first video posted below, a journalist raises a question at a government press briefing about allegations of sexual violence in internment camps. The press report refers to the response of a ‘Minister’. The respondent is not a minister at all, but the occupant of a civil service position (Secretary General of the government’s dormant Peace Secretariat). The man’s reply is equally disgusting. He states that members of international aid agencies have been committing acts of sexual violence – and that there are blue-eyed children in the camps. Mr failed politician turned fake civil servant (& false Minister): please answer the question. International aid workers have functioned in Sri Lanka for a long period of time, but cases of sexual abuse in the northern warzone were consistently committed by the Sri Lankan military. Is the Civil Servant trying to imply that all past cases of sexual violence were committed by members of international aid organisations? What about Krishanthi Koomaraswamy? What of Tharshini? What of the thousands of other unreported cases of sexual abuse? The Civil Servant’s response only serves to elucidate one key point: that sexual abuse in Sri Lanka’s internment camps is rampant, and that the state authorities (i.e. the political high command) clearly harbours nothing against such sexual abuse and thereby ‘encourages’ them.

The second video provides crystal clear evidence of the essentially rapist and sex-crazed nature of Sri Lanka’s armed forces. It is about a young lady who was sexually abused by a soldier of the Sri Lanka Peacekeeping Mission to Haiti. The Peacekeeping Mission was shipped home after a large number of cases of this nature, but unfortunately, one is forced to question the strength of Mr. Ban Ki-Moon’s backbone: recent news reports have highlighted that the UN is to authorize a new peacekeeping force from Sri Lanka…this SOULD DEFINITELY NOT HAPPEN, AND THE ENTIRE WORLD SHOULD STAND UP IN PROTEST AGAINST THE SRI LANKAN MILITARY’S MASS USE OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE. 

To the attention of my readers/à l'attention de mes lecteurs et lectrices

Here's a video of a speech delivered by Dr Brian Seneviratne, a Sri Lankan Australian medical professional and a strong advocate of Tamil self-determination. Dr Brian has strong affinities to Sri Lankan politics, and has long been a deeply involved political activist and campaigner for the rights of the Tamil people. Some of the views he expresses may have a contradictory dimension, but the point he is making is absolutely convincing, and more people, especially Sinhalese Sri Lankans, should think about Dr Brian's ideas. 

Le Dr. Brian Seneviratne est un expatrié sri-lankais en Australie (de nationalité australienne). Activiste impliqué pour le droit de l'auto-détermination de la communauté tamoule, ce docteur en médécine, âgé aujourd'hui de 77 ans, reste une exception: appartenant à la communauté singhalaise (majorité ethnique au Sri Lanka), il fait préuve d'une compréhension exceptionnelle de la question tamoule. Le vidéo ci-dessous est une de ses allocutions (délivrée lors d'une manifestation tamoule en Australie au mois de mai 2009). Les idées du Dr. Seneviratne seront très utiles à toute personne cherchant à comprendre la question ethnique du Sri Lanka. Ce vidéo (et d'autres travaux du Dr Seneviratne) sont fortement recommandés au singhalais, qui, en raison d'une aveuglesse intellectuelle déplorable, ne voient qu'une seule dimension de la question ethnique de leur pays: celle de la politique majoritaire (c'est-à-dire la vision de la majorité ethnique sur le conflit). 

UVF Decommissioning > Northern Ireland Moves On...

The Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), one of the foremost loyalist paramilitary entities in Northern Ireland, has begun its process of arms decommissioning. This is a significant step forward, which follows up on the path taken by the Provisional IRA, which terminated its decommissioning process in 2005. The Ulster Defence Association (UDA), the largest loyalist paramilitary group, is yet to begin its decommissioning process, but analysts believe that the UDA will follow suit and enter the process of arms decommissioning. 

It has also been reported that General John de Chastelain, the Canadian military official who oversaw the work of the International Commission on the decommissioning of arms in Northern Ireland (with regards to P-IRA decommissioning) is back in Belfast, and attending to the intricacies of the loyalist paramilitary decommissioning process. 

As Sir Reg Empey, the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) has affirmed (as reported in The Times on Thursday 18 June 2009) this demonstrates the 'progress that Northern Ireland has made' in terms of conflict regulation. The process of managing and regulating the conflict and sectarian contentions in Northern Ireland was highly specific in its own right, and was developed with the uniting of a number of favourable conditions. The experience of conflict regulation in Northern Ireland may therefore not be directly applicable elsewhere, but lessons learnt from aspects of that process, and precedents it set in terms of engaging with armed groups, incorporating all antagonist segments in negotiations and 'uniting' a myriad of political, regional, national, bilateral and diplomatic incentives for conflict regulation provide a large number of insights into policymakers dealing with similar challenges in other parts of the world. 

Drame humanitaire & questions pointues sur les droits de l'homme

Dans un entretien télévisé, Sunila Abeysekere, activiste de premier plan dans la scène sri-lankaise des droits de l'homme (domaine où « jouer un rôle actif » égale « traitre », et même « partisan du terrorisme »), exprime ses inquiétudes vis-à-vis les quelques 300,000 civils logés temporairement dans des camps dites de « concentration » au nord du Sri Lanka (région de Vanni). L’objectif du gouvernement sri-lankais, c’est d’assurer qu’aucun de ces civils ne fasse partie des groupements terroristes, avant qu’ils soient permis de repartir dans leurs vill d’origine es/villages.

Les propos de Sunila font écho d’autres nouvelles inquiétantes, notamment en ce qui concerne les jeunes tamouls internés dans ces camps. Les forces de l’ordre avaient séparés les filles et les garçons, qui ont été ensuite amené dans un endroit secret. Les parents de ces jeunes restent désespérés,  sans aucune nouvelle de leurs enfants.

Comme l’a été indiqué dans le message précédent dans ce weblog, un autre group sri-lankais des droits de l’homme a publié le 10 juin 2009 un rapport spécial qui dévoile des faits extrêmement violents, qui représentent des violations importantes des droits de l’homme. Le texte intégral du rapport spécial No 32 de University Teachers for Human Rights (UTHR), groupe composé principalement d’anciens enseignants de l’Université de Jaffna (l’univeristé de la capitale de la province du nord- à majorité tamoule), est accessible ici (accédé le lundi 15 juin 2009).

En même temps, il est intéressant de constater la nature des débats sur les défis dites « d’après-guerre » occasionnés par les personnages politiques, diplomates et les citoyens sri-lankais. La meilleure des sources pour cela, c’est Groundviews, le projet de journalisme des citoyens développé par le Centre for Policy Alternatives , centre de recherches de premier plan à Colombo, qui, lui même a été fortement menacé par les nationalistes cinghalais depuis la fin officielle des hostilités entre les forces de l’ordre et les tigres tamouls (liens accédés le lundi 15 juin 2009). 

Special Note: UTHR Special Report on War's End

University Teachers for Human Rights (UTHR) is unarguably the most prominent, hardworking and outspoken human rights organization in Sri Lanka. UTHR has released a Special Report on the atrocities committed (by both the LTTE and the Government of Sri Lanka) in the last few days of confrontations between the state military forces and the LTTE. 

The special report has indeed caused a considerable amount of controversy, with Sri Lanka's notorious Secretary to the Ministry of Defence (NOT the Minister of Defence, the senior-most civil service position in the defence establishment) intervening to express his rejection of allegations made in the report. This itself amply demonstrates that there is indeed no smoke without a fire. In the past, UTHR reports have been extremely well-researched, accurate, and contained justifiable and credible information. This strongly seems to be the case with the newest report, which can be accessed here (accessed 15 June 2009). 

A related article published in the BBC Sinhala service website is available here (accessed June 15 2009). Another detailed article, published in the Guardian (UK) on Thursday 11 June 2009 is available here. 

The UTHR Special Report No. 32 provides ample testimony to the salient fact that the high command of Sri Lanka's defence establishment and the government are indeed guilty of large-scale war crimes, and the manner in which they consolidated and 'consumed' their victory in its immediate aftermath was far from anything "civilized". 

On the contrary, their behaviour has been one that stinks of blood, deserves outright contempt and condemnation from each and every human being who values human rights, civil liberties and democracy. The senior authorities in Sri Lanka's military and state apparatus have engaged in acts of violence that contravene fundamental human rights, hence the highly plausible accusation of war crimes. 

The international community has been numb for too long, allowing the geopolitics of the day to shape the course of events in Sri Lanka. The civil war under the Rajapakse administration is marked by crimes against humanity, violence against women and children, forced internment, and war crimes of the most crucial nature. In this context, it is essential that international power structures develop a firm, no-nonsense policy on Sri Lanka. 

As President Rajapakse's official visit to Burma amply epitomizes, the Rajapakses and the military junta in Burma are birds of a feather, who flock together with tremendous friendship and camaraderie. 

Closing doors to Bob Rae: paranoia of the highest order

Above: Rt Hon. Bob RAE MP (picture courtesy: Tamilnet - accessed 10 June 2009). 

Bob Rae is a distinguished Canadian politician. A lawyer by profession, Mr Rae (born in 1948) has served as a federal and provincial politician. He was also the Premier of Ontario from 1990 to 1995. Rae was also a Rhodes scholar at Oxford University (UK), and is an officer of the Order of Canada. Rae’s profile on the Canadian encyclopaedia says the following about his political positions:

‘Rae became disenchanted with the NDP (New Democratic Party) over its policy positions (e.g. Israel and economic policy). He formally joined the Liberal Party and ran for its leadership in 2006 (placing third behind the victor Stéphane Dion and old university friend Michael Ignatieff). Dion appointed Rae as co-chair of the federal Liberal election policy platform committee. In 2008 Rae was a successful Liberal candidate in the Toronto Centre bi-election and returned as an MP to the House of Commons’.

Above: Bob Rae in 1990, after the NDP victory in Ontario (picture courtesy: Rae's profile in the Canadian Encyclopedia - accessed 10 June 2009). 

Here is an engaged political leader who was courageous enough to alter his political positions on grounds of principle and personal conviction. Rae has been extremely critical of the government of Sri Lanka in the recent past, over the course of the ethnic conflict. The Sri Lankan government had begun a mission of decimating its own citizens in the name of salvaging the country from terrorism. In crushing terrorism, the government has unarguably created a new wave of terrorism – and the term ‘terrorist state’ is highly applicable to the government of Sri Lanka. If accusations of this nature are false, as the government strongly maintains, one wonders why the high command could not allow Mr Rae into Colombo, sit with him in the Foreign Ministry and explain the government’s deeds in a credible and logically justifiable manner……

Leaving that to the wise to determine, it has to be reiterated that rejecting entry to a senior politician (who is also a 61-year-old senior citizen, who had travelled all the way to Colombo from Canada) from a state with a phenomenal Sri Lankan diaspora is an extremely disgusting act, which deserves outright contempt and condemnation from all right-minded Sri Lankans. This is an act that amply shows the Rajapakse administration’s lack of any regard for Sri Lanka’s foreign policy, and for the Sri Lankan Diaspora (Sinhala, Tamil, Moor and Burgher). If a tired, 61-year-old man is seen as a contender, one can possibly get a clear glimpse of how Sri Lankans who have contrary ideas to those of the Rajapakse administration are treated in the island….

Jan: the rising star of British politics

Above: Ms Jan Jananayagam (picture courtesy: Jan's campaign website - accessed 8 June 2009)

By any means of measurement, the British political scene is undergoing a ‘testing time’, as Premier Gordon Brown described yesterday (Sunday 7 June 2009) addressing a group of Labour Party supporters in East London. Six cabinet ministers resigned within the matter of a week, while prospects for Labour appeared extremely grim at the local government polls (& EU polls). The Tories, unarguably more successful than Labour, do represent a new, young and articulate leadership in David Cameron, but their 'energy' does not seem to have sufficed in adding colour to the grim political scene.

Below right: Jan speaking to members of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). Picture courtesey: Transnational Middle East Observer blog (accessed 8 June 2009). 

One voice that began from the scratch, but reached significant heights within a short period of time, is that of Jan (Janani) Jananayagam, a young banking professional who contested the EU parliamentary elections as an independent candidate. Ms Jananayagam scored a record number of over 50,000 votes, a substantial result for an independent candidate at an EU election. She faired way better than many a small political party. In this era of Obama rule, Jan’s success lies in her ability to surpass ethno-national boundaries, and receive the endorsement of the wider British public, as a credible, articulate and conscientious future leader. It was her first election, and the results she gained demonstrate tremendous potential for future successes. Jan may not sit in the EU parliament chamber in Strasbourg  this time, but it is indeed a fact that she has made her mark in British politics. Hers is a voice that deserves to be and will be heard more and more, a political future that will see many successes in the years to come. 

The plight of the Innocent...

They have been standing by the statue of Vincent Churchill at Parliament Square (London UK) for over two months. A banner they have hoisted says ‘on strike for peace’. Every single day of the week, despite weather conditions, constraints from state and law-enforcement authorities, they continue to show their opposition in the best of their possibility. The main reason for their protests is the civil war in Sri Lanka, or in other words, the evolution of the ‘Tamil question’ of Sri Lanka, the South Asian island they call ‘home’. It is know fact that the Tamils of Sri Lanka have made tremendous contributions to Sri Lanka in many areas. They are known for their hard-working nature, and for their rich cultural, literary and religious heritage. The Tamils of Sri Lanka constitute the island’s main ethnic minority.

Sri Lankan society can be best described as a society composed of a permanent ethnic majority and permanent minorities (i.e. the Tamils, Sri Lankan Moors/Muslims and Burghers). During a century and a half of British rule, the island was governed as a single administrative unit, which laid the foundations of the political and administrative framework of independent Ceylon and later Sri Lanka. At the time of independence, ethnic Tamil political leaders were concerned about the political representation of the Tamil minority and the protection of the rights of the Tamils as an ethnic minority. The Federal Party of Ceylon (FPC), formed at soon after political autonomy from Britain – and the foremost political party of Sri Lanka’s Tamil community until the late 1970s, explained the challenge of imposing a Westminster-style parliamentary system (with a first-past-the-post electoral system) in Sri Lanka and the plight of the Tamils in a pamphlet issued in 1957 in the following manner:

‘As any student of the British constitution would know, the success of the working of the Parliamentary Government depends on the existence of a healthy and sound party system. A party which commands a majority in one parliament may be reduced to a minority in the next parliament, and vice versa. This is made possible because parties are divided by ideologies and their respective policies on the political, social and economic aspects of Government, and not by accident of birth. These are shifting bases as far as popular attachment and alignment is concerned. Majorities in Parliament are obtained depending on the measure of support a particular policy received from the people for the time being. But this system cannot be worked in a democratic way in a country like Ceylon where the population is so divided into racial groups that one race is in an unchanging perpetual majority and another in a perpetual minority. Parties may emerge whether in the majority or the minority inter se on the British model, but Parliament will always be divided into a perpetual majority and a perpetual minority on a racial basis. Not that it is suggested that this position should be reversed but what is emphasised is that this is inevitable and inherent in a unitary constitution of the British type as applied to Ceylon. That is why farsighted Tamil leaders contended that under the Soulbury dispensation political power had been permanently transferred into the hands of the Sinhalese to the total exclusion of the Tamils’ (From Ceylon Faces Crisis, an FPC communiqué, released in 1957, p. 9).

The majority of those protesting at Parliament Square in London belong to a younger generation. Many of them consider themselves as British, and they represent the same zest for Tamil activism embodied in Maya Arulpragasam (M.I.A) and Jan Jananayagam.  Their concerns can be summed up as follows:

1.     Relief and support for some 300,000 Sri Lankans (Tamils) displaced in Northern Sri Lanka, temporarily accommodated in internment camps (the Sri Lankan government describes them as ‘welfare centres’, while Tamil activists view them as ‘concentration camps’). By any means, it is crystal clear that life in these ‘centres’ is more identical to a concentration camp.

2.     Autonomy: the right to manage the affairs of the Northern and Eastern (especially Northern) provinces of Sri Lanka – the two provinces are predominantly Tamil, and here’s a Tamil community that has had enough of Sri Lanka’s exclusively ‘Sinhalese’ military controlling these areas – the ultimate settlement unarguably lies in granting a high degree of autonomy to the said provinces, with powers of policing, justice, local government (with a regional assembly), education and social welfare.

Analysts, Tamil, Sinhalese, Sri Lankan and non-Sri Lankan, tend to misunderstand the core reasons that prompt British Tamils to rise in protest in front of the British Houses of Parliament. In their home country, a viciously fascist government, whose approach to the ethnic question is frighteningly one-sided, biased and chauvinist, is preventing any form of Tamil activism. In Britain, the country that ruled their home country prior to independence, and their present country of residence and (for many of them) citizenship, they have decided to express their opposition to the manner in which the Tamil question is handled by Sri Lankan authorities.

Some say that the Tamil Diaspora as a whole is ultra-nationalist, unwilling to negotiate, uncompromising, and a group that strongly clings to the concept of a separate state for Sri Lanka’s Tamils. A stroll down parliament square and a chat with the protestors will amply show that this is an extremely wrong assumption. The core reasons for their protest campaign stem from humanitarian concerns, and all they are asking for is political autonomy, and the right to manage the affairs of their native regions with dignity. This is exactly what the present government of Sri Lanka has denied them.

Talking to the protestors, it was learnt that confidentially received reports from the internment camps show cases of intense sexual abuse, child abuse, abductions and violence against women and children. Such reports are extremely identical to the behaviour of the Sri Lankan military, which has been accused of sexual abuse (including child sexual abuse) even by the United Nations. The government of Sri Lanka seems to have allowed the state security forces to ‘use’ the Tamils in these camps – hence the high plausibility of the ‘concentration camp’ accusation. The LTTE, the most vocal voices of militant Tamil nationalism, was composed of young men and women from poor social backgrounds in northern Sri Lanka. Those interned in the camps also belong to the same social level.

The Sri Lankan government’s objective is crystal clear: the gradual elimination of the deprived, economically poor Tamil community of Northern Sri Lanka (especially the youth and children) to prevent the rise of strong Tamil nationalist movements in future. Given this objective, the present situation in Northern Sri Lanka rightly constitutes a case of ‘genocide’.

The UK government ought to provide the fullest support for the Parliament Square protestors to continue their protest campaign, and make their voice heard. Almost every tourist that passes by Westminster stops a second to ask what’s going on, and this provides an effective platform for British Tamils to raise international awareness about Sri Lanka’s Tamil question. The media, on their behalf, ought to show more presence, and support this fully justifiable and timely venture. 

Interview with Sri Lankan Tamil politician

Right: Darmalingam Siddarthan, leader of the Peoples' Liberation Organisation of Tamil Eelam (PLOTE). Image courtesy: The Sunday Leader (accessed 5 June 2009). 

 
Last Sunday (31 May 2009), the Sri Lankan weekly Sunday Leader published an interview with Darmalingam Siddarthan, leader of the Peoples' Liberation Organisation of Tamil Eelam (PLOTE), a Tamil political party in Sri Lanka. Mr Siddarthan's party was among the Tamil political groups that were strongly opposed by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), in the latter's mission to emerge as the 'sole representative' of the Tamil-speaking people of Sri Lanka. 

In the present-day ('post-conflict') context, the PLOTE leader ponders on some of the main challenges that lie ahead to Tamils of Sri Lanka and their political representatives. One of the key issues that emerges in the interview is the lack of 'inclusion' and involvement of Tamil political leaders in the Sri Lanka government's post-conflict reconstruction initiatives. 

The full text of the interview can be read here (accessed 5 May 2009).