Wednesday, November 4, 2009


was prabakaran in consultation with the chief minister of tamilnadu in 2008 and 2009?
if he had been and had sought some intervention,it would not have been appropriate to ask the sri lankan state to halt the offensive,as it would have meant that the sri lankan state would have demanded a laying down of arms.
whatever the situation,prabakaran had to go down fighting.he could not have asked for a stalemate which would have been of no consequence.because the situation suddenly became very tough,in view of the restricted supply of arms,a proud army would not have thought of asking for a go slow from the enemy.the indian state could not go and argue on behalf of that army and state,eelam,which had assasinated an indian head of state.the case must have been argued with the world community which had decided that it was not having the appetite to get involved in the creation of a new country.the world community was totally absorbed with iran iraq and afghanistan.
prabakaran would have realised that the odds were suddenly stacked against his army and country.he would have known that this fight was to the finish.against all the odds,they fought till the very end using all strategies that they could come up with.these would not have included a wanton targeting of sinhalese civilians but a defensive war with the people behind the frontlines.
the people obviously would have wanted to go to safer areas as they would not have received military training.if the sri lankan state wanted the leaders to surrender by threatening attacks on civilians,it meant that it was degrading and descending in desperation.the sri lankan state knew that such a chance would never come again.
a group of terrorists cannot move 300,000 people with them.a state and its apparatus was what was retreating in the face of aggression by an enemy.
the eelam armed forces were negotiating with the international community and when they did not want or accept any compromise,what should the international community have done?it should have either supplied arms to both sides or should have imposed an arms embargo on the entire could have considered dropping all trade with the island,in the absence of leadership to ensure a peaceful independence for eelam.
why the international community chose to go with the status quo and support the state of sri lanka,formed in 1948,and which had proved itself as being illegal and inhuman.was it because of the state of israel also formed in 1948,another illegal state,which would have meant a similar recognition for the freedom fighters in palestine.
the chinese state thought that it was already a superpower and also that it had to act in strategic ways befitting a would have thought that it was being pragmatic,in contrast with would have also thought that separatism was not something which needed a precedent.
the chinese state must realise that there is a higher power and a morality which is above all the machinations of a super power on earth.the ultimate aim of a superpower or any country must be the betterment of its citizens,that goal can unite all kinds of nationalities,if it is carried out with honesty.
if the tibetan people want to be headed by the dalai lama,the chinese state must find ways of accomodating him within the structure of the state.if it believes that such an arrangement will result in a loosening of the central authority,it has to adopt methods which convince the population that there is betterment in coexisting with the rest of the country under the rule of one party,which will ensure a reduction of fractiousness and strife.can such a simple concept not be communicated to the people.of course,it can only be communicated if the people are not differentiated in any way.
the sri lankan state which had differentiated a section which had the most genuine claim for a nationhood,systematically repelled and propelled this section into taking up arms,and when the rest of the world did not have a leadership to do the obvious and retreated,the 'going places in a hurry' chinese state set out to fill the vacuum with its kind of business leadership.a deep analysis of the issues was probably not initiated or else the chinese state also had no time for any nationalism when business was what was the issue,as with the rest of the world.
now that business has lost its lucre,the international community including the chinese have to realise that the island of ceylon is unlike anything else,have to realise that you just cannot hand over the reins to one group when there are only two groups,each having a history and a culture,one obviously predating the other.
in such a scenario of global meltdown and distraction,the eelam army did what it had set out to do,fight for its homeland,and did so till the very end.
the sri lankan state,also set out to do what it was mandated to do.
which of the actors broke international rules and conventions of war has to be found out,if it is the sri lankan state,it has fallen victim to the bloodrush of a few victories of the onward march and has made the birth of eelam more easier.
in such a complex scenario and when the opposition in tamilnadu displayed no compunction in utilising the deaths of civilians for electoral purposes,the DMK had the issue removed from its could not do anything which would have resulted in the tamils here losing out on their progress.a most significant government formation was taking place and when there were some who tried to reduce the issue into something in the manner of pointing fingers,there was nothing else to be done,other than what was done,the humanitarian element.
the fundamental question was whether prabakaran was in consultation with the chief minister of tamilnadu or whether he had decided to seek alliance with those who did not have the constraints of a state and the responsibility of governing.
he would have needed moral support in the time of his last stand but he would have known that destiny had put him in the last battle.he would have known that his fight would not go for a waste,he might also have realised the need for the advice of someone like kalaignar.prabakaran did the best for his country which will be born sooner than later.

No comments: