Abstract of paper presented at the Annual Conference of the UK's Conflict Research Society, Aston University, Birmingham, September 6 2006
Revisiting History : Contemplating A New Approach to Resolving the Sri Lankan Conflict
Keywords: conflict, negotiation, Commonwealth, Ceylon/ Sri Lanka, Sovereignty, New approach, Resolution
Abstract
The armed conflict in Sri Lanka is moving to a new phase of violence and war. Past attempts to reach a negotiated settlement and a peaceful solution to the ethnic crisis have given few results. At each occasion when a government was elected with a clearly-expressed mandate for Peace (which was the case of the 1994 Presidential Elections that brought former President Mrs Kumaratunga to power, and the 2001 General Elections that brought former PM Ranil Wickramasinghe to power), the successive peace moves seem to come to a virtual standstill within a few months. New approaches, in the Sri Lankan context, have therefore been rather short-lived in the past.
We propose to read such failures as the direct consequence of a strongly apparent ‘unwillingness’ to solve the ethnic crisis. This leads to a sheer lack of inclusion (of all the key elements concerned) within a peace move.
In this paper, we wish to outline a totally new approach to the resolution of the Sri Lankan crisis, one that begins with a constructive effort to reach ethnic consensus. We develop the argument from the standpoint that the Ceylonese/ Sri Lankan case is an extremely sensitive issue, and that any attempt to resolve the conflict not only requires high levels of strategic creativity, involved diplomacy and thorough knowledge of conflict management, but also a deep understanding of Ceylonese/Sri Lankan history.
Thus, the new approach to be developed in my paper may be called one that entails ‘Revisiting History’. Contrary to the bilingual language policy and the general discourse announced by the Rajapakse administration[1], the present Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (DSRSL) can never come to terms with her problems and see the future in a new light until she assesses them in the backdrop of her colonial, postcolonial/Commonwealth (i.e. post-1948 Dominion and post-1972 Republic) past. The present conflict came to being due to a set of reasons deeply steeped in this history, and it is there that the key to its resolution lies. We may thereby highlight the inextricable link between conflict resolution and history.
In the Sri Lankan issue, if peace was the case before 1948 (and, amidst tensions, up until 1972), it is only a reformation of the State apparatus that would make the island reach ethnic inclusion and peace. Policymakers of the South are simply unprepared to contemplate anything of this nature. As the present Foreign Minister contends, the ‘sovereignty of Lanka is non-negotiable’[2] for the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL). In-keeping with the ‘Sovereign State’ principle, learning from lessons of history may lead Lanka to peace.
The greatest strength of the proposed ‘New Approach’ would be the creation of a ‘dialogue’ that leads to ‘understanding’, within all parties concerned. Conflict resolution skills should be deployed in creating a forum that makes each party understand the realistic paths that may be taken in reaching a state of civil peace. This may lead to the gradual conclusion on devolution and affirmation of the Tamil community’s fundamental right for self-determination.
As it was mentioned previously, the sovereignty of Lanka could be kept intact and the Tamil self-determination affirmed through one pertinent solution: strengthening Lanka’s position within the Commonwealth of Nations. Conflict Resolution initiatives stand as the best path to ‘get there’, and a new approach of ‘going back’ to history is a promising starting point.
Keywords: conflict, negotiation, Commonwealth, Ceylon/ Sri Lanka, Sovereignty, New approach, Resolution
Abstract
The armed conflict in Sri Lanka is moving to a new phase of violence and war. Past attempts to reach a negotiated settlement and a peaceful solution to the ethnic crisis have given few results. At each occasion when a government was elected with a clearly-expressed mandate for Peace (which was the case of the 1994 Presidential Elections that brought former President Mrs Kumaratunga to power, and the 2001 General Elections that brought former PM Ranil Wickramasinghe to power), the successive peace moves seem to come to a virtual standstill within a few months. New approaches, in the Sri Lankan context, have therefore been rather short-lived in the past.
We propose to read such failures as the direct consequence of a strongly apparent ‘unwillingness’ to solve the ethnic crisis. This leads to a sheer lack of inclusion (of all the key elements concerned) within a peace move.
In this paper, we wish to outline a totally new approach to the resolution of the Sri Lankan crisis, one that begins with a constructive effort to reach ethnic consensus. We develop the argument from the standpoint that the Ceylonese/ Sri Lankan case is an extremely sensitive issue, and that any attempt to resolve the conflict not only requires high levels of strategic creativity, involved diplomacy and thorough knowledge of conflict management, but also a deep understanding of Ceylonese/Sri Lankan history.
Thus, the new approach to be developed in my paper may be called one that entails ‘Revisiting History’. Contrary to the bilingual language policy and the general discourse announced by the Rajapakse administration[1], the present Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (DSRSL) can never come to terms with her problems and see the future in a new light until she assesses them in the backdrop of her colonial, postcolonial/Commonwealth (i.e. post-1948 Dominion and post-1972 Republic) past. The present conflict came to being due to a set of reasons deeply steeped in this history, and it is there that the key to its resolution lies. We may thereby highlight the inextricable link between conflict resolution and history.
In the Sri Lankan issue, if peace was the case before 1948 (and, amidst tensions, up until 1972), it is only a reformation of the State apparatus that would make the island reach ethnic inclusion and peace. Policymakers of the South are simply unprepared to contemplate anything of this nature. As the present Foreign Minister contends, the ‘sovereignty of Lanka is non-negotiable’[2] for the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL). In-keeping with the ‘Sovereign State’ principle, learning from lessons of history may lead Lanka to peace.
The greatest strength of the proposed ‘New Approach’ would be the creation of a ‘dialogue’ that leads to ‘understanding’, within all parties concerned. Conflict resolution skills should be deployed in creating a forum that makes each party understand the realistic paths that may be taken in reaching a state of civil peace. This may lead to the gradual conclusion on devolution and affirmation of the Tamil community’s fundamental right for self-determination.
As it was mentioned previously, the sovereignty of Lanka could be kept intact and the Tamil self-determination affirmed through one pertinent solution: strengthening Lanka’s position within the Commonwealth of Nations. Conflict Resolution initiatives stand as the best path to ‘get there’, and a new approach of ‘going back’ to history is a promising starting point.
[1] Where all public servants will be encouraged to be bilingual (Sinhalese/Tamil)
[2] Statement made in the course of a speech delivered at the Norwegian parliament recently. The full text of the Foreign Minister’s speech is available at: http://www.peaceinsrilanka.net/peace2005/Insidepage/PressRelease/GOSLreleases/GOSLmediaRel140606.asp Accessed June 30th 2006.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire