H. L. D. Mahindapala

Whenever Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga (CBK) opens her mouth it reminds me of her own characterization of the way Ranil Wickremesinghe (RW) talks. Tired of getting nowhere with RW in their numerous talks to arrive at a formula to solve the north-south conflict she said: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Ranil katha karanney katin noweiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ (Ranil does not speak with his mouth) meaning that he speaks through an unmentionable part of his anatomy located roughly a span or so beneath the navel but slightly off-centre. CBKƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s latest speech delivered at Justice Palakidnar Memorial Oration in Colombo, Sri Lanka on 24 July 2011 indicates clearly that she is better at speaking like Ranil than Ranil himself.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ As everyone knows she has a big mouth. Anura Bandaranaike once told me that she gets late to keep appointment because she canƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t stop talking once she gets going. On her latest public appearance she made use of the platform of Justice Palakidnar being laid to rest to gain some political advantages. Nothing surprising in that! She has been doing that all her life.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ First she climbed on the coffin her father to exploit the sympathy vote without acknowledging her debt to the massive Sinhala-Buddhist political wave headed by her father, S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” a wave that still resonates in the critical nooks and corners of the southern electorate. She would be nothing more than an obscure baila-dancing, wine-drinking, pontificating, loud-mouth if she did not inherit the Sinhala-Buddhist grass roots revived by her great father after 500 years of colonial suppression.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Second, she undercut her mother and formed her own party with her husband siding with the Jaffna jingoists to give them what her father called ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-outrageous demandsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. Third, she wormed her way into the motherƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s bosom by using the young children to win her over and undercut her brother who had stood with the SLFP loyally. Now she is using her childrenƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬‚or rather their tears — to win the sympathy of the people. In her speech she says that Sri Lanka is a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-failed nationƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. What has she achieved to prove that she has been a success? The Sunday Leader exposed her career at Sorbonne and questioned whether she qualified by passing her exams. So what has she achieved for the nation or for her self to win another chance?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The greatest tragedy in the life of S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike is that nobody has ever heard his offspring speaking spiritedly in defence of his Sinhala-Buddhist politics. At different time they have had the gumption to attack his Sinhala-Buddhist politics which triumphed repeatedly to bring them into power and keep them in power beating the left-wing loonies and all other right-wing anti-national forces. Even in her latest outburst CBK takes pot shot at her fatherƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s Sinhala-Buddhist politics. Their ingratitude to their father reveals the low caliber of the Bandaranaike offspring. Of course, in an annual ritual they lay wreaths at his statue not to respect, honour and sustain the historic political tradition which their revered, liberal father restored to the people but to extract some political mileage for their personal glory and advancement by posing as the legatees of the Bandaranaike image embedded in the memories of the grateful people.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ After the cameras taking pictures of wreath-laying stops rolling they rush back to party with their bed-fellows in the anti-Bandaranaike NGOs. CBK has been the worst ingrate who fancies that she knows better than her far-sighted father who beat the so-called ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-golden brainsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ of the Marxists with double doctorates and saved the nation from falling into the hands of Soviet-style Marxist dictators. She had no compunction in attacking her father at the funeral of Justice Palakidnar. There she lambasted her fatherƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s politics, the politics of the Sinhala-Buddhists, praised her childrenƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s tears, praised her own regime, (MPHOT!) spun some political yarns about what a good political leader she was when she was president, blamed the Sinhala majority for the mono-ethnic politics of the Jaffna jingoists whose uni-directional politics plunged them headlong into extremism encapsulated in the Vadukoddai Resolution of 1976, and concocted her own pretentious political theories which she had never practiced when she had the power to do so.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Being the drama queen par excellence she was out to make a bit of heroi-comic theatre at the funeral oration hoping it would launch her into the realms of power once again. Only Channel 4 took some notice of it. But how many votes can Channel 4 deliver to her to become, for instance, the next prime minister, now that she has exhausted her two terms as president? All in all, her speech goes to reveal only her true self where she ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” the notorious Queen of Deception (Chowri Rajini) — tries in vain to parade as a super intellectual in command of all the mantras that are required to cure the ills facing the nation.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ At her age of 66 it is rather difficult to imagine that she had lost her memory. But her speech contains all the symptoms of her heading irreversibly into AlzheimerƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s. At one point in her oration she talked, with a dramatic pause for effect as if emotion had choked her, of her children ringing her from London and crying after viewing the footage of Channel 4. These kids, according to their mother, are averse to dabble in politics and the crying possible was a private affair. But their mother had no qualms in dragging them into her failed politics, hoping to take cover behind their tears to condemn the Sri Lankan soldiers who sacrificed their lives for CBK to go dancing with ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Saravanamuttu, the anti-Sri Lanka NGO pundit known for denigrating and desecrating her fatherƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s name, heritage and politics in every fora.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ By dragging her children she has exposed them to political attacks because their mother had used their tears to prop up her political agenda which is not going anywhere now. As ex-Presidente it was her duty to defend the Security Forces against the report of the Advisory Panel of Experts (APEs) and Channel 4. After all the Security Forces defended her and served her loyally when she was Commander-in-Chief. Instead she comes out defending the Channel 4 accusations by using her childrenƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s names. Has she forgotten that the Security Forces sacrificed their lives to defend her regime when it was under attack by the Tamil Tiger terrorists? But she has exposed her childrenƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s private tears for her public gain. Has she no shame or self-respect?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Perhaps, this may be a ruse to pose as a human rights activist with an eye to get a job in the UN. It is true that she is unemployed now and is looking around for a job. She tried the UN but she was sacked even before she get could get confirmation. Her speech now has made her unemployable. Worst of all, in unscrupulously dragging the tears of her children into the political arena she had made them vulnerable political targets. Unfortunately, they will be made to pay for the sins of their mother exploiting their tears. If she cared for them and their privacy she should have kept their tears as a family secret and not make a public show of it. By politicizing ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-the nobleƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ tears of her children she must take responsibility for making them political targets.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

So letƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s consider how the Kumaratunga kids reacted when their mother was persecuting the Sinhalese. Did these children cry for the Sinhalese mothers and wives who were stripped naked and forced to parade publicly in the Wyamaba electorate under their motherƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s regime ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” a deliberate move to suppress the democratic rights of dissenting women in the opposition? Would the Kumaratunga kids have felt the tears of the helpless children of the Sinhala mothers stripped naked in public? Did they feel ashamed of being Sri Lankan or were they proud that their mother was humiliating mothers of other children? How come they had no tears for the Sinhala mothers and wives? Or do they have feelings only for visuals cooked up for political gain of anti-Sri Lankan agents abroad and at home and not for the suffering of Sinhala women which they would have known at first hand?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Looking back, did the Kumaratunga kids cry at the denial of the opportunities for Sri Lankan kids to study abroad under their GrandmaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s rules which, of course, were overruled to give their mother a special place at Sorbonne where she qualified more to be a sozzled sommelier of the cheapest sort than as a political scientist of any sort? Above all, how many times have these kids cried for the Tamils who died when her forces entered and conquered Jaffna in 1995? In any war civilians do get killed. But is she saying that civilians died only in the last days of January to May 2009 and not during her offensives fought successfully by Major-General Janaka Perera? Why is she defending Channel 4 now and why did she deny any killings when Tim Sebastian of the BBC accused her of killing Tamils citing reports? The Kumaratunga kids can verify this by googling Tim SebastianƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s interview with their mother on the You Tube. IsnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t she defending Channel 4 purely to get even with her foe, President Mahinda Raapaksa? IsnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t she aligning herself with the Tamil expats who, like her, had lost their power by losing Prabhakaran?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ And it this Mama who tells her kids and anyone willing to listen: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-I must emphasize that my government only employed democratic methods, never force, violence nor murder.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ If the Kumaratunga kids canƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t access Tim SebastianƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s HARD TALK they should at least get a copy of Victor IvanƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s Chowri Ragini. It is more reliable than Channel 4. After all Victor was one of CBKƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s best buddies who helped her to get into power. He says that she didnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t have a sari to pose for her photos when she was elected. He and the photographer had to buy a sari for her to look good in the pictures. And, lo and behold, miracles happened at Temple Trees. Before long she was wearing pearl necklaces and expensive watches and buying expensive saris each time she stepped into India. She even opened her cupboard at Temple Trees and offered Ivan Rs. 500,000.00 which he rejected. Three cheers for that! But how did a woman who didnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t have a sari come to offer half-a-million almost overnight?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Then again, long before these kids were even a twinkle in their parentsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ DNA, things happened that had brought copious tears to parents and children of all communities. When the Sri Lankan children were starving, without any milk, their Grandmother announced that she had rationed the supply of chocolates to their mother and her siblings at Rosemead Place. (Shades of Marie Antoinette, eh?) Will the Kumaratunga kids ever cry for the Burgher, Sinhalese and Tamils families who led the mass exodus to foreign countries in the seventies just to feed their children and give them an education comparable to that of their mother who got a free scholarship at Sorbonne? Did these children also cry for the thousands of other poor children who were left behind when they (the Kumaratunga kids) were flown to Egypt for a special viewing of the Pyramids and the Sphinx? Were they proud to be Sri Lankans then enjoying privileges denied to other Sri Lankan children? When you are a Kumaratunga with connections itƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s nice to be born Sri Lankans, eh kids?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Not surprisingly Mama ends, as usual on a dodgy note: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-I was proud of my son and daughter, proud that they cared for the others, proud that they have grown up to be the Man and Woman their father and mother wanted them to be.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Now isnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t this typical of the CBK speaking like Ranil for that unmentionable part of the anatomy? CBK takes great care to hide behind her childrenƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s emotions without informing the nation about her reaction to the Channel 4 video. After all, she was the Commander-in-Chief of forces that fought wars against the Tamil Tigers and chased them out of Jaffna. Her knowledge of her forces should enable her to form an opinion on the charges leveled by Channel 4. From her experience of fighting the Vadukoddai War earlier what does she think the role of the soldiers would have been when they conquered the last bit of land in Vellamullivaikal and brought peace to the nation? If she was president would she not have gone all the way to end the Vadukoddai War once and for all?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ When she was accused of committing war crimes by Tim Sebastian she denied it totally. But she endorses the Cannel 4 accusations in cowardly fashion: she cites the tears of her children. Of course, she drags in the tears of her children to impress how noble they are. Does this mean that they need another video depicting the charges made against her by the State Department for them to shed tears on their not-so-noble mother? The burning question of the day is not the tears shed by her children after viewing Channel 4 but the tears not shed by their mother for her crimes (as stated by State Department) against all communities, particularly the women of Wyamba. Without expressing her opinions directly she takes cover behind the tears of children and condemns the forces indirectly. After her lengthy speech at Justice PalakidnarƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s memorial we have yet to learn from the garrulous Mama where she stands on Channel 4 and the APEsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ reports.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Besides, as a responsible mother, did she ever discuss with her kids how their GrandmotherƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s government was forced to quell the JVP fascists by slaughtering 20,000 Sinhala youngsters misled by the JVP terrorists? Did she tell her kids that the path to her passage to the presidential chair was partly cleared by their Grandma who went about her business of restoring law and order ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” quite rightfully ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” by eliminating the JVP fascists? Make no mistake, the violence against the JVP and the LTTE ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” two fascist outfits ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” was a necessary evil. I do not cavil about the use of force. Every state has the right to use force against fascist terrorists who threaten elected governments and the fundamental rights of every citizen to lead normal, peaceful lives. My objection is to the double standards where CBK pretends that she did not use force or commit any crimes in waging war against the Jaffna jingoists.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ LetƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s now shift our focus to CBKƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s views on culture and politics. Practically all of it reflects, in one form or another, those of her dancing partner, ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Saravanamuttu, the bogus guru of human rights and political culture who heads the anti-Sri Lankan Centre for Policy Alternative. Politically speaking, ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ and the Bandaranaike sisters certainly make strange bedfellows. The less you talk of that the better it is for what is left of their reputation. What matters is their symbiotic relationship in politics. Her funeral oration doesnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t contain a single original statement other than the ill-informed, ill-digested, half-baked theories and conclusions regurgitated by the NGOs hacks like ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ and some left-wing loonies who are still undecided as to whether they should go for MarxƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s unattainable classless paradise on earth or equally unrealizable other-worldly paradise in an exclusively Christian heaven. With the kind of close links that the Bandaranaike sisters have with the likes of ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakisƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ it is not surprising at all to see CBK parroting anti-Sinhala-Buddhist and anti-Sri Lankan propaganda of the NGOs.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Consider, for instance, the following line which she dishes out as if it is a statement of profound and sublime wisdom expressed by a meta guru meditating in the Himalayan hills. She said: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Yesterday, I had the privilege of attending an unique (???) event in Colombo. It was the Geoffrey Bawa Awards ceremony for excellence in Architecture. It was a most beautiful example of the richness of diversity, of what could be achieved in harnessing the talents of all.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The richness of the diversity of the Sri Lankan culture has been a consistent, creative and a shining force throughout millennia. But CBK had discovered it only yesterday. Condemning Sri Lanka as a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-failed nationƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ and accusing the Sinhala- Buddhists for not giving the minorities their space she says: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Could the Sinhala community alone have produced a Bawa, a Barbara Samson, an Ananda Coomaraswamy a Muralidaran, a Duncan White, a Michael Ondaatje, a Shyam Selvadurai?ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Obviously, she is totally ignorant of the basic fact that the Sinhala-Buddhist culture blossomed from the year dot because it opened its space for all cultures to mix, co-exist and thrive on parallel spheres. It was an open society, inclusive of all those who wanted to make it their home in common with the others. The tolerant Sinhala-Buddhist culture was never a closed society that excluded the ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-otherƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. Lakshman Kadirgamar, her outstanding Foreign Minister, put it succinctly when he said in his classic speech that all his honours and titles are mere icing at the top. The cake was baked in Sri Lanka, he said.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ No one denies the contributions of individuals to the overall culture irrespective of their ethnicity. But CBK, in her bitter haste to condemn the Sinhala-Buddhists, does not pause to ask in what overarching culture did the minorities find their space to blossom. Take the case of Murali. He, indeed, was gifted with a unique talent. But where would it have taken him if the multi-cultural, open and democratic culture did not give him the place that as due to him? Who created the cricketing culture and who gave him the space to be a part of that culture? What would he have thrown if he was forcibly recruited by PrabhakaranƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s fascist forces? WouldnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t he have been forced to use his skills to throw hand grenades instead of ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-doosrasƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ and probably loose either his arm or his life? Who stood up for him when the Australians were trying their best ban him with the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard calling him a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-chuckerƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚? That was the time when the Sinhalese, who stood up for Murali, ran banners at the MCG, saying: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Are you aware, Darryl Hair / MuraliƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s balls are quite fair?ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ The Sinhalese applauded and defended all our cricketing heroes drawn from all communities unlike the LTTE lunatics who ran amok on cricket grounds wrapped in the Tiger flag ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” the vilest flag among all flags with no redeeming features of humane values.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ In all the names cited by CBK it is apparent that racism was never a factor that excluded the minorities. Sri Lanka was not S. Africa or racist Nazi Germany. For instance, in the politically explosive boxing bout between Afro-American Joe Louis and the German-Aryan Max Schemling Nazi pride and honour was dependent on a victory by the Aryan German. HitlerƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s theory of Aryan superiority depended on Schemling defeating Joe Louis. He had already defeated Joe in New York in the 12th round. In the 1938 rematch Joe knocked him out in the first round. Hitler was stunned when his ideology of white superiority was beaten into pulp by Joe Louis. Murali gives the lie to CBKƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s fiction that the Sinhala-Buddhist culture is against the minorities. In fact it is a leading example which demonstrates that racism has never been a determining factor in the Sinhala-Buddhist culture. MuraliƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s presence debunks CBKƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s concoction that the Sinhala-Buddhist culture is exclusivist. All her arguments and examples prove that she qualifies to be the latest ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Bunkum-wathieƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ still hanging around hoping to win back the power she lost.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ All individual talent grows in a favourable climate and if the culture of the Sinhala-Buddhist majority was not conducive there would have been no opening for the minorities to flourish as they have done in Sri Lanka. Take also the case Ananda Coomaraswamy. His masterpiece was the monograph he wrote in praise of Medieval Sinhala Art exhorting the Sinhalese not to let it die. Unlike CBK, who is a failed politician with limited knowledge of her own culture, iconic polymaths like Coomaraswamy were way ahead in their awareness of the creative national culture created by the genius of the Sinhala-Buddhists who not only built Hindu temples but also embraced Hindu gods and made them an integral part of Buddhist temples. Is this exclusivism or inclusivism? Instead of mouthing clichƒÆ’†’ƒ”š‚©s and slogans of the NGO Nazis it is time she learnt that Sinhala-Buddhism was always inclusive which accounts for the national diversity and richness which she acknowledges at one point.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ She also talks of Shyam Selvadurai. She seems to dropping names merely to impress because if she knew the contents and the context she would not throw these names around in vain. Every name she cites proves the diversity of the Sri Lankan culture unlike the closed society of the north which shut out even the low-caste Jaffna Tamils. ShyamƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s FUNNY BOY, for instance, is one of the finest novels on two intertwining and sensitive issues: 1. forbidden same sex relationships and 2. the inter-ethnic relationship in which people of both communities overcome their condition with intertwining bonds of friendship, love and understanding, despite the divisive and ethnic violence propagated by the Jaffna jingoists only. His non-judgmental narrative depicts graphically the poisonous political violence redeemed, of course, by the power of human and compassionate feelings for each other, rising gloriously like a Phoenix above consuming tribalism. Towards the end the narrator, Arjie, says: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚¦ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚¦..something occurred to me that I had never really been conscious of before ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” Shehan (his lover) was Sinhalese and I was not. This awareness did not change my feelings (of love) for him, it was simply there, like a thin translucent screen through which I watched himƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ (p.302 Vintage, 1995). Amor vincit omnia!

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Shyam handles, in quiet undertones, the inter-ethnic, political and personal relationships with urbane subtlety and exquisite refinement. The homo eroticism is drawn so delicately in every detail to transform the sensuality into something innocent and epiphanic, particularly for a child awakening to the nature of his sexuality. The novel exemplifies the line in The Times of London (August 10, 1995) which said Sinhala-Tamil relationships are neither ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-visceral not atavisticƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. In the riots when the house of Tamil Arjie is burnt down and all hopes are reduced to ashes it is the Sinhala friends and neighbours who come to lift them up again. The Sinhalese too were ashamed about the behaviour of the Sinhala mob. It was genuine guilt mixed with compassion and not an attempt score political points like the way CBK exploits the guilt feelings of her children.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The novel affirms that it is not constitutions, political institutions, power centers and extremist ideologies that help or save the victims of violence. It is the invisible hand that comes out of a caring heart and embraces all in a universal bond that gives eternal hope to victims of violent politics — and even to ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-the mass men who live lives of quiet desperation.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ (Thoreau, Walden, 1854). It is a bond that opens up space for us to live as separate entities and identities and yet hold us together by sharing common human values as saving grace, or as inclusive aspirations, or as the highest common factor for survival in a violent world hijacked by brutal megalomaniacs posing as liberators.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Shyam delineates the intimate inter-personal relationships of the diverse ethnic actors and confirms that there is hope for peaceful co-existence because their humanity can overcome politics and ethnic divisions that separate them. The novel as an art form has the capacity to delineate the lived historical experiences with greater emotional content than the partisan sociological exercises like those fabricated by S. J. Tambiah and H. L. Seneviratne who wrote the Work of Kings — longest genuflecting footnote to TambiahƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s Buddhism Betrayed?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ShyamƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s novel belongs to the whole of Sri Lanka while Tambiahs and Seneviratnes cater only to one-eyed jacks like themselves. It is very unlikely that any of these themes ever crossed the wine-addled, shrunken brain of CBK. If it did she would not have cited Shyam as a product deprived of living space by the majority Sinhalese. He is far more truthful to the existential experiences of the Sri Lankans that those conceived by CBK in her weird dreams.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Last but not the least, let me conclude with her pseudo-intellectual analysis which is a sopho-moronic exercise that would not rate even a D- in any respectable university. She divides her perceived inequalities into four areas: 1. economic and social inequality; 2. cultural inequality; 3. political inequality and 4. the nature of the state. According to her fanciful theorizing only the minority has faced these inequalities and all this is due to the Sinhala-Buddhist majority who had disregarded the needs and aspirations of the minorities.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ To prove her points she must answer several basic questions: 1. WasnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t it the frustrated Sinhala youth who took up arms first on the issues of discrimination raised by her (including language)? So how does it make an ethnic issue when the youth of the majority community also took up arms on the identical issues? 2. Can she mention the issues of discrimination that the minorities experienced which were not experienced by the majority? DoesnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t this prove that discrimination was a common factor shared by all on an economic basis and not on ethnic differences? 3. If it was an ethnic issue can she tell the nation why only one-Tamil speaking community ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” the Jaffna jingoists ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” (and not the Tamil-speaking Muslims and the Indian Tamils) that raised the language and other perceived (as opposed to real) issues of discrimination? 4. If the majoritarian politics was a key factor that oppressed the Tamil-speaking peoples why didnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t the non-Jaffna Tamil minorities join the Vadukoddai War, despite political moves by S. J. V. Chelvanayakam to form a pan-Tamil movement to rise up against the majority Sinhalese? 5. Why does she lump all the Tamil-speaking minorities into one bundle when they had no truck with the issues of discrimination and language raised by the Jaffna jingoists? 6. DidnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t the Sinhala youth also take up the language issue (English) on a class basis while the Tamil youth took up the issue of Sinhala language on a ethnic basis? So was the violence of both youths based on class discrimination or on ethnic discrimination? WerenƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t both facing common problems of upward social mobility on a class basis than on ethnic basis?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Since she claims to be a political scientist from Sorbonne she could perhaps give us some intelligent answers to these issues. Because her writing is not that brilliant she may prefer to debate the issues in a public forum which her buddies in NGOs can organize. If she is prepared to use that medium IƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢m prepared to come and face her at a mutually convenient date and time. Perhaps, this medium may be preferred by her because she has a big mouth.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ What say you, CBK? Or will you chicken out like the others who are very good at monologues and scared of dialogues?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚