‘Breaking India’ and the fight at UNHRC about the LLRC Report
Posted on March 20th, 2012

C. Wijeyawickrema

 Introduction

            American and European politicians who got humiliated after failing to rescue Prabakaran from the battle filed in May 1910, are now trying in Geneva for the second time to put Sri Lanka on the separatist trap by intimidating Sri Lanka to allow one or two of their agents to sit at an office in Colombo in “helping” in implementing the LLRC report. From their point of view this innocent-looking plan is possible and workable because Colombo is replete with Eurocentric politicians and officers who are for the 13-A plus game. Even the cabinet has a lot of bankrupt politicians who previously supported things such as “this war is not winnable,” “Sri Lanka was a failing state,” the package deals of the CBK days and the Indian F formula. The dying breed of NGO peace mudalalis know very well that 13-A of 1987 is an India- imposed communalist strategy taking back Sri Lanka to 1832, when communal representation was first introduced. 

            Why the colonial master in Ceylon did not Break Sri Lanka in 1948 is a mystery in the history of colonialism. May be they wanted to use Ceylon to control Nehru and the Russian bear looking for a warm water port in the Indian Ocean.  The separatist Chelvanayagam was all out to deliver Tricomalee to Nehru, and the Malayali geopolitical expert Pannikkar was treating Trinco as part of India! This was why Soulbury Commission did not want any federal mess in Ceylon. The English-nursed young SWRD did not know enough of his country’s history or geography to not talk about federalism for the Kandyans (Up-country). Instead both he and DSS, Low-country Sinhalese, had Kandyan political marriages.  Yet, the white man did everything possible to divide Sri Lankan people on communal lines and caste basis. Unlike in Ceylon, since the early 1770s, “breaking India” was part of colonial agenda.  First it declared “there is no India,” then later, after feeding the cancer to break India it said “there are two Indias.”

            Until about two months ago all what I knew was the axis between Ali Jinna and the Dravidastan separatists in Madras and the importation of this plan to Ceylon via Tamil Christian separatists in Colombo. I wrote about this aspect of Tamil separatism in detail in the past. Only by accident I came across a book which records in detail a two-hundred year old imperialist plan to break India. It is an incredible story. After reading this book I could see a clear link between the plan recorded in the book and what America is trying to at the UNHRC in Geneva.  If America can fool others and get a seat at LLRC office in Colombo, it will be the latest and shortest path to the plan to break India. If Sri Lanka is divided or the TNA separatists get “meaningful-devolution” in the Northern Province then it will be the base from which the break- India-plan will operate in future. The world of reasonable people needs to know this naked strategy of the modern-day imperialist saints.

Breaking India

            Breaking India: Western interventions in Dravidian and Dalit faultlines is a book by Rajiv Malhotra and Aravindan Neelakandan, (www.BreakingIndia.com), published in 2011, just before the release of the LLRC Report. It gives a factual account of how the Imperial West was planning since the early 1770s to break India that existed prior to European arrival by inventing Dravidian and Dalit “faultlines.”  It was a different colonial game compared with the Opium Wars against China.  The anti-India front has now become a deadly silent cocktail mixing biblical stories, with Hindu gods and geopolitics, western government agencies, university professors and entities such as the Ford, Fulbright and Rockefeller Foundations and all kinds of foreign and Indian NGOs. The breaking India authors painstakingly unravel this complex and often secretive saga of a conspiracy to destroy India from within, sooner than later.  If American and European plan works to intimidate Sri Lanka to allow access it will be much sooner.

            Amazingly, Eurocentric politicians (and bureaucrats) in India, because they have to depend on communal Tamil Nadu actors for political survival in Delhi, are playing a deadly game of going behind the American fox, not realizing that the West is planning to use Sri Lanka as a platform to break India via a ghost Eelam under the 13th Amendment (there will be only one Dravidastan or one Ealam covering both India and Sri Lanka). For this purpose all what America wants is that the Sri Lankan side of Eurocentric politicians (there are several dozen of them in the government) and their western educated advisors to agree at the UNCHR in Geneva to let American agents to sit in a Colombo room to “help implement” the LLRC Report! The rest will be history as happened in Kosovo, South Sudan or East Timor. Future Hilary Clintons can land in Tamil Nadu or in Jaffna without any objections from Delhi or Colombo because that is hwat is meant by “meaningful devolution.”  The UNO or any of its agents never solved any political problem in the world. It was a cat’s paw in the hands of white western imperialists.  One has to read the Breaking India book or visit the Website mentioned above to understand the gravity of this threat to India.

            Breaking India is of 650 pages and the main body of the book is 421 pages long with 19 chapters full of tables and diagrams.  What I did here is to reproduce the “:six provocations” listed in the book which I think are relevant in the context of the UNHRC meeting now in session in Geneva. India already has a “red corridor,”  “Christian belt,” and the world’s fully Baptist state. India could so far delay UNHRC attempt to interpret caste division as race division to intervene in Indian domestic affairs direct as UNHRC is now used by American to interfere in Sri Lanka.

Six Provocations

1. DRAVIDIAN IDENTITY CONSTRUCTED, EXPLOITED & POLITICIZED:

The fabrication of South Indian history is being carried out on an immense scale with the explicit goal of constructing a Dravidian identity that is distinct from that of the rest of India. From the 1830s onwards, this endeavor’s key milestones have claimed that south India: is linguistically separate from the rest of India; has an un-Indian culture, aesthetics and literature; has a history disconnected from India’s; is racially distinct; is religiously distinct; and, consequently, is a separate nation. Tamil classical literature that predates the 19th century reveals no such identity conflicts especially with “alien” peoples of the north, nor does it reveal any sense of victimhood or any view of Westerners or Christians as “liberators.” This identity engineering was begun by British colonial and missionary scholars, picked up by politically ambitious south Indians with British backing, and subsequently assumed a life of its own. Even then it was largely a secular movement for political power (albeit with a substratum of racist rhetoric). In recent decades, however, a vast network of groups based in the West has co-opted this movement and is attempting to transform Tamil identity into the Dravidian Christianity movement premised on a fabricated racial-religious history. This rewriting of history has necessitated a range of archeological falsities and even epigraphic hoaxes, blatantly contradicting scientific evidence. Similar interventions by some of the same global forces have resulted in genocides and civil wars in Sri Lanka, Rwanda and other places. If unchallenged these movements could produce horrific outcomes in South India.

2. LINKING OF DRAVIDIAN & DALIT IDENTITIES:

India has its own share of social injustices that need to be continually addressed and resolved. Caste identities have been used to discriminate against others, but these identities were not always crystallized and ossified as they are today, nor were they against a specific religion per se. Caste identity faultlines became invigorated and politicized through the British Censuses of India, and later intensified in independent India by vote bank politics. A dangerous anti-national grand narrative emerged based on claims of a racial Dalit identity and victimhood. But Dalit communities are not monolithic and have diverse local histories and social dynamics. There are several inconsistencies and errors in these caste classifications: not all Dalit communities are equivalent socially and economically, nor are they static or always subordinate to others. While Dravidian and Dalit identities were constructed separately, there is a strategy at work to link them in order to denigrate and demonize Indian classical traditions (including spiritual texts and the identities based on these) as a common enemy. This in turn, has been mapped on to an Afro-Dalit narrative which claims that Dalits are racially related to Africans and all other Indians are “whites.” Thus, Indian civilization itself is demonized as anti-humanistic and oppressive. This has become the playground of major foreign players, both from the evangelical right and from the academic left. It has opened huge career opportunities for an assortment of middlemen including NGOs, intellectuals and “champions of the oppressed.” While the need for relief and structural change is immense, the shortsighted selfish politics is often empowering the movements’ leaders more than the people in whose name the power is being accumulated. The “solutions” could exacerbate the problems.

3. FOREIGN NEXUS EXPLOITS INDIA’S FAULTLINES:

An entity remains intact as long as the centripetal forces (those bringing its parts together) are stronger than its centrifugal forces (those pulling it apart). This study of a variety of organizations in USA and Europe demonstrates certain dangerous initiatives that could contribute to the breaking up of Indian civilization’s cohesiveness and unity using various pretexts and programs. The institutions involved include certain Western government agencies, churches, think tanks, academics, and private foundations across the political spectrum. Even the fierce fight between Christians and Leftists within the West, and the clash between Islam and Christianity in various places, have been set aside in order to attack India’s unity. Numerous intellectual paradigms, such as postmodernist critiques of “nation,” originating from the West’s own cultural and historical experiences are universalized, imported and superimposed onto India. These ill-fitting paradigms take center stage in Indian intellectual circles and many guilt-ridden Indian elites have joined this enterprise, seeing it as “progressive” and a respectable path for career opportunities. The book does not predict the outcomes but simply shows that such trends are accelerating and do take considerable national resources to counteract. If ignored, these identity divisions can evolve into violent secessionism.

4. RELIGION’s ROLE IN THE COMPETITION FOR SOFT POWER:

Global competition among collective identities is intensifying, even as the “flat world” of meritocracy seems to enhance individual mobility based on personal competence. But the opportunities and clout of individuals in a global world relies enormously on the cultural capital and standing of the groups from which they emerge and are anchored to. As goes India and Indian culture (of which Hinduism is a major component), so will go the fate of Indians everywhere. Hence, the role of soft power becomes even more important than ever before. Religions and cultures are a key component of such soft power. Christian and Islamic civilizations are investing heavily in boosting their respective soft power, for both internal cohesiveness and external influence. Moreover, undermining the soft power of rivals is clearly seen as a strategic weapon in the modern kurukshetra.

5. INTERROGATING THE TERM “MINORITY”:

How imperialists use minorities as servants

“One must wonder if the vulnerable third-world “ƒ”¹…”minorities’ could end up as unwitting     agents for imperialism and as the new global “ƒ”¹…”coolies’ or “ƒ”¹…”sepoys.’ “¦ There is a need to            redefine the notion of minority, keeping the following factors in mind: If a minority is                  working for, funded by, appointed by, or trained by a foreign global nexus, then it is not      really a minority. It is part of a bigger [global] enterprise”¦” pages 190-191

The book raises the question: Who is a “minority” in the present global context? A community may be numerically small relative to the local population, but globally it may in fact be part of the majority that is powerful, assertive and well-funded. Given that India is experiencing a growing influx of global funding, political lobbying, legal action and flow of ideologies, what criteria should we use to classify a group as a “minority”? Should certain groups, now counted as minorities, be reclassified given their enormous worldwide clout, power and resources? If the “minority” concerned has actually merged into an extra-territorial power through ideology (like Maoists) or theology (like many churches and madrassas), through infrastructure investment (like buying large amounts of land, buildings, setting up training centers, etc.), through digital integration and internal governance, then do they not become a powerful tool of intervention representing a larger global force rather than being simply a “minority” in India. Certainly, one would not consider a local franchise of McDonalds in India to be a minor enterprise just because it may employ only a handful of employees with modest revenues locally. It is its global size, presence and clout that are counted and that determine the rules, restrictions and disclosure requirements to which it must adhere. Similarly, nation-states’ presence in the form of consulates is also regulated. But why are foreign religious MNCs exempted from similar requirements of transparency and supervision? (For example: Bishops are appointed by the Vatican, funded by it, and given management doctrine to implement by the Vatican, and yet are not regulated on par with diplomats in consulates representing foreign sovereign states.) Indian security agencies do monitor Chinese influences and interventions into Buddhist monasteries in the northern mountain belt, because such interventions can compromise Indian sovereignty and soft power while boosting China’s clout. Should the same supervision also apply to Christian groups operating under the direction and control of their western headquarters and Islamic organizations funded and/or ideologically influenced by their respective foreign headquarters? Ultimately, the book raises the most pertinent challenge: What should India do to improve and deliver social justice in order to secure its minorities and wean them away from global nexuses that are often anti-Indian?

6. CONTROLLING THE DISCOURSE ON INDIA:

The book shows how the discourse on India at various levels is being increasingly controlled by the institutions in the West which in turn serve its geo-political ambitions. So, why has India failed to create its own institutions that are the equivalent of the Ford Foundation, Fulbright Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, etc.? Why are there no Indian university based International Relations programs with deep-rooted links to the External Affairs Ministry, RAW, and various cultural, historical and ideological think tanks? Why are the most prestigious journals, university degrees and conferences on India Studies, in sharp contrast to the way China Studies worldwide is under the control of Chinese dominated discourse, based in the West and mostly under the control of western institutions?Comments are closed.

 

9 Responses to “‘Breaking India’ and the fight at UNHRC about the LLRC Report”

  1. Dilrook Says:

    This is outdated logic.

    There is a very wide gap between breaking up Sri Lanka and breaking up India. In fact breaking up Sri Lanka is essential for India’s survival today!

    Tamil Nadu will always remain part of India especially if Sri Lanka is divided. There is no significant Dravidistan movement outside Tamil Nadu today.

    1. India is the main tool US-EU have in countering China. If not for a unified and powerful India, there is absolutely nothing to stop China venturing into the vital Middle East region. Breaking up India is therefore not an option for US-EU today. This is the new world order of the 21st century. If India is broken up, some peices will join with China making the US-EU agenda impossible.

    2. Tamil Nadu gains immensely by being part of India economically (world’s fourth largest economy). Tamil Nadu or “Dravidistan” poltiicians are no fools to leave India and lose this massive economy.

    3. Tamil Nadu gains militarily. If out of India Tamil Nadu or “Dravidistan” is exposed not only to a hostile India but also to Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, China and other India broken up states. This is suicide. It is better to remain part of world’s sixth most powerful nation.

    4. Religion wise Tamil Nadu has no reason to leave India. Muslims and Christians in Tamil Nadu are less than the national average.

    5. Tamil Nadu leaders only want a Tamil nation from anywhere for them to be real national leaders. TNA worships Tamil Nadu leaders.

    6. Getting best of both worlds has always been the Tamil Nadu people’s mentality. It serves best by remaining part of India. If a Tamil nation can be created anywhere, that relieaves India from having to labour it. Using India’s power, Tamil Nadu leaders can rule it through proxies which will give them immense power and self esteem.

    This is the new world order. Breaking up of Sri Lanka ensures the continuity of India in one piece. Helping Sri Lanka remain in one piece endangers India from Pakistani/Chinese manipulations and also from Tamil Nadu aggitations.

    German, US NGOs aggitating against a nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu, Christian NGOs converting low caste Tamils and other very small scale non-governmental operations are nothing compared to Tamil Nadu’s dire need to remain part of India for economic, political, military, religious and social survival and also to make their wildest dreams come true. US-EU will do anything to keep India in one pieace or suffer Chinese expansion across a divided India. China strives to break up India for this reason. Hopefully it will materialise.

  2. Christie Says:

    The writer quotes ” Imperial West was planning since the early 1770s to break India that existed prior to European arrival by inventing Dravidian and Dalit “faultlines.”. Better to read about the history of Indian subcontinent which was like Europe before the arrival of British. It is the British who made India.

    The writer will be better rewarded if the article was sent to an Indian one.

    At last real Sinhala contributors to thie site has woken up.

    I have repeatedly brought up the issue of what India is up to when it comes to Indian Empire that was the British-Indian Empire. Thanks Lankaweb as my letters to news papers, comments and posts to websites and representations to local politicians are never taken. In the mid of 1980s my representations were taken up by great leaders like Hon Lalith Athulath Mudali and Hon R Premadasa who were killed by the Indian Tamil terrorist outfit.

    Latest Indian actions gives us a clear platform to stand up to Indian colonial parasites and Indian Imperialists ( Indiyanu jadawadaya).

    India is the biggest buyer of armaments in the world in the past five years.

    India has enough resources to invade the island nation and intall an Indian regime within the Island with Indian colonial parasites in the island. In this scenario Indian colonial parasites will govern most of the island and a small area in the south will be governed by Sinhalese socialists like the JVPiers and some UNPiers.

    It is a chilling idea for the non-Indians in the island. But this is what I know for a long time. I learned this from Indians in the West like UK, Australia and from Indian colonial parasites from Singapore, Malaysia and Fiji.

    We should not only liberate ourseleves from Indian imperialists but lead the freedom of all other victims of Indian colonialism and imperialism.

  3. Rohan8 Says:

    Christie is right. India was created by the British. There was no country called India before the British came. Just a conglomeration royal indian principalities. United States to was also created by the British. I think there is a lesson in there somewhere for Sri Lanka. Which Sri Lanka is one of the oldest nation states in the world. Majority of countries in the world escept Europe and others have been directly or indirectly created by the by the British Imperialist Oligarchy which I believe is still the group that controls the world behind the scenes.
    Most of the countries in the Middle East were created by the British Imperialists.
    That is why I say the cabal controlling the world to one world government is centred in Britain.
    Divide and rule, order out of chaos, Problem-Reaction-Solution this has always been Divide and Conquer British Imperialist Policy. People need to wise up fast. An american based website group is tracking this group. I think it would be wise for all Sri Lankans to follow this website closely. I get a lot of my knowledge from these guys who I have found to have top notch researchers and whose news items are second to none.
    http://larouchepac.com/
    http://www.larouchepub.com/

  4. Fran Diaz Says:

    Dr Wijewickrema brings important points into focus. He brings out the weakest points in the ancient Indian culture and the exploitation of those points by other sources.
    Indo-Lanka relations run deep. Genetically and through religion, the roots are deep and inseparable. If India ‘attacks’ Lanka, it is because Lanka is perceived as being used as a base by various outside sources, seen by India as leading to a break up India. It is that simple.

    In the microsphere, at the level of each human being, the same thing happens all over the world. Human beings wants to better themselves – there is push from within to do so – it comes with the genetic make up, with the ‘chip’ in the brain. Indians & Sri Lankans are no better – they all push for ‘betterness’. The masses are always pushing for ‘betterness’.

    However, in ancient India, this push was curtailed and controlled by the Caste system tied to the Hindu religion and as far as the Dalits went, it was controlled completely, in that they were denied religion. In modern times, India has outlawed discrimination under the Caste System, particularly for the Dalits, but being a 3,000 yr old system, some practices continue. Many an opportunity is seen here by external sources for interference and ‘take over’.

    There is also a question of MODERNISATION in both India & Lanka. That is where the western model/outlook comes in. Being Modern is important to masses of both India & Sri Lanka. What does it take to be Modern ? Simply put, it is the upgrading of Living Standards ( food, clothing & shelter, the last includes toilet facilities), and to know a world language, mainly English, be savvy of what is going on in the world, etc. Masses in both countries see Modernisation as equal to Social Acceptance, self respect, etc. – a basic human trait.

    That these aspects of MODERNISATION can be achieved WITHOUT changing ones religion has yet to sink into the thinking of the masses in India & Sri Lanka.

    That various strong sources use this push from the masses for ‘Betterness’ & Modernisation for their own ends is evident, more so now than ever before. It is usually accepted that the west has science & technology to offer and the east its religions. If wisdom prevails, there could be a peaceful exchange of ideas without fear & attempts at dominance.

  5. Christie Says:

    Indian subcontinent was never a unified entity until it was unified by British, starting with the help of Madras Regiment. The only time in Indian history it was Dharmasoka who managed to run through the subcontinent to try and build his empire.

    So it is a plain fact thet there was no India before British made it.

  6. Ben_silva Says:

    imperialists know what they want and they will plan to get it. Unfortunately, some Sinhalese are trapped in an era 2600 years BC and want to give up desires. Time to dump Indian dogmas that even Indians do not believe and have a clear set of desires to survive and win, as we live in a war zxone.

  7. Fran Diaz Says:

    All ancient religions are ‘trapped’ up to a point. With the Masters/Teachers passing away, various interpretations are given to the teachings, various stories added to enhance points, and doubtless, embellishments added on. However, the Core Teachings are probably intact.

    Re HIndu religion : The Laws of Manu were ADDED ON to the Hindu religion long after the Teachers had passed away. The story of the original ‘Manu’ person is obviously myth, to hide the origins of the “laws of Manu”, which was an attempt to organise society in those ancient times.

    The time has come to gently and truly MODERNISE India. Sri Lanka problems will then be minimal.

  8. AnuD Says:

    The word HInduism is wrong.

    Ask different Indian – Hindus. Some say, Buddhism is part of HInduism and some say not. Because, different areas have different Gods. But, we as we don’t know – collectively identify everything as hinduism.

    IT is Different Brahminic religions or Brahminism.

  9. Radha Rajan Says:

    It is my considered view that by voting against Sri Lanka India’s UPA government has signalled that it does not have the strength of political will to stand up to American bullying either with regard to the anti-Sri Lanka resolution or reducing oil imports from Iran. The RSS has backed the Sri Lankan government’s decisive action againt the LTTE while standing solidly with the Tamil-speaking people in their struggle for full and equitable rights guaranteed by the country’s Constitution. Just as India’s Hindus will resist every and any move by the two Abrahamic religions to alter the religious demography of the country in a manner leading to vivisection or separatism, Sri Lanka has the sovereign right to defend its territory from Church-backed and inspired Tamil terrorism and secessionism. And the writer of this column erred in quoting extensively from Breaking India because one of the authors, Aravindan Neelakantan has written an extremely negative column in Tamil Hindu faulting the RSS exhortation ot the Indian Government to stand with Sri Lanka and vote against the US-sponsored resolution. He has called for the government to vote against Sri Lanka. By voting against Sri Lanka India has ceded the geopolitical space to Pakistan and China. India’s Hindus and Sri Lanka’s Buddhists and Hindus share civilizational umblical ties. Breaking India is a hypocritical book which theorises but loses the plot in practise.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2019 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress