CLASSIFIED | POLITICS | TERRORISM | OPINION | VIEWS





 .
 .

 .
 .
.
 

"Against violent oppression, violent resistance is moral"

Interviewed by Juliette Perrier in Geneva

Afrique-Asie, the leading French language periodical on Third World affairs and international politics from a Third World perspective, has in its current (April 2008) issue, a two page interview with and profile of Dr Dayan Jayatilleka, Sri Lanka's Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva. The interview is part of a major feature on the global implications of the secession of Kosovo, entitled "Kosovo: The Balkanisation of the World?"

Penning the famous founder editor Simon Malley's obituary in The Guardian, Victoria Brittain referred to Afrique-Asie as the main source of information on the Third World for a whole generation of Western journalists.

What follows is a translation of the Afrique-Asie feature from French into English, by Dr. Subhashinie Punchihetti of the original report from Geneva by Juliette Perrier.


Interview

Reputed academic, author of "Fidel's Ethics of Violence", Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka is today the Ambassador of Sri Lanka to the United Nations in Geneva. He fervently defends the policy of his government against the Tamil Tigers, the secessionists of the North-East whom he describes as "Fanatics".

"Against violent oppression, violent resistance is moral"

Interviewed by Juliette Perrier in Geneva
Courtesy Afrique-Asie
,

What do you mean by "Ethics of Violence"? Could a violent action be moral?

By "ethics of violence", I mean a conception of the world and a code of conduct which governs the use of violence. What are the taboos? When is the violence allowed and against whom is it used? These are the questions which are linked with an "ethics of violence".

The "just war"
Yes, a violent action can be moral. The violent eviction of money lenders from the Temple in Jerusalem by Jesus Christ was moral. The same is true of lethal forms of violence. When there is oppression and violent injustice, unnecessary and intentional cruelty, it is moral to resist, to challenge and to change that situation through violence, that is if all peaceful measures have failed and if violence is not directed towards innocent people, those who are unarmed. In such a situation, I would even say it is immoral not to rise against prolonged violent oppression and cruelty.

The Christian theological studies on "just war" are a classic example of what I mean by 'ethics of violence'. However, there are no just war theories for liberation, revolutionary or resistance movements. Now, I think that the ideas and practices of Fidel Castro (and those of Che Guevara) contain elements of such a theory.

What are the root-causes of the terrible civil war that plagues your country?

They are complex and intricate. According to the leader of the Tigers, Velupillai Prabhakaran, there are eighty million Tamils in the world who do not have a country of their own. Sri Lanka would be the only country where they can install such a State because mighty India would not let them create it on their territory. Their ideology could be linked to what Prof. Walter Laqueur, famous researcher, has written in his book, The New Terrorism (1999): "In terms of their fanatism and ruthlessness, I could compare the Tamil Tigers only with the European fascist movement of the 1920s and 30s." John Burns, Pulitzer Prize Winner and journalist of the New York Times, described the Tiger chief V. Prabhakaran as the "Pol Pot of South Asia". We should remember that Rajiv Gandhi, the grandson of Nehru and a leader of the non-aligned movement was assassinated by a Tamil Tiger suicide bomber, on the soil of Tamil Nadu, in South India.

Quite logically, the Sinhalese majority will not let the small island of Sri Lanka - the only country in which Sinhalese is still spoken - to become a dismembered and separated State, while Tigers do not accept anything short of a separate independent State. This is why there's a war going on. There is another factor: the majority chauvinism of the Sinhalese, which was the major cause of the conflict at one time, but which has become a secondary factor, at least since the signing of the Indo-Lanka Peace accord in 1987. This accord has offered a solution based on autonomy, which was accepted by the State but was fought against by the armed Tigers.

According to many people, no one can predict how the war would end. Therefore, it is obvious that the repression without limits is not a solution. What does your Government propose concretely to bring the secessionists to the negotiating table?

You have heard the slogan "The revolution by stages" or "the revolution in two stages". In the same way, the policy of the Government can be called "Decentralization in steps" or "power-sharing by transfer". It tries to achieve decentralization in two steps or a power sharing with the majority Tamil periphery. The government has called for an all party conference which has come up with the first of two sets of suggestions. The first is about giving back the autonomy to the provinces within the concept of a unitary State. That is what was suggested by the Indo-Lanka accord under the 13th amendment of the Sri Lankan Constitution. I was a Minister, probably the youngest, in the North-East Provincial Council which was established in 1988. This effort failed because of the war the Tamil Tigers waged against autonomy. Today, the situation has improved because they have been militarily weakened. During the 7th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva [which was held from 3rd to 28th March, Comment by the writer], the Indian delegation praised the efforts Sri Lanka is taking to implement the 13th Amendment.

Defeat or decapitate

Expected second step: a round table discussion with the concerned political parties to bring about more radical reforms. Why these two steps? Because, at present, the balance of powers in the Parliament, the arithmetic, does not allow anything more than the autonomy of the provinces within the framework of a unitary state. The reality on the ground is that the Government held local (municipal council) elections only in the Eastern Province, which was for years, under the control of the Tigers. But it is liberated today. However limited it was, this election represents an important reopening of the democratic process. The elections for the Eastern Provincial Council will follow soon, and that will be for the first time in 20 years. I should state a brutal truth: that is, this process takes place while a military offensive of the armed forces of Sri Lanka is going on from multiple fronts. This offensive should either defeat the Tigers or behead them so that we could to bring the survivors to the negotiating table.

According to my own theoretical grid, there should be a typology of armed movements. One cannot consider them all in the same manner. Most of them have longstanding demands and if the political environment is open to them, they would transform into peaceful movements. But, certain movements are led by fanatics, irrational fundamentalists, who engage in barbaric forms of violence. For example, the movement of the Khmer Rouge of Pol Pot, as well as the Shining Path in Peru, Al Qaeda of Osama Bin Laden, or the Taliban in Afghanistan. The Tamil Tigers belong to this category. This neo barbarism should be combated, if necessary, militarily.

" The Tamil Tigers: Neo-barbarians who should be combated, if necessary, militarily."

I would like to make another point. The anti-imperialist movement should seriously reflect upon the breaking up of the ethno-federal system of the former USSR and the former Yugoslavia. The Sri Lankan public is quite aware of the conspiracy to divide Serbia by recognizing the secession of Kosovo. Iraq's Kurdistan could perhaps be the next Kosovo. Today, it is necessary to prevent centrifugal trends which try to destroy States. An excessive decentralization should be avoided to the same extent as we avoid an excessive centralization. The sovereignty of a State is a necessary protection against projects of unipolarity, hegemony and interventionism.

A young revolutionary

"I was a militant revolutionary and was condemned in absentia: I was in clandestinity. The police officer who was assigned to arrest me was the former chief of the special paramilitary police who had been trained in Israel. Had I been arrested, I would have either been judged and sentenced to prison for a long time or would have simply 'disappeared'. In fact, I was sentenced in absentia by the High Court of Colombo on 14 charges under the law on Prevention of Terrorism and Emergency legislation. I was mainly accused of conspiring to overthrow the government through violence. I was the accused number one.

My motives were varied. I wanted to help the socialist revolution take place in my country. In the mid 1970s, while I was only a high school-leaving adolescent, I had already been arrested and questioned by the police for being involved with a secret armed revolutionary group organizing against an authoritarian and capitalist regime. While I was still very young, I had Marxist-Leninist, socialist and revolutionary ideas. I had been influenced by Vietnam, by Che and Fidel, by Lenin and Mao. During the events in 1968, I was able to travel through Europe with my parents. My father was an editor and a journalist and was a very well-known figure in South Asia. He took me to the Non-Aligned Movement's Conference in Cairo in 1964 when I was still a 7 year old.

In 1965, I was in Indonesia, just before the coup d'Etat. My parents were invited by Dr. Subandrio, the foreign Minister of Sukarno on the occasion of an Afro-Asian solidarity meeting. My father was the last journalist to interview D. N. Aidit, the leader of the PKI, the Indonesian Communist Party. After the massacre of the unarmed Indonesian communist movement and, later, the bloody overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile, I was among those in the world who were convinced that the Right would not allow peaceful transformations. At the same time, having had the opportunity to be present when my father interviewed the "biggest terrorist in the world", at the time, Abu Nidal, in 1975 in Bagdad, I could also reflect on the issue of terrorism and the attacks against civilian targets.

My revolutionary engagement in the 1980s was concerned however with more urgent motives. I was striving to overthrow a right-wing government which had, then, simply "postponed" the legislative elections and had become an authoritarian or a dictatorial regime. I also had a third objective: overcome ethnic divisions in my country and stimulate a common revolutionary combat which would reunite, on internationalist foundations, the Marxists among the majority Sinhalese and the minority Tamils."


Disclaimer: The comments contained within this website are personal reflection only and do not necessarily reflect the views of the LankaWeb. LankaWeb.com offers the contents of this website without charge, but does not necessarily endorse the views and opinions expressed within. Neither the LankaWeb nor the individual authors of any material on this Web site accept responsibility for any loss or damage, however caused (including through negligence), which you may directly or indirectly suffer arising out of your use of or reliance on information contained on or accessed through this Web site.
All views and opinions presented in this article are solely those of the surfer and do not necessarily represent those of LankaWeb.com. .

BACK TO LATEST NEWS

DISCLAIMER

Copyright © 1997-2004 www.lankaweb.Com Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Reproduction In Whole Or In Part Without Express Permission is Prohibited.