Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Sri Lanka Background

Sri Lanka Facts & History

I realize I'm again heading off to a place most people don't know of at all so I figured I'd attach some backround on Sri Lanka and its history.

BIG HUGE FAT DISCLAIMER: this is amateurish research performed by me and doesn't even begin to really address most of what has happened since 1983. Also its biased. So nobody get any thoughts in their head that I'm an authority on this. Because I'm clearly not.

Name: Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka

Population: 20 million

GDP: 40.6 Billion USD

Ethnic Makeup: Sinhalese 74% Tamil 12%

Religions: Buddhism, Hindu, Muslim, Christian

This background is ripped directly from my final project proposal, but I think it sorta gives an idea of what's going on.


Sri Lanka is a tear drop shaped island with 20 million inhabitants. Sinhalese make up 74% of the population and are concentrated in the densely populated southwest. Sri Lankan Tamils, citizens whose South Indian ancestors have lived on the island for centuries, total about 12%, live throughout the country, and predominate in the Northern Province.1 The main religions are Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam and Christianity. Sri Lanka gained its independence from the United Kingdom in 1948.
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam are a separatist group born out of the Tamil community’s reaction to the Sinhalese nationalist movement of the 1970s. During that time Tamil political groups were actively protesting against the Sinhalese-run government's policies that were exclusionary towards non-Sinhalese Sri Lankans. This political movement continued to grow, militant groups were formed and separatists began to advocate for an independent Tamil State (Tamil Eelam). Groups became more active as their protests were increasingly violently repressed by the government. It is in this context that the LTTE formed and started to fight for a Tamil homeland independent from the south of Sri Lanka.
The Sri Lankan army fought back to regain control of the North during the 1970s, but at that time they were weak, unorganized and poorly equipped to handle guerrilla warfare tactics or
terrorism. It would take several years for the army to modernize and be able to respond to such threats. The violent conflict that many have witnessed was mostly triggered by the slaying in 1983, by the LTTE, of thirteen government soldiers in an ambush, which sparked widespread riots. In their aftermath, 125,000 Tamils living in the South left for the Tamil Northern province.2 Many Sinhalese left their homes in the North permanently. The riots also spurred a mass migration of Tamils out of Sri Lanka, causing the North and South to become extremely polarized and the two ethnic groups to become increasingly exclusionary. Both the LTTE and Government Army have been accused of mass human rights violations against all involved in the conflict. There is not enough space to go into detail here, but accusations of attacks on civilians, violent, forced migrations and recruitment of child soldiers are well documented in the media.
 
The First Peace Accord between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan army was facilitated by India and signed in 1987.  As a result, Sri Lanka allowed 100,000 Indian troops to monitor the ceasefire on both sides. After three months of ceasefire the LTTE declared war on the Indian Peacekeeping force.  Many cease fires have been signed between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government and none have yielded a sustainable peace. Since 1989 until present, coinciding with Sri Lankan regime change, there have been peace initiatives with positive responses from the LTTE. Many peace agreements and ceasefires have been signed and then broken in the conflict's 26 year history. Each new government in Sri Lanka has attempted a peace negotiation with the LTTE. A number of political leaders who were involved in the political engagement with the LTTE directly or indirectly-Prime Minister Rajiv Ghandi of India, President Premasada and Ministers Gamini Dissanayake and Ranjan Wijertne of Sri Lanka, A. Amirthalingam and Neelan Tiruchelvam of the Tamil United Liberation Front- have all been assassinated by the LTTE for reasons that are linked to negotiation failures.3  The government continued to negotiate with a separatist movement that in the past has used ceasefires to reorganize and arm itself and continue fighting. This also seems confusing when confronted with the fact that negotiation carries such an extreme personal risk to its facilitators on both sides of the Sri Lankan conflict.
 
Sri Lanka entered the global economy in the late 1970s.  It became a market economy and received World Bank and IMF loans to facilitate development. This had a lot of influence on governmental action throughout the conflict. If peace is to be considered a precondition for prosperity, then development aid may be an incentive for recipient countries affected by conflict to cooperate with donor agencies. In highlighting the link between conflict and peace, development objectives become increasingly tied to security agendas.3 The Sri Lankan government continued to negotiate with the LTTE due to international pressure, which sometimes were preconditions to financial assistance. Meanwhile, the LTTE was able to mobilize support from the Diaspora and the international community when confronted with attacks from the government. This powerful minority was able to lobby and make donor countries take a tougher stance on Sri Lanka when it came to conditions of aid as well as bilateral trade. The Sri Lankan government continued to cooperate in negotiations with the LTTE knowing that it would receive additional aid, regardless of the outcome of the negotiations. It was impossible to determine whether aid was distributed to the north or east of Sri Lanka.

Current Context:
The situation changed drastically in May 2009. The leader of the LTTE Velupillai Prabhakaran, was killed in battle, the group surrendered and the government declared a “peace.” The government retook control of the north and east. As is probably obvious, this government declaration doesn’t not resolve the conflict or address any of the issues that caused it. Most recently the context has changed through the presidential and parliamentary election process. On January 26, Mahinda Rajapaksa was re-elected for a second term. He has since placed his main presidential opponent and former employee Sarath Fonseka in jail for an attempted coup, almost immediately after winning. Riots followed after this as election results were disputed, much of the support for Fonseka came from Tamil dominated north and eastern parts of Sri Lanka. Voter participation in the former conflict zones was also particularly low compared with the rest of the country. Parliamentary elections took place on April 8, with Rajapaksa's party winning 144 of the 225 seats.4 The ruling party is just short of the two thirds vote it would need to amend the constitution. Voter turnout was considered very low, which leaves a lot of open questions. Sri Lanka is in an especially unique position of being able to lay the groundwork for constructive change as this nation tries to mend broken relationships and avoid the path back towards civil war. The conflict dynamic has added a certain level of politicization to Sri Lankan elections in the past. Polling stations became sites of intimidation and violence as LTTE members tried to force citizens to boycott elections in the past. The government has been accused of using state materials to promote their party’s campaign within IDP settlements with allowance for competitors.
The conflict also has left a legacy of mass migrations. Hundreds of thousands of Sri Lankans have been forced to leave their homes on several occasions. Certain groups were only allowed 24 hours before they were removed. There have been several waves of displacement since 1983 at the start of the conflict. The United Nations is an active player in the resettlement process that has been occurring since May 2009. They estimate that 93,000 internally displaced people await resettlement in the north and east.

No comments: