Academic Paper Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/Achieving-Peace-And-Ethnic-Harmony-Thro 👈

1. Perspectives on National Integration in Sri Lanka Amal Jayawardane (ed.)
Colombo: National Integration Programme Unit, 2006, pp. 139-159
Achieving Peace and Ethnic Harmony through Civil Society Activism; Multi Track
Peace Building and National Integration Experience of Sri Lanka
Sisira Pinnawala
Introduction
Peaceful settlement of conflicts between states and their political adversaries, within or
without, traditionally has been through negotiations between the state actors and the
adversary. Today the state centered approach to political conflict management is being
increasingly replaced by more inclusive approaches where non-state stakeholders play a
central role. On the one hand this is due to the recognition that state centered approach to
peace, though necessary, would not be sufficient to settle complex identity based
conflicts that constitute the great majority of contemporary conflicts. On the other there is
also the fact that though peace may be achieved by direct participation of the state and its
adversaries in the process, either in the form of confrontation (war) or dialogue
(negotiations) such would not sustainable without civil society partners becoming owners
of it.
Ethnic harmony and national integration have acquired new importance as a consequence
of increasing ethnic discord and conflict in the world. Yet the phenomena are not new
and the two are part of the core objectives of the nation state, namely, construction of a
cohesive and vibrant political entity combining the energies of different cultures and
identities and interest groups. Experience of newly independent countries of Asia and
Africa shows that, though their nation building was expected to follow the path of the
nation states of Europe, they neither did that nor it produced the expected results.
Integration of ethnically diverse groups that had been brought together, often arbitrarily,

2. through political force and administrative decisions, was a challenge to the leadership of
these societies. Except for very rare cases like India in all other countries this externally
imposed unity by their colonial masters collapsed shortly after the independence. This
collapse was mainly due to the inability of competing ethnic groups to agree on a suitable
model of national integration that would satisfy their interests and aspirations. The
existing socio-cultural differences and perceptions, exacerbated by wrong policies of the
new rulers and the contentious issue of the level of participation in the new polity were
crucial to the failure of these nation building projects. The immediate result of this failure
was these societies plunging into crises of ethnic discord and conflict leading, in many
cases, to civil war.
Multi Track Approach to Peace Building
Multi track approach to peace came to be recognized as an effective means of conflict
resolution in the early 1980s. The origins are in the Track Two diplomacy, a term coined
in 1981 by Joe Montville, a US diplomat, to describe the conflict resolution work of
private citizens and NGOs. The approach was expanded by John McDonald, a fellow
diplomat of Montville who introduced the term Multi-Track Diplomacy (McDonald
1991). It was McDonald who included three more tracks, namely, Track Three, private
sector involvement; Track Four, citizen-to-citizen educational exchange programs; and
Track Five, the media. Four more tracks were added later to include education and
training, peace activism, religion and funding. Multi Track is a systems approach, in
which all partners of the process, including Track One, are involved in peace building to
make a peace agreement effective and lasting. It is neither the exact number of Tracks nor
their content that is relevant but the principle, namely, peace building through civil
society activism. It is primarily civil society focused based peace building and conflict
resolution strategy and is applicable in many different situations of conflict
The strength of Multi Track Approach lies in the fact that it is an inclusive process as
Tracks represent different interest groups that are either party to or stakeholders of the
conflict. Representation makes Multi Track Approach an effective strategy in the long
term sustainability of peace. Long term peace is possible only if peace becomes part of
1

3. the institutional setup and also ideological makeup of society. This is because long term
peace requires integration of conflicting interests and groups in a mutually dependant
relationship. Multi Track strategy, by bringing in actors who are part of different Tracks,
provides the basis for formation and continuity of such dependency at wider societal
level. Civil society thus is brought into conflict management process and becomes the
catalyst of promoting ethnic harmony and integration. This inclusive property of Multi
Track Approach, namely, bringing relevant actors together into dialogue so that process
will become meaningful and effective with shared goals and ideology is the concern of
this paper.
The specific problem that is examined in the paper is organization and strategic
orientation of Sri Lanka’s civil society activism in peace building and promotion of
ethnic harmony. The paper argues that the peace process in Sri Lanka, though has an
active civil society component, neither includes all relevant actors (Tracks) nor has
shared goals that bring together the two main adversaries. It argues that in multi track
peace building it is not only necessary for all relevant groups to be involved in the
process but also the process itself needs to be guided by objectives acceptable to/shared
by, all parties. There are actors whose participation is crucial as they either wield power
and influence (they may not be the most affected in immediate terms sometimes as we
shall see later) and each actor has its own set of interests and modes of operation. In
concrete terms this would mean that perception of peace and integration/harmony of
different stakeholder are different and the strategies they would want to follow to achieve
what they see as relevant in their own view differ accordingly. Each Track then could
correctly be viewed as an interest group with its own perceptions and views/meanings
that are founded on and representative of their interests. Multi Track peace building
should be able to bring these interest groups to work towards a common goal if it were to
achieve its objectives
2

4. Integration and Ethnic Harmony in Sri Lankan Society
Integration is a systemic property and implies existence of a functional arrangement
based on coordination and interdependency between parts. It therefore assumes existence
of an orderly and stable system founded on well coordinated components. In societal
terms this means properly coordinated relationships between social institutions which in
turn expected to lead to harmony. Harmony is expressed at organizational and functional
levels as well as at the level of ideology. Integration in this sense is a necessary condition
for harmony making the relationship between the two one of means and ends. It is in this
sense the two concepts are understood in this essay.
Sri Lanka is a multi ethnic society. Different ethno-national groups have been part of this
country for a very long period of time1
. Chronicles though highlight only the rivalries and
wars between these different groups, they also include enough evidence to support the
view that unity and intermixture have been more the norm of group relations in Sri
Lanka. King Elara who is the very symbol of Tamil aggression of the country in modern
Sinhalese psyche was not only a just ruler who treated his Sinhalese subjects justly and
fairly but also had Sinhala soldiers fighting in his army. Similarly king Dutugemunu was
ably supported by Tamil military commanders (Siriweera 1980). The last king of the
Sinhalese was a Tamil royal and during the reign of the Kandyan kings Tamil language
had a special place2
. The British brought the country into a single administrative unit and
this provided the ethno-national groups in the country with a new plane of action not only
to work together but also to compete with each other. This also led to emergence of an
elite group, which was ethnically mixed and politically united on the basis of their anti
colonial views and liberal political vision. The masses on the other hand were living in a
general state of ethnic harmony, in spite of intermittent incidents of conflicts3
. This state
of affairs continued until the nationalist elite from the Sinhala majority took over the
1
There are different arguments on the issue of the emergence of ethnic identities, particularly the Sinhalese
identity. Some historian argue that Sinhalese identity is of recent origin (Gunawardana 1979)
2
Several top Sinhalese aristocrats who were signatories to the surrender treaty with the British signed their
name in Tamil
3
During the British period there was harmony between Tamils and Sinhalese. It was the Muslim
community that was in conflict with the Sinhalese.
3

5. leadership of the country in the mid 1950s. One important development that
accompanied the emergence of nationalist minded elite leadership of the Sinhalese was
the political mobilization of the Sinhala Buddhist masses who until then were in the
periphery of political activism. This broadly is the beginning of ethnic polarization in Sri
Lanka. A host of policy measures that negatively affected the ethnic status quo, the
Sinhala only policy and standardization of University admission are two examples here,
were responsible in leading to ethnic polarization that has since developed into a civil
war.
It would not be correct however to describe ethnic relations in the post independent Sri
Lankan society in terms of conflict and discord alone though ethnic discord did become
one of its defining characteristics. Ethnic conflict though affected the unity and polarized
ethnic groups, political mobilization of ethnicity was largely confined to the elites of the
groups until recently. Except for ethnic rhetoric which was common during the times of
elections, and several incidents of mass involvement through attacks on the minority
Tamils4
living in predominantly Sinhala areas, the relationship was generally peaceful
the masses. Ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka is still an elite project primarily confined to t
political realm. There has been unity and integration outside of the political arena during
the major part of the post independence period and that still remains so in spite of the
conflict. It is necessary understand the nature of this integration and harmony outside of
politics in order to make an assessment of the potentials and constraints of civil society
involvement in peace building in Sri Lanka.
he
Ethnic harmony and integration outside the political arena which was a feature of the
major part of the post independence period was based on number of that brought different
ethnic group together in many important spheres of activity. These spheres of activity
covered important areas ranging from exchange of economic and social goods and
4
Attacks on the minority Tamil community by Sinhalese have been a feature of the ethnic relationships in
the post independence Sri Lanka. The majority of these incidents took the form of mob attacks and did not
have organized political backing and was always condemned by the major political parties. But it is
generally accepted that the widespread attacks on the Tamil community in July 1983 was not only
organized but also had the blessings of some powerful politicians of the then government in power.
4

6. services to institutionalized cultural and social interactions. Some of these relationships
could be termed as service dependency relationships where one group provided services
the other group was in short supply. These various areas of activities that brought
together Tamils and Sinhalese into inter ethnic contact and cooperation created social
fields that served as nodes of inter ethnic communication.
As providers of goods and services across ethnic boundaries several Tamils service
groups played an important and very visible role in the South where the majority
Sinhalese live. There were Tamil doctors and other professionals and also traders (mostly
petty traders) who served as nodes of inter ethnic interaction and ambassadors between
the two communities. The services provided by these groups, especially those by Tamil
professionals were vital for the Sinhalese south that did not have sufficient supply to cater
to their requirements5
. These service providers, especially Tamils professionals, were
treated with respect by the Sinhalese for their dedication and honesty. Similarly there
were Sinhalese service providers in the North, though not as many, for example bakers
from the South in Jaffna. Migratory fishermen, seasonal agricultural laborers were some
other nodes of ethnic interaction between Sinhalese and Tamils.
Religion also has been an important player of ethnic harmony and inter-ethnic
dependency with its ability to bring different ethnic groups together into a common plain
of action. Christianity particularly performed this role by bringing members of the two
groups together on the basis of common faith. Buddhism and Hinduism, being
exclusively ethnic religions, did not bring different ethnic communities together.
However they also facilitated inter ethnic inter action in many other ways. At ritual levels
it is very common and also accepted practice to have important members of Hindu
pantheon in Buddhist places of worship. Though one could argue that these Hindu gods
in Buddhist places of worship have lost their Hindu identity and have become Sinhalese
Buddhist gods, the very fact that they have not been accepted by the Buddhist Sinhalese
5
It is this very service dependency that later provided the basis for ethnic discord as the emerging new
national elites and the newly mobilized Sinhalese Buddhist masses in the South began to interpret the
predominance of Tamils service providers, especially the professionals, in terms of injustice and
discrimination.
5

7. is ample demonstration that there congruence of cultural and religious practices. There
are also other important areas religious activities that are part of these two religions that
bring the two communities together. In spite of attacks on religious sites, especially
during periods of conflicts and mob attacks, the two communities have always respected
each other’s religious sites. Patronage of each other’s religious sites was also not
uncommon. Another important religion based inter ethnic nodes of interaction are the
pilgrimages to shared religious sites that bring the two communities together in large
numbers and on regular basis. Pilgrimages and ceremonies associated with inter religious
sites like Kataragama (Obeyesekere 1978) and Sri Pada bring members of different ethic
communities, especially, Tamils and Sinhalese together. Though these sites have lost
much of their plural character recently due to increasing Sinhalization of their leadership
and Buddhisization of ceremonies (Obeyesekere 1978, Nissan 1988) which again is a
result of ever increasing Sinhala Buddhist hegemony in the country, they were important
actors who contributed to ethnic harmony and integration in Sri Lankan society in the
past.
The ethnic interaction in Sri Lanka was not limited to the above nodes of action or
spheres of activity. Until recently higher educational institutions, especially the
universities, used to be vibrant fora of interethnic dialogue through physical mixture of
academics and students from different ethnic communities. Work places with their
ethnically mixed work force were another such node of inter ethnic activity. In addition,
among Tamils and Sinhalese there were also attitudinal congruence and mutual empathy
based on shared views such as parity between corresponding caste groups of the two
communities that further added to the good relationships between the two communities. It
would not be an overstatement to say that Sri Lanka had a strong institutional base for
inter-ethnic harmony. It is this basis that has weakened in the present context.
The interdependency and harmony however was not based on equality and there was
implicit Sinhala hegemony in it. Sinhalese always had primacy and this was evident in
all spheres of activity including elite politics of the colonial era. There was a tacit
agreement where the Tamil leadership on their own giving the leadership, at least
6

8. symbolically, to the Sinhalese. This was despite equal participation of Tamils in all
activities. In addition to this national level hegemony of the Sinhalese there was also a
regional hegemony of the Tamils in their own areas that had tacit acceptance of the
Sinhalese. The situation of this dual hegemony functioned well until Sinhalese hegemony
became the official policy and part of aggressive Sinhalese Buddhist identity. The new
Sinhalese Buddhist hegemony began to increase in the period after the independence due
to policies of the state and conscious mobilization by the Sinhalese elite leadership. Even
religious sites such as Kataragama where there was close inter-ethnic participation began
to lose its multi ethnic core6
. Though these festivals symbolize collective representation
of multi ethnic Sri Lankan society ethnic mixture today is more a superficial one than a
reality.
What we see today is gradual deterioration of the role of the above mentioned nodes of
inter-ethnic interaction and dependency. Polarization of ethnic communities and lack of
ethnic harmony needs to be understood in this context. Further, the deteriorating role of
these important players/nodes of inter-ethnic action is both a result as well as a cause of
the conflict. The crucial question is whether we want to recreate this inter dependency so
that a proper basis for inter-ethnic harmony and integration can be provided with a firm
foundation. This cannot be answered without an answer to another related question,
namely, whether this is what is asked by all stakeholders of the conflict. It appears that
the Tamil minority would not settle for a paradigm of integration that would not offer
them more power in political and structural terms. Therefore going back to the old days is
clearly not an option. The question is whether the civil society activism has understood
this reality and whether the civil society activism is based on the right issues and
objectives that could provide a viable alternative.
6
Obeyesekere (1978) gives a detailed and very insightful discussion of this process. Sinhala Buddhist
hegemony in Kataragama has developed to such an extreme the god Kataragama is invoked today to bring
victory over Tamil separatism (see Nissan 1988).
7

9. Multi Track Peace Building in Sri Lanka
Though the formal entry of multi track strategy into peace process of the country was
only after the signing of the MOU in 2001, there had been attempts to get the civil society
involved in peace building before that. Some of these have been government
involved/sanctioned ones while some others were initiatives of NGO activists and the
business leadership. The National Integration Programme Unit, though a governmental
agency, pioneered the work in civil society based peace building and promotion of ethnic
unity in the county. The business community also came into the process as active partners
in 2000 with its own programme of action called Sri Lanka First. There also were
intermittent activities by other actors such as the media and professionals either in
coordination with NGO initiatives or those of the government, mainly the NIPU. Of these
the only consistent advocate and activist of the civil society is the NGO sector that
continues with its activism with the same enthusiasm and vigor even today.
The pre-independence Sri Lankan polity was characterized by a form of ethnic unity
based on elite consensus. As pointed out earlier at the level of the masses there was no
ethnic mobilization and ethnically based political conflict but inter ethnic inter ethnic
cooperation while maintaining ethnic boundaries. The lack of political mobilization
among the masses can be attributed to the lack of political engagement of the masses
during the period. There was no nation building project encompassing all groups since
independence. What had already been there in the form of unity was also destroyed by
the actions, knowingly and unknowingly, by the post independent politicians. The
Government was interested in or was embarked in a path of building a Sinhala nation,
especially after 1956. With eruption of war the first attempt was at providing a political
solution (constitutional solution) so the efforts to bring peace to the country was
dominated by activities that could be called as high politics. The Annexure C of the India
sponsored peace deal in 1983, the Thimpu talks, the Indian intervention and India
mediated 13th
amendment to the constitution are examples here. During this period the
policy makers and politician however did not see the ethnic problem of the country as
one of integration of different ethnic communities at societal level. Change of this view
8

10. of high politics and state centered approach gradually emerged during the Presidency of
Ms. Chandrika Kumaratunge. With that we note appearance of several state sponsored
attempts to get the partnership of civil society in peace building in Sri Lanka. Sudu Nelum
(white lotus) movement for peace and subsequent establishment of NIPU are the notable
development in this area during the period. These attempts, being state sponsored and top
down, cannot be called genuine civil society involvements. Yet they contributed to
gradual incorporation of civil society activism on its own into peace building programs in
the country.
Of genuine civil society activities that followed the work of the NGO actors has been the
most consistent and arguably the most effective. They are also the most controversial
group and have generated a significant amount of public debate not entirely for their
contribution in the area but for issues totally unrelated. In Sri Lanka NGOs have had a
long history of being involved in a very broad spectrum of activities. Peace building is
only one and is naturally one of their recent interests. Their entry into peace building and
issues related to ethnic conflict has resulted in generating controversy due to their alleged
sympathy for the Tamils, an issue often highlighted by some sections of the Sinhalese,
particularly the Sinhalese Buddhists. For these elements NGOs are biased and partisan
and have negative influence on indigenous values and culture. Further, the NGO sector is
also disadvantaged by the fact that it is divided into competing interest groups, NGOs can
be lucrative business in Sri Lanka. Yet in spite of these disadvantages the NGO sector has
very effectively served both as a catalyst of change and also as a key channel of
communication between the conflicting groups.
Controversies apart there have also been other issues that are part of the NGO activities
that hampered their contribution. First there was the problem of coordination of NGO
work. There are many NGOs, though they have some network relationships and
partnerships who work independently on their own agenda. Coordination of work of
these different NGO actors has always been problematic, and mainly to address the
problem of coordination the Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies (CHA) was formed in
1997. The CHA sponsored other coordinating bodies, which included the Emergency
9

11. Group (EG), the Northern Task Group (NTG), and the Eastern Forum. During 2000 a
group of civil-society leaders from leading peace organizations began meeting regularly
under the name of the Peace Support Group. They have issued joint statements and
placed media advertisements advocating pro-peace positions. (Lewer and Willaim 2002)
The activities of the NGO Track fall basically into two areas. One area the NGO actors
are involved in is research activities and generation of policy dialogue aimed at state
actors, namely politicians, policy makers and administrators. The other area is facilitation
and capacity building including community based actions, awareness creation through
education/training. The activities falling within the ambit of first area are mainly the
function of donor supported local NGO actors headed by local liberal intellectuals. They
are almost all Colombo based middle class organizations. The International Centre for
Ethnic Studies (ICES), the Law and Society Trust (LST), Consortium of Humanitarian
Agencies (CHA), Social and Economic Development Centre (SEDEC), Centre for
Society and Religion (CSR), and Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) are in this
category. The second grouping of activities is mainly carried out by local NGOs. The
NGO actors whose activities fall into this area, except for a few, are small NGOs with
regional bases. It also must be noted that the activities of the NGOs often overlap. All
these organizations have been active in trying to inform and educate people about
elements that contribute to a strong civic society, and have been working to improve
public awareness about civil, political, cultural and socioeconomic rights, and equal
access to justice. International NGOs have been involved in a range of initiatives but their
involvement is mostly indirect, namely, through funding of the work of local actors.
The business community is another group that has been active in the area of promoting
peace. Increasing economic problems that the country began to experience in the late
1990s which culminated with the attacks on Katunayake Airport and the Petroleum
refinery complex in July 2001 led to the business community to take an active role in
promoting peace. This began first as an uncoordinated action of a group of business
leaders who organized a public campaign to get the government and the opposition
parties to agree on a bipartisan approach to finding a political solution to the conflict.
10

12. This was followed by the Sri Lanka First campaign, which was both a media based
public relations exercise and civil society agitation of sorts. The civil society involvement
of this effort was the holding of hands for peace campaign in September 2001. The
activities lost took a back room with the signing of the MOU on 22/02/2002. While the
sense of urgency and intensity for action amongst the private sector has diminished there
remains a broad understanding that peace needs to be sustained if the economy is to
prosper. And even today there are attempts to revive the efforts in various forms that
shows the leaders of the business community have not withdrawn from the activities. The
continued commitment of the business sector in the on going peace efforts is evident
from the ongoing awareness raising activities of the business community, advertising
campaigns, television shows and print media coverage (CHA National Analysis 2003:pp.
3-4).
Strategies and Directions
There are three most noticeable features of the civil society based peace process in Sri
Lanka. The first is the strategic concentration of their activities. The civil society actions
are almost exclusively activities aimed at achieving inter ethnic understanding and
interactivity that has lost. Another feature of the peace process is the non participation of
a very important group, perhaps the most crucial actor, in it. The diaspora, particularly
the Tamil diaspora is not an active participant of the peace process. Third is the southern
bias of the peace process. The activities not only are mainly sponsored by Southern civil
society actors but also the focus of the activities, is to large extent, promotion of inter
ethnic cooperation between ethnic groups in the South. There is clear absence of the
voice of the Northeast in any one of these programmes.
The work of civil society actors are manly concentrated in three areas. They are namely,
educational and awareness creation activities, community level support services and
facilitation and capacity building. NGO sector is active in all three areas but their main
concentration is awareness creation followed by capacity building and community level
support services. The business sector also has been active in the same two areas
11

13. primarily. The underline assumption of the activities appear to be that inter-ethnic
integration is lacking in different sectors and levels of Sri Lankan society and this needs
to be brought back in order to promote and maintain sustainable peace in the country.
Higher level socio-economic interdependency, i.e., creating and promoting structural and
institutional level interdependency, between ethnic communities, is not the focus because
it is either beyond the capacity or objectives of the peace process. Civil society activism
concentrates on small communities/ groups or individuals. Micro level and bottom up
peace building focusing on activities aimed at strengthening inter ethnic understanding
through education, facilitation are the major means of achieving ethnic harmony7
. It
seems that their work is based on the assumption that integration is primarily a matter of
creating a mindset rather than structures. But integration is more than a simple issue of
unity of minds. Peace and ethnic harmony become sustainable only if the members of
society become organically part of the peace process, meaning there should be proper
institutional and structural integration.
There is southern bias in the civil society involvement in the peace process. All actors of
different Tracks are almost exclusively Sinhalese or from the Southern groups. This is
true of even voluntary associations such as Sarvodaya which was once a major player in
the Northeast part of the country. In the case of more ethnically mixed associations where
there is substantial presence of minority leadership, or either minority actors hold
leadership positions, the groups are Colombo based and middle class. Moderate Tamils
have either been silenced by threats of LTTE or have left the country as a result of the on
going conflict. In the North there is increasing control of civil society by LTTE and civil
society actors cannot take part in peace building on their own. Today civil society
organizations cannot function in the North if they do not represent the views of LTTE8
. It
also must be noted that except for during the very early days of the peace accord (MOU
of 2002) the participation of Tamil civil society in the peace process has been lukewarm.
7
Capacity building work among communities such as language teaching, supporting interactivity through
multi ethnic activities (multi ethnic participation) tri lingual events etc. are the mainstream work of NGOs.
8
It is not only that civil society leadership has been cowed into submission by threats but also the civil
society itself has become a mere label for LTTE to carry out its propaganda. Tamilnet and other pro LTTE
websites for example regularly use the phrase civil society sources just to substantiate LTTE point of view.
12

14. It did not display the same enthusiasm of the south. Even this initial enthusiasm waned
and civil society actors of the North gradually started withdrawing from peace activities.
Today there are no Northern civil society initiatives in the peace process.
The situation of the Northern civil society which has been under tight control of LTTE
for some time has now worsened. The deterioration of the situation is due to two
developments. The first is the planned taking over of civil society organization, for
example formation of citizen committees and similar organizations by the LTTE. The
recent programme of action by LTTE to train citizen forces and volunteers and deploy
them in combat as a right under the UN Charter (Tamilnet 2006) is the second
development9
. For all practical purposes civil society is no more in the North. LTTE is
currently engaged actively in militarizing the masses and as a result certain civil society
groups are is increasingly becoming part of paramilitary wing of the LTTE10
. Child
recruitment has now extended into arming of the general public and women, namely,
establishment of a civil defense force. These developments have resulted in the blurring
of the boundary line separating the civil society and the military organization in the Tamil
community. Increasing militarization of Tamil society will require re-examination of the
whole process in the light of this new development. This has serious repercussions on
Tamil civil society.
The void that is created as a result of Northern civil society becoming non effective has
partly been filled by the Sinhalese liberals who cannot represent the true voice of the
Tamils. Further, it also has resulted in subtle incursion of Sinhalese hegemony, with low
intensity of course, into civil society actions. Sinhalese hegemony the minorities rejected
earlier are now coming back in a new form on a new plan of action. The danger is that in
the name of interethnic cooperation and solidarity Sinhalese hegemony/domination is
being recreated but this time as the protector of the moderate Tamils and their voice that
9
Mr. Elilan who is Trincomalee political Head of LTTE told the Tamilnet recently that according to
United Nations charter oppressed people in anywhere in the world can fight for their liberation as it
recognizes this birthright of the people. According to news reports that appear on LTTE press women also
will receive training under the Peoples’ Force programme of LTTE (Tamileditors 2006)
10
LTTE claims that they are a formal military force of a de facto Tamil state. Therefore any societal
organization that carry arms or use them in other ways (planting bombs for example) in order to
supplement its armed activity becomes a paramilitary.
13

15. is not allowed in the LTTE dominated north. It is doubtful that in such situations where
the true of the minority voice is not represented whether the actions initiated by a
hegemonic civil society leadership, though it technically represent all relevant Tracks,
would bring desired results of ethnic harmony. Civil society activism is Multi Track in
quantity perhaps but certainly not in quality.
The Missing Track
Ethnic diasporas are important players in domestic ethnic conflicts (Stavenhagen 1991).
Sri Lankan diaspora, particularly the Tamil diaspora, which is an important player in the
Sri Lankan conflict is conspicuously absent from peace building activities in Sri Lanka.
Though the diasporas are not technically part of Sri Lankan society the transnational
connections they maintain with the home country makes them an extended part of Sri
Lankan civil society. Except for the recent dialogue between a group of Sri Lankan and
representatives of the Tamils (LTTE?) domiciled overseas which was initiated by the
Burgof Foundation there has been hardly any contact between civil society peace
activism in Sri Lanka and the Tamil diaspora. This does not mean that they are not
involved in Sri Lankan civil society. Both Sinhala and Tamil diasporas are engaged in the
conflict as transnational players on their own plain of actions but their energies are
diverted more to promote conflict than peace. The connection of the Tamil diaspora with
Sri Lanka’s Tamil community ranges from the traditional diaspora functions of economic
support for the kith and kin back at home to political and financial support for the
liberation struggle. Their activities in mobilizing the diaspora and their role in the
international context as a pressure group is well documented (Tekwani 2006, Chalk
2000).
Though the Tamil diaspora groups are not partners of the on going civil society projects
of peace building in Sri Lanka they are active on their own peace project which is in line
with LTTE’s two nation two state theory. This peace project is diametrically opposed to
other on going civil society actions of the mainstream players that aims at peace through
bringing together rather than through separation. The objectives of the civil society peace
14

16. activism are based on the mainstream political views and interpretation of the conflict. It
is either based on a politically united Sri Lanka where diverse ethnic groups will have
politically semi autonomous still within an overall majoritarian system. Socially it also
means return to return to pre-war situation of integration without the negative aspects
such as official discrimination and hegemony that were part of it. Political rhetoric and
actions of the Tamil diaspora shows that would not be interested in the paradigm/model
of integration that is being currently promoted. This clash of objectives and visions is the
main reason for their non-participation in the on going civil society peace activism.
However Sri Lankan Tamil diaspora is very crucial to any peace building project in Sri
Lanka mainly because of the multiple roles they play as financial supporters, intellectual
base and global ambassadors (lobbyists).
The Tamil diaspora consists of several groups that left the country during different
periods of time and under different circumstances. The early migrants (excluding the
small group that went to Malaysia during the British colonial rule) left the country mainly
because either feared or experienced discrimination under increasing Sinhalese
domination of the state. This group largely consisted of westernized liberal with a
cosmopolitan outlook. Then with the expansion of Sinhala hegemony and formal
establishment of discriminatory practices in all governmental activities (education,
employment for example) an exodus of another group occurred. They were socially less
cosmopolitan and had little inter ethnic mixture mainly due to vernacular education they
received. Finally the ethnic conflict initially and war later resulted in an exodus of vast
number of Tamils to overseas destinations. Substantial number of these is young people
who left Sri Lanka as refugees11
. Today, though estimates vary, they are around 700,000
to 1,000,000 Tamils domiciles overseas. They left the country under circumstances that
would not make it easy for them to support a peace building project in Sri Lanka in the
direction it is taking today.
11
See Pinnawala (1986) on a discussion on a typology of Sri Lankan diaspora and Daniels (1997) for a
classification of Tamil diaspora
15

17. In addition to the fact that they feel they were prosecuted and chased away and hence
have strong feelings of resentment towards Sri Lanka there is another reason that would
at least make them less eager to be part of any peace and integration activity in the
country. This group though are strongly attached to the homeland this attachment more a
symbolic and psychological one than one that is founded on the real intension to return.
Eelam is for them a question of pride and self esteem than a real home. Eelam once
established will not be their physical home as in the case of Israel for the Jews. They
want a homeland so that there will be a place called home not a place to live. Further,
they are, unlike their compatriots at home are not physically suffering so they have no
immediate reasons come forward to alleviate suffering as in the case of the Tamils in Sri
Lanka. (The sufferings Tamils in Sri Lanka unfortunately neither have no voice in the
civil society peace building project in the South nor do they have a voice in the Northern
struggle). The Tamil diaspora community can wait and in no hurry to achieve peace in Sri
Lanka if that is not going to be achieved in the way they want it. The activities of the
Tamil diaspora clearly demonstrate that they want to wait and ready for it.
The Challenges
South always had an anti peace lobby which was supported by the radical left and the
traditional nationalist elites who are mainly Sinhalese Buddhists. Their protests were
mainly peaceful in the early days and were limited to rallies and media based propaganda
and criticism of the peace movement. They were also not very effective (CHA 2003) in
the early days. The emergence of the Buddhist political party and the rise of the JVP is a
manifestation of new crystallization of the forces that are against a political solution. This
group which was in the periphery of political mainstream until recently has managed to
become part of the political center stage due to political bargaining and manipulations,
especially during the last Presidential elections. Their agenda is establishment of ethnic
unity within a Sinhala Buddhist hegemonistic paradigm (Jathika Chintanaya). All
activities of these groups show that they are determined to block any civil society attempt
to deviate from the old hard line approach which is based on the belief that Sinhalese
should come first in any solution. In the past these forces only verbally vilified those
16

18. who did not subscribe to their line of thinking as in the case of their opposition to NGOs
and particularly the activities of the business community in their campaign Sri Lanka
First12
. They have today become militant and are now seem to be ready to use physical
force which may be either due to frustration that their message is not getting across or
because they feel now they have power behind them. With this newly acquired power
they are now engaged in a concerted action to attack and weaken the southern civil
society peace project.
In the north the situation is even worse. There the civil society is now non existent due to
extreme controls, militarization and other manipulations of LTTE. Particularly with the
formation of civil defense forces (this is simply conscription of civilians by force) by
LTTE, Northern civil society today is gradually becoming an extension of LTTE military
structure. The recognition of LTTE by some quarters of the international community as
the sole representative of the Tamils, meaning that they represent Tamil civil society, has
not only added to this dangerous development but also has given the situation legitimacy.
The action of the international community is justified on the argument that it is the only
pragmatic approach as without the LTTE there cannot be a political solution to the
conflict. But the danger it has caused to Tamil society may be more harmful for the very
survival of democracy in Tamil society in the long run. Even in the short run there are
other negative repercussions as it has made civil society among the Tamils politically
irrelevant. It is not possible to carry out any meaningful civil society activism when civil
society is an irrelevant actor and that is the dilemma before the population in the
Northeast where LTTE has a de facto control.
Civil society based peace building is founded on the premises that there is active and
strong civil society. The recent development in the country raises serious doubts about
this. Apart from the issue of strategy, objectives and actors the civil society peace
building in Sri Lanka now is confronting a challenge from civil society itself. In the
south there is a trend towards crystallization of anti peace forces that are also becoming
strong politically. In the North there is further weakening of civil society which for a long
12
What happened to business persons like Mr. Lalith Kotalawala who was a pioneer of the business
community sponsored peace movement Sri Lanka First is example. He was personally targeted by the anti
peace lobby and other extremist groups.
17

19. time has been under the strict control of LTTE. Civil society there has been made
irrelevant by the actions the stakeholders to the conflict, mainly by the actions of LTTE.
The civil society peace activism needs not only to recognize this reality but also needs to
formulate strategies to confront this challenge. Realistically it is not a challenge the civil
society can easily overcome as there are politically powerful forces and actors who are
operating behind the scene.
Bibliography
CHA 2003 National Peace Audit: National Analysis, Colombo: Consortium of
Humanitarian Agencies, http://wwe.humanitarian-
srilanka.org/Pages/National_Peace_Audit.htm, pp 14
Chalk , Peter (2000) Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) International
Organization and Operations - A Preliminary Analysis, Commentary No. 77, A Canadian
Security Intelligence Service Publication,
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/com77e.htm
Daniel, E. Valentine (1997), Suffering Nation and Alienation, in Arthur Kleinman, Veena
Das and Margaret M. Lock (eds.) Social Suffering, Berkeley: University of California
Press
Diamond, Louise and John McDonald (1996) Multi-Track Diplomacy
A Systems Approach to Peace, West Hartford: Kumarian Press
Gunawardana, R. A. L. H., (1979) The People of the Lion, The Sri Lanka Journal of
the Humanities, vol. 4, no. 1-2:p. 1-25
Lewer, Nick and Joe William (2002) Sri Lanka: Finding a Negotiated End to Twenty-
Five Years of Violence, Searching for Peace in Central and South Asia,
http://www.conflict-
prevention.net/page.php?id=40&formid=73&action=show&surveyid=31
Lewins, F. (1978) The Myth of the Universal Church, Canberra: Australian
National University
McDonald, J. W., (1991) Further Exploration of Track Two Diplomacy in Thorson,
Stuart J. and Louis Kriesberg, (eds.) (1991) Timing the de-Escalation of International
Conflicts (Peace and Conflict Resolution), New York: Syracuse University Press
18

20. Nissan, Elizabeth (1988) Polity and Pilgrimage Centers in Sri Lanka, Man, (New
Series), vol.23 no. 2:pp. 253-274
Obeyesekere, G. (1978) The Fire-walkers of Kataragama: The Rise of Bhakti
Religiosity in Buddhist Sri Lanka, Journal of Asian Studies, vol. 37, pp. 457-476
Pinnawala, Sisira (1985) Sri Lankan In Melbourne: Factors Affecting Patterns of
Ethnicity, Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Australian National University
Siriweera, W. I., (1980) Recent Developments in Sinhala Tamil Relations, Asian
Survey, vol. 20, no. 9:pp. 903-913
Stavenhagen, Rudolfo, (1991) Ethnic Conflicts and their impacts on International
Society, ISSJ, vol. xliii, no. 1:pp. 433-445
Tamileditors (2006) Self defense training for Tamil women, Written by Administrator
Friday, 24 February 2006,
http://www.tamileditors.com/NEW/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&
Itemid=1
Tamilnet, (2006) Teacher Volunteer Force formed in Muttur east, TamilNet, July
23, 2006 13:16 GMT, http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=18900
Tekwani, Syam (2006) The LTTE’s Online Network and its Implications for
Regional Security Working Paper 104, January 2006, Institute of Defense and Strategic
Studies, Singapore, www.ntu.edu.sg/IDSS/publications/ WorkingPapers/WP104.pdf
Wolf, E, (1958) The Virgin of Guadalupe; A Mexican national symbol, Journal of
American Folklore, vol. 71, pp. 34-39
19