Thamilchelvan's Accusation: Whose Duplicity?
	Media outlets reported (July 5, 2006) that the LTTE's Political Head, S.P. Thamilchelvan as saying that, "Colombo's call for talks based on Sri Lankan constitution, rejected by Tamils decades ago, is a deliberate act of deceiving the International Community while failing to implement practical steps to implement the fundamental terms of cease fire agreement (CFA) as agreed in Geneva 1". He has further stated that the "most immediate need of the moment" is the execution of measures agreed in Geneva on the implementation of the CFA. The comments by S.P.Thamilchelvan appears to be a disingenuous dilatory tactic aimed at deflecting the increasing concern of the international community over LTTE's intransigence and misconduct, in particular its appalling campaign of terror. However, it is important that the two issues raised by him are clarified so that the international and national opinion are not mislead.

	The decision of the Government and President Rajapakse to proceed to the next phase of exploring political and constitutional reforms aimed at resolving the national question and to set up an All Party Representative Committee (APRe) comprising of a nominee from each political party for this purpose was based on a decision taken by the All Party Conference. It is also reflective of a growing consensus that issues relating to devolution of power needs to be addressed and that the decades of conflict has to be resolved through negotiations based on a multi-party approach and an inclusive process. It is for this purpose that President Rajapakse also set-up a Panel of Experts that is multi-ethnic and multi-disciplinary. The Government has made a genuine commitment to resolve the conflict afflicting the country through discussion, while the LTTE continues to obfuscate and resort to mindless violence. The establishment of a multi ethnic committee is also the logical next step taken by the Government to address the genuine concerns of the Tamil people following the international community's expressed disapproval of the LTTE terror tactics demonstrated through the EU listing. The establishment of the committee is the very fact which testifies to government's genuine attempts to resolve the national question through a political process which includes constitutional reform. It is therefore regrettable that instead of welcoming the timely efforts of the Government, LTTE has chosen to denounce this promising initiative off hand. Such polemical responses while not unfamiliar to the LTTE, is neither conducive to improving the current situation nor to the resolution of the fundamental issues of the national question. The LTTE position further reflects its preference of its own self interest over the genuine concerns of the Tamil people and its incongruous attempt to mislead the international community. If the process of finding a negotiated settlement to the national question had itself got protracted, it is largely due to the LTTE's refusal in every negotiation that it has had with successive Governments to address the core political issues and the root causes of the conflict. Where the LTTE did present a written proposal in October 2003, it was for an interim arrangement with no links to a final negotiated peace settlement. The LTTE also adopted a curious position that its proposal shall constitute the "sole basis for negotiations". This in effect precludes any Government from presenting alternative or contributory proposals and is not conducive to a principled and meaningful negotiation. Further, the LTTE has rejected one proposal after another in a series of initiatives ranging from the 1995 proposals to the Draft Constitution of August 2000. Not only did the LTTE reject the initiatives, it also deployed a suicide bomber to assassinate Dr. Neelan Tiruchelvam, an architect of the 1995 proposal and a respected Tamil politician of the TULF, for his contribution towards the constitutional reforms process that would have given the Tamil people and the region they inhabit substantial participation in governance. It appears that the LTTE feels threatened with any substantive proposal on devolution that would render the demand for a separate State redundant and irrelevant. Thamilchelvan's stand that the Government's decision to proceed with attempts at forging a consensus on devolution of power is a "duplicitous approach" aimed at deflecting responsibility for not implementing the Geneva 1 Agreement does not stand the test of reason and facts. The LTTE did all it could to avoid attending second round of Geneva Talks on flimsy grounds, whilst engaging in a wild campaign of claymore mine and grenade attacks on the security forces and civilians. Following the LTTE attack on Pear Cruise II endangering the lives of the SLMM monitors, the Norwegian Government attempted to have a technical meeting in Oslo on the security of SLMM monitors. This was sabotaged by the LTTE after refusing meet with the Government delegation having gone to the venue of the talks at the expense of the Norwegian Government. Despite LTTE's shrill propaganda and theatrics, not to mention endless acts of terrorism, the Government continues to extend a hand to the LTTE to come forward and engage in principled negotiations. The process of forging a democratic consensus at the level of the parliamentary parties is for the purpose of facilitating such an engagement with the LTTE and is not aimed at excluding it. However, if LTTE continues to disengage from these attempts at exploring a political and constitutional solution to the national question, then it will be isolating itself from the Tamil people that it undemocratically claims to solely represent. This, however, would not in any way deter or dilute the Government's own resolve to proceed with the process. Department of Government Information 09 th July 2006
	<< Back
Telephone : + (47) 23 31 70 80 Telefax : + (47) 23 31 70 90, E-mail: embakont@online.no Copyright © . All rights reserved