Skip to content

SRI LANKA: Undermining reconciliation

Over a year after the end of the war, the Sri Lankan regime is continuing the politics of confrontation, undermining the possibilities for reconciliation in the post-war period. There remains an urgent need for reconciliation between multiple actors: between the Tamil and Sinhalese communities, polarised by nationalist mobilisation; between the state and minorities who have faced majoritarian discrimination; and between the government and the United Nations, which have become increasingly estranged. The challenge before Sri Lanka now is whether it can move forward as a genuinely multi-ethnic polity and an accepted member of the international community, particularly when local participation and international support are both vital for the reconstruction and development of the war-ravaged society. Since the end of the brutal conflict 15 months ago, Sri Lanka has also completed two national elections, ensuring the political stability of Mahinda Rajapakse's government and strengthening his hand. However, the president's actions on the ground, and his administration's response to international engagement, would have one believe that the conflict was not over.

In recent weeks, the government has restricted the freedom of movement of NGOs into the north, while extending requirements for Defence Ministry clearance for nationals and journalists to visit the area. Organisations providing psycho-social care have been denied permission to work in the north, with the government's priority on reconstruction remaining focused exclusively on physical infrastructure, despite the continuing trauma of a war-affected population. This paranoia towards the north is worrying, for an overly security-oriented approach will only further alienate the already-sullen Tamil community. Indeed, any serious approach towards reconciliation needs to begin with demilitarisation, while ensuring democratisation with the full participation of the local population. The roots of the conflict lie in the political grievances of the minorities, which need to be addressed through a political settlement that reforms the majoritarian centralised state through the genuine devolution of power to the provinces and power-sharing at the Centre.

Instead, the government's current approach is focusing solely on the physical resettlement of those displaced from the Vanni, in the north – over 300,000 people caught in the wrong place in the last phase of the war. Thereafter, it wants to move forward with large development projects, in what seems to be intended to bring in billions of dollars in donor funding. The problem, of course, is that resettlement is not merely about physical return, and must include rehabilitation and the resumption of social and economic daily life. Neither is the current displaced population limited to those who were forced to move during the last phase of the war. Rather, this also includes those northern Muslims who were forcibly evicted by the LTTE from the north as far back as 1990, as well as individuals moved out of military-designated High Security Zones, Sinhalese villagers from border villages, and refugees who have gone to India. The resettlement of such a wide range of people can cause conflict on a range of issues, including access to land and state resources, and requires a sensitive approach to both the different forms of displacement and the common issues that underlie such experiences.

Growing estrangement
Days after the end of the war in May 2009, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visited Sri Lanka, where he made a joint statement with President Rajapakse. Many of the issues outlined in that communiqué have been points of contention over the last year, and might well be at the root of escalating estrangement between the government and the UN.