The D.M.K. President Dr.Kalaignar put forth three important demands to the Government of India with regard to the Sri Lankan Tamils issue.
They were:
“Declares that genocide and War Crimes had been committed and inflicted on the Eelam Tamils by the Sri Lankan Army and the administrators.
Strongly urges the establishment of the credible and independent International Commission of Investigation in the time bound manner into the allegations of War Crimes, Crimes against humanity, violations of International Human Rights Law, violations of International Humanitarian Law and the Crime of Genocide against the Tamil people”.
Kalaignar urges the Government of India to take appropriate steps to incorporate the above two demands as amendments to the U.S. sponsored resolution in the U.N.H.R.C
Further, he urges the Government of India to pass a resolution incorporating the above two demands in the Parliament.
With regard to the third demand, on 20 March 2013, the Parliament Speaker Mrs. Meera Kumar convened a meeting of representatives of all parties in Parliament. In the meeting, the DMK urged the government to move a resolution in Parliament as demanded by Kalignar.
But all national parties including the BJP, which has been projected by some in Tamil Nadu that it would solve the Eelam Tamils Problem once and for all when it would come to power at the center; and the Communist Parties, which speak in vociferous tone on Eelam Tamils issue in Tamil Nadu only, opposed the moving of such a resolution in Parliament. Their opposition to the resolution was based on two reasons. They were:
They oppose any country-specific resolution.
If we interfere in Eelam Tamils problem today, other countries may interfere in Kashmir problem tomorrow.
Amongst two, the first reason is meaningless according to Mr.Hardeep S.Puri, the former permanent Representative of India to the United Nations in New York. He has clearly stated in his article published in The Hindu on 9 April 2013: “To suggest that India does not support country – specific resolutions is absurd. Even more that we have a principled position on this. In any perceived clash between principle and national interest it is invariably the latter that is invoked and reigns supreme. Following the anti – Tamil riots in Colombo in 1983, New Delhi mustered sufficient courage to spearhead a resolution against Sri Lanka in the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and the Protection of Minorities. We vote in favour of similar resolutions against Israel only because they deal with gross and systematic violations of human rights of Palestinian people in the occupied territories. We have never hesitated to take a position on country – specific resolutions whether on DRRK or Iran, whenever national interest so demanded”
Kalaignar’s letter to his brothers, published in Murasoli on 11 March, also mentioned this, which adds strength to the view expressed by Mr. Hardeep S.Puri. In his letter, Kalaigner has raised the following poignant questions: “Whether it would have been possible for Pandit Nehru to interfere in the South – African problem if India followed the principle of non-interference in another country’s internal problem in its foreign policy? Whether it would have been possible for Indira Gandhi to extend helping hand to Mujbir Rahman of Bangladesh in his liberation struggle? Will not the Tamils of the world who closely follow the history, raise such questions?” Hence, the decision of the national parties not to support a country – specific resolution with regard to the problem of Eelam only is a wrong one.
The second reason for the decision of the national parties was that if India would interfere in the Eelam problem at present, the other countries would interfere in Kashmir problem in future. The Sinhala political parties in Sri Lanka also often sarcastically advice the Government of India and the Indian political parties to divert their attention to the Kashmir problem instead of to the Eelam problem. Does it mean that the problems of Kashmir and Eelam are one and the same?
What is the story of Kashmir?
There were 565 Princely States, big or small, in the Indian sub-continent during the British rule. When the British left India on 15th August 1947, they announced that the Princely States were free to join either India or Pakistan or remain independent. As there was no elected Assembly in the Princely States , sovereignty resided with the ruler. Therefore, the rulers decided the future of their states. Accordingly, 554 Princely States joined Indian Union. Kashmir is one among them.
Maharaja Pratap Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, passed away in 1925. As he had no male issue, his younger brother Amarsingh’s son, Harisingh succeeded to the Kashmir throne. It was during his reign, Sheikh Abdullah, acclaimed as the Lion of Kashmir, became the popular leader. Born in 1905 in a hamlet near Srinagar, Sheikh Abdullah studied M.Sc., in Aligarh University. Then, he joined as a junior teacher in a high school in Srinagar. Later, he resigned from that job and started Muslim Conference Party in 1932. Attracted by his oratory, people of different religious faiths extended their support to him. He also welcomed all people, irrespective of their religion, to join his party and with that purpose, he changed the name of his party from Muslim Conference to National Conference in 1939. At the Anantnag session of the National Conference held in the same year, he was mainly instrumental in passing a resolution demanding reservation of seats for the minorities (ie) Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists in the Assembly.
In 1941, Sheikh Abdullah invited Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru to Kahsmir as the chief guest of National Conference. Nehru was given a tumultuous welcome, unprecedented in the history of Kashmir. In 1944, Jinnah visited Kashmir and stayed there for nearly three months. At that time, Jinnah tried to instigate communal feelings and divide the people on that line. Enraged by the activities of Jinnah, Sheikh Abdullah described Jinnah’s observations as anti-democratic and asked him to leave Kashmir immediately.
On 15th August 1947, the British left India once and for all. Maharaja Harisingh was in a dilemma and was not able to take a decision on the future of his state. Kashmir was surrounded by four countries – India, Pakistan, Russia and China. Maharaja Harisingh’s ambition to keep Kashmir as an independent and separate state was kindled by some, who suggested that being in the centre of four big countries, Kashmir could shine as the Switzerland of Asia, if it would remain an independent and neutral country. Therefore, Harisingh was in a state of uncertainty and confusion.
But the intemperate Pakistan began to give all sorts of pressure to Kashmir ruler to merge his state with Pakistan. Further, Pakistan started its military activities in a clandestine manner. In the darkness of early morning of 22 October, about 4000 Frontier tribesmen fully armed with modern weapons entered Kashmir, captured Muzaffarabad before dawn and were fast approaching Srinagar.
On hearing the news of the invasion of hordes of Frontier tribesmen supported by the Pakistan army, Maharaja Harisingh got nervous and immediately sent an SOS to India for help. Then he announced that Kashmir would be acceded to India. Harisingh, who was in his Jammu palace in the evening of 25 October, gave his pistol to his body guard with instructions to shoot him (Harisingh) down while in sleep, if Menon, the Indian Representative, did not turn up next morning as promised. The body guard was, however, saved of the agony of performing the unpleasant task entrusted to him by his master. Menon arrived at Jammu on the morning of 26 October well before the appointed time along with the draft instrument of accession. Maharaja Harisingh signed the instrument of accession without any precondition. In this, he had the unqualified support of Sheikh Abdullah. Thus with the whole-hearted support of the ruler and the people, Kashmir was acceded to India.
Following this, India immediately sent its army to Kashmir to drive away the aggressors. At a time, when the three-fourth of Kashmir was liberated from the aggressors, on 1st January 1949, U.N. intervened and brought in ceasefire between India and Pakistan.
Soon after the accession of Kashmir to India, Sheikh Abdulla was appointed as Head of Emergency administration. On 5th March 1948, he was elevated as Prime Minister. The elections to the Constituent Assembly were held in September and October, 1951. The constituent Assembly was convened on 31st October. In his first speech in the constituent Assembly, Sheikh Abdulla declared that Kashmir’s accession to India was final and irrevocable.
In 1952, Sheikh Abdullah visited New Delhi and held discussions with Prime Minister Nehru. After days of deliberations, an agreement known as Delhi Pact was signed between Nehru and Sheikh Abdulla. There were eight points in the agreement. The Pact inter-alia accepted a common citizenship with certain special privileges for State subjects, an elected Head of State to be recognized by the President of India and a State flag to be hoisted along with the National Flag. About the agreement, Sheikh Abdulla declared: “It is not a paper agreement but a union of hearts, which no power on earth can loosen” The Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, as it has been called, came into force on 26th January 1957.
We may now summarize the special privileges extended to Kashmir State :
Article 370 of the Constitution of India, which came into force on 26th January 1950, gives special status to Kashmir State.
Article 370 specifies that except for Defence, Foreign Affairs, Finance and Communications (matters specified in the instrument of accession) the Indian Parliament needs Kashmir State Government’s concurrence for applying all other laws.
Articles 356 and 357 of the Constitution of India were not extended to Kashmir prior to December 1964.
Under Article 370(3), consent of Kashmir State legislature and the Constituent Assembly of the State are also required to amend Article 370.
The Government of India has no power to declare Financial Emergency under Article 360 in Kashmir.
The Government of India can declare Emergency in Kashmir only in case of war or external aggression.
No proclamation of emergency made on the grounds of internal disturbance or imminent danger thereof shall have effect in relation to Kashmir State unless (a) it is made at the request or with the concurrence of the government of the state, or (b) where it has not been so made, it is applied subsequently by the President to that State at the request or with the concurrence of the government of that state.
The Indian Parliament has no power to legislate Preventive Detention laws for Kashmir State; only the State legislature has the power to do so.
Till 1963, the Parliament could legislate on subjects contained in the Union List and had no jurisdiction in case of Concurrent List under VIIIth Schedule of the Constitution. But now only the Parliament has power to legislate on some of the subjects of the concurrent list.
Residuary powers, unlike other states, rest with Kashmir State.
In India Jammu and Kashmir is the only state which has a constitution of its own.
While taking oath as Ministers and legislators, they affirm their faith and allegiance to the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir.
Kashmir has a separate State flag, which is hoisted along wth the National flag.
Article 145 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir declares Urdu as the official language of the state. English language shall continue to be used for all the official purposes of the state for which it was being used immediately before the commencement of the Constitution. Hindi is not imposed in Kashmir.
Kashmiri, Dogri, Balti, Dardi, Punjabi, Pahari, Ladakhi and Gojri are declared as regional languages and included in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution.
As per article 146 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir an Arts Academy has been established.
A common citizenship is recognized with special privilege for State subjects.
The application of principles of Fundamental rights as defined in the Constitution of India is applied in Kashmir with certain modifications.
Indian citizens from other states cannot purchase land or property in Jammu and Kasmir.
Indian citizens from other states cannot join Jammu and Kashmir Government services.
Under these circumstances, the aggression of about one-fourth of Kashmir by Pakistan and the intrusion into Kashmir by the Pakistan trained terrorists, who are indulging in violent activities in the Kashmir Valley are the problems of Kashmir. This is the story of Kashmir.
Now, let us see in brief the tragic history of Eelam.
As Jinnah demanded and obtained a separate state for Muslims, when the British left India in 1947, Chelvanayakam also could have demanded and obtained a separate state for Eelam Tamils, when the British left Ceylon on 4th February 1948. But the Tamils did not entertain such an idea at that time. All that they wanted was equality of rights on a par with the Sinhalese. But, What had happened?
In 1956, Prime Minister Bandaranaike started the subjugation of Tamils by introducing the “Sinhala only” Bill in Parliament. Tamils held a peaceful demonstration protesting against the Bill. But the Sinhalese led by the Buddhist monks attacked the Tamils and in the violence let loose by the Sinhalese, about 150 Tamils were killed. Later, in July 1957, a treaty to establish autonomous regional councils in Tamil areas was signed between Bandaranaike and Chelvanayakam. But the Sinhala fanatics opposed the treaty. As a result, Bandaranaike announced that he was scrapping the accord that he had made with Chelvanayakam.
In 1965, Dudley Senanayake also entered into an agreement with Chelvanayakam, which promised to set up regional councils in Tamil areas. Again Sinhala chauvinists opposed the agreement and as a result, Senanayae abrogated his accord with Chelvanayakam.
On 29 July 1987, the Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi signed an accord with the Sri Lankan President Jayawardene. This accord also promised to establish a Provincial Council in the North-East Province. But, even 26 years after the signing of the Indo-Sri Lankan Accord, there is no indication for the establishment of the Provincial Council. Worser than that, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the younger brother of President Rajapaksa and the Defence Secretary of Sri Lanka told news reporters last month that “There is no chance for the establishment of the Provincial Council in Tamils areas”.
But, in India, Kashmir State has been established and fair and free elections were held many a time there. A majority of people enthusiastically participated in those elections and exercised their franchise. National Conference, Congress party and Peoples Democratic Party one after the other won the elections, captured power and successfully administered the state. Further, what are the rights enjoyed by an Indian in Kanyakumari, are also given to Kashmir Indian. Moreover, we have seen earlier that Kashmir Indian is given certain more rights than a Kanyakumari Indian.
Hence, our question is this: Whether one percent of the rights enjoyed by the Kashmiris are given to Eelem Tamils? But, the answer is “NO”. The Sinhala government have cheated the Tamils and subjugated them as second class citizens. In this ironic situation, how could the problems of Kashmir and Eelam be one and the same?
Therefore, the national parties should reconsider their stand on Eelam Tamils problem. The state units of those national parties should convey this to their leaders at the national level. They need not approach the Eelam Tamils problem with a guilty conscience over Kashmir problem. At least in future, the national party leaders should approach the Eelam Tamils problem with courage and clarity. Will they do this?
They were:
“Declares that genocide and War Crimes had been committed and inflicted on the Eelam Tamils by the Sri Lankan Army and the administrators.
Strongly urges the establishment of the credible and independent International Commission of Investigation in the time bound manner into the allegations of War Crimes, Crimes against humanity, violations of International Human Rights Law, violations of International Humanitarian Law and the Crime of Genocide against the Tamil people”.
Kalaignar urges the Government of India to take appropriate steps to incorporate the above two demands as amendments to the U.S. sponsored resolution in the U.N.H.R.C
Further, he urges the Government of India to pass a resolution incorporating the above two demands in the Parliament.
With regard to the third demand, on 20 March 2013, the Parliament Speaker Mrs. Meera Kumar convened a meeting of representatives of all parties in Parliament. In the meeting, the DMK urged the government to move a resolution in Parliament as demanded by Kalignar.
But all national parties including the BJP, which has been projected by some in Tamil Nadu that it would solve the Eelam Tamils Problem once and for all when it would come to power at the center; and the Communist Parties, which speak in vociferous tone on Eelam Tamils issue in Tamil Nadu only, opposed the moving of such a resolution in Parliament. Their opposition to the resolution was based on two reasons. They were:
They oppose any country-specific resolution.
If we interfere in Eelam Tamils problem today, other countries may interfere in Kashmir problem tomorrow.
Amongst two, the first reason is meaningless according to Mr.Hardeep S.Puri, the former permanent Representative of India to the United Nations in New York. He has clearly stated in his article published in The Hindu on 9 April 2013: “To suggest that India does not support country – specific resolutions is absurd. Even more that we have a principled position on this. In any perceived clash between principle and national interest it is invariably the latter that is invoked and reigns supreme. Following the anti – Tamil riots in Colombo in 1983, New Delhi mustered sufficient courage to spearhead a resolution against Sri Lanka in the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and the Protection of Minorities. We vote in favour of similar resolutions against Israel only because they deal with gross and systematic violations of human rights of Palestinian people in the occupied territories. We have never hesitated to take a position on country – specific resolutions whether on DRRK or Iran, whenever national interest so demanded”
Kalaignar’s letter to his brothers, published in Murasoli on 11 March, also mentioned this, which adds strength to the view expressed by Mr. Hardeep S.Puri. In his letter, Kalaigner has raised the following poignant questions: “Whether it would have been possible for Pandit Nehru to interfere in the South – African problem if India followed the principle of non-interference in another country’s internal problem in its foreign policy? Whether it would have been possible for Indira Gandhi to extend helping hand to Mujbir Rahman of Bangladesh in his liberation struggle? Will not the Tamils of the world who closely follow the history, raise such questions?” Hence, the decision of the national parties not to support a country – specific resolution with regard to the problem of Eelam only is a wrong one.
The second reason for the decision of the national parties was that if India would interfere in the Eelam problem at present, the other countries would interfere in Kashmir problem in future. The Sinhala political parties in Sri Lanka also often sarcastically advice the Government of India and the Indian political parties to divert their attention to the Kashmir problem instead of to the Eelam problem. Does it mean that the problems of Kashmir and Eelam are one and the same?
What is the story of Kashmir?
There were 565 Princely States, big or small, in the Indian sub-continent during the British rule. When the British left India on 15th August 1947, they announced that the Princely States were free to join either India or Pakistan or remain independent. As there was no elected Assembly in the Princely States , sovereignty resided with the ruler. Therefore, the rulers decided the future of their states. Accordingly, 554 Princely States joined Indian Union. Kashmir is one among them.
Maharaja Pratap Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, passed away in 1925. As he had no male issue, his younger brother Amarsingh’s son, Harisingh succeeded to the Kashmir throne. It was during his reign, Sheikh Abdullah, acclaimed as the Lion of Kashmir, became the popular leader. Born in 1905 in a hamlet near Srinagar, Sheikh Abdullah studied M.Sc., in Aligarh University. Then, he joined as a junior teacher in a high school in Srinagar. Later, he resigned from that job and started Muslim Conference Party in 1932. Attracted by his oratory, people of different religious faiths extended their support to him. He also welcomed all people, irrespective of their religion, to join his party and with that purpose, he changed the name of his party from Muslim Conference to National Conference in 1939. At the Anantnag session of the National Conference held in the same year, he was mainly instrumental in passing a resolution demanding reservation of seats for the minorities (ie) Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists in the Assembly.
In 1941, Sheikh Abdullah invited Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru to Kahsmir as the chief guest of National Conference. Nehru was given a tumultuous welcome, unprecedented in the history of Kashmir. In 1944, Jinnah visited Kashmir and stayed there for nearly three months. At that time, Jinnah tried to instigate communal feelings and divide the people on that line. Enraged by the activities of Jinnah, Sheikh Abdullah described Jinnah’s observations as anti-democratic and asked him to leave Kashmir immediately.
On 15th August 1947, the British left India once and for all. Maharaja Harisingh was in a dilemma and was not able to take a decision on the future of his state. Kashmir was surrounded by four countries – India, Pakistan, Russia and China. Maharaja Harisingh’s ambition to keep Kashmir as an independent and separate state was kindled by some, who suggested that being in the centre of four big countries, Kashmir could shine as the Switzerland of Asia, if it would remain an independent and neutral country. Therefore, Harisingh was in a state of uncertainty and confusion.
But the intemperate Pakistan began to give all sorts of pressure to Kashmir ruler to merge his state with Pakistan. Further, Pakistan started its military activities in a clandestine manner. In the darkness of early morning of 22 October, about 4000 Frontier tribesmen fully armed with modern weapons entered Kashmir, captured Muzaffarabad before dawn and were fast approaching Srinagar.
On hearing the news of the invasion of hordes of Frontier tribesmen supported by the Pakistan army, Maharaja Harisingh got nervous and immediately sent an SOS to India for help. Then he announced that Kashmir would be acceded to India. Harisingh, who was in his Jammu palace in the evening of 25 October, gave his pistol to his body guard with instructions to shoot him (Harisingh) down while in sleep, if Menon, the Indian Representative, did not turn up next morning as promised. The body guard was, however, saved of the agony of performing the unpleasant task entrusted to him by his master. Menon arrived at Jammu on the morning of 26 October well before the appointed time along with the draft instrument of accession. Maharaja Harisingh signed the instrument of accession without any precondition. In this, he had the unqualified support of Sheikh Abdullah. Thus with the whole-hearted support of the ruler and the people, Kashmir was acceded to India.
Following this, India immediately sent its army to Kashmir to drive away the aggressors. At a time, when the three-fourth of Kashmir was liberated from the aggressors, on 1st January 1949, U.N. intervened and brought in ceasefire between India and Pakistan.
Soon after the accession of Kashmir to India, Sheikh Abdulla was appointed as Head of Emergency administration. On 5th March 1948, he was elevated as Prime Minister. The elections to the Constituent Assembly were held in September and October, 1951. The constituent Assembly was convened on 31st October. In his first speech in the constituent Assembly, Sheikh Abdulla declared that Kashmir’s accession to India was final and irrevocable.
In 1952, Sheikh Abdullah visited New Delhi and held discussions with Prime Minister Nehru. After days of deliberations, an agreement known as Delhi Pact was signed between Nehru and Sheikh Abdulla. There were eight points in the agreement. The Pact inter-alia accepted a common citizenship with certain special privileges for State subjects, an elected Head of State to be recognized by the President of India and a State flag to be hoisted along with the National Flag. About the agreement, Sheikh Abdulla declared: “It is not a paper agreement but a union of hearts, which no power on earth can loosen” The Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, as it has been called, came into force on 26th January 1957.
We may now summarize the special privileges extended to Kashmir State :
Article 370 of the Constitution of India, which came into force on 26th January 1950, gives special status to Kashmir State.
Article 370 specifies that except for Defence, Foreign Affairs, Finance and Communications (matters specified in the instrument of accession) the Indian Parliament needs Kashmir State Government’s concurrence for applying all other laws.
Articles 356 and 357 of the Constitution of India were not extended to Kashmir prior to December 1964.
Under Article 370(3), consent of Kashmir State legislature and the Constituent Assembly of the State are also required to amend Article 370.
The Government of India has no power to declare Financial Emergency under Article 360 in Kashmir.
The Government of India can declare Emergency in Kashmir only in case of war or external aggression.
No proclamation of emergency made on the grounds of internal disturbance or imminent danger thereof shall have effect in relation to Kashmir State unless (a) it is made at the request or with the concurrence of the government of the state, or (b) where it has not been so made, it is applied subsequently by the President to that State at the request or with the concurrence of the government of that state.
The Indian Parliament has no power to legislate Preventive Detention laws for Kashmir State; only the State legislature has the power to do so.
Till 1963, the Parliament could legislate on subjects contained in the Union List and had no jurisdiction in case of Concurrent List under VIIIth Schedule of the Constitution. But now only the Parliament has power to legislate on some of the subjects of the concurrent list.
Residuary powers, unlike other states, rest with Kashmir State.
In India Jammu and Kashmir is the only state which has a constitution of its own.
While taking oath as Ministers and legislators, they affirm their faith and allegiance to the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir.
Kashmir has a separate State flag, which is hoisted along wth the National flag.
Article 145 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir declares Urdu as the official language of the state. English language shall continue to be used for all the official purposes of the state for which it was being used immediately before the commencement of the Constitution. Hindi is not imposed in Kashmir.
Kashmiri, Dogri, Balti, Dardi, Punjabi, Pahari, Ladakhi and Gojri are declared as regional languages and included in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution.
As per article 146 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir an Arts Academy has been established.
A common citizenship is recognized with special privilege for State subjects.
The application of principles of Fundamental rights as defined in the Constitution of India is applied in Kashmir with certain modifications.
Indian citizens from other states cannot purchase land or property in Jammu and Kasmir.
Indian citizens from other states cannot join Jammu and Kashmir Government services.
Under these circumstances, the aggression of about one-fourth of Kashmir by Pakistan and the intrusion into Kashmir by the Pakistan trained terrorists, who are indulging in violent activities in the Kashmir Valley are the problems of Kashmir. This is the story of Kashmir.
Now, let us see in brief the tragic history of Eelam.
As Jinnah demanded and obtained a separate state for Muslims, when the British left India in 1947, Chelvanayakam also could have demanded and obtained a separate state for Eelam Tamils, when the British left Ceylon on 4th February 1948. But the Tamils did not entertain such an idea at that time. All that they wanted was equality of rights on a par with the Sinhalese. But, What had happened?
In 1956, Prime Minister Bandaranaike started the subjugation of Tamils by introducing the “Sinhala only” Bill in Parliament. Tamils held a peaceful demonstration protesting against the Bill. But the Sinhalese led by the Buddhist monks attacked the Tamils and in the violence let loose by the Sinhalese, about 150 Tamils were killed. Later, in July 1957, a treaty to establish autonomous regional councils in Tamil areas was signed between Bandaranaike and Chelvanayakam. But the Sinhala fanatics opposed the treaty. As a result, Bandaranaike announced that he was scrapping the accord that he had made with Chelvanayakam.
In 1965, Dudley Senanayake also entered into an agreement with Chelvanayakam, which promised to set up regional councils in Tamil areas. Again Sinhala chauvinists opposed the agreement and as a result, Senanayae abrogated his accord with Chelvanayakam.
On 29 July 1987, the Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi signed an accord with the Sri Lankan President Jayawardene. This accord also promised to establish a Provincial Council in the North-East Province. But, even 26 years after the signing of the Indo-Sri Lankan Accord, there is no indication for the establishment of the Provincial Council. Worser than that, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the younger brother of President Rajapaksa and the Defence Secretary of Sri Lanka told news reporters last month that “There is no chance for the establishment of the Provincial Council in Tamils areas”.
But, in India, Kashmir State has been established and fair and free elections were held many a time there. A majority of people enthusiastically participated in those elections and exercised their franchise. National Conference, Congress party and Peoples Democratic Party one after the other won the elections, captured power and successfully administered the state. Further, what are the rights enjoyed by an Indian in Kanyakumari, are also given to Kashmir Indian. Moreover, we have seen earlier that Kashmir Indian is given certain more rights than a Kanyakumari Indian.
Hence, our question is this: Whether one percent of the rights enjoyed by the Kashmiris are given to Eelem Tamils? But, the answer is “NO”. The Sinhala government have cheated the Tamils and subjugated them as second class citizens. In this ironic situation, how could the problems of Kashmir and Eelam be one and the same?
Therefore, the national parties should reconsider their stand on Eelam Tamils problem. The state units of those national parties should convey this to their leaders at the national level. They need not approach the Eelam Tamils problem with a guilty conscience over Kashmir problem. At least in future, the national party leaders should approach the Eelam Tamils problem with courage and clarity. Will they do this?
No comments:
Post a Comment