Welcome to Kenneth Abeywickrama's Blog Site

Sri Lanka: The Original Sin

Repression of minorities
Whenever the international media refers to Sri Lanka, a developing country in the Indian Ocean that usually gets little exposure for its creditable achievements in human development, they conclude a basically critical piece with the standard ending, “Tamils are discriminated against in Sri Lanka” or, in a slightly more generous mood, “Tamils claim they are discriminated against in Sri Lanka”. If this needs elaboration to bring in the background, it may add that “there has been systematic discrimination against Tamils by the Sinhalese dominated government of Sri Lanka in employment and education since the Sinhala Only Act of 1956, ..”  etc. So 1956 is the date of The Original Sin and the Act was the legislation pushed through in the national parliament to make Sinhala the sole Official Language of the country. From then on, one can be assured, the Sinhala dominated country went on an aggressive path of discrimination and marginalization of the Tamil minority. This, presumably, also justifies the use of mass terror by the LTTE on the entire civilian population and leaders of all communities using explosives concealed in public places, suicide bombings and indiscriminate attacks on Sinhala and Muslim places of congregation and armed insurrection to occupy and govern national territory.

Gen. Ashok Mehta, giving a presentation at the prestigious Indian Centre for Land Warfare Studies, gives a more comprehensive list that covers more issues :
“Four watershed events spurred the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka – the Sinhala Only Act of 1956, the Republican Constitution of 1972, the Parliamentary elections of 1977 and the 1983 ethnic riots. The killing of 13 Sri Lankan Army (SLA) soldiers by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam on 23 July 1983 marked the initiation of armed hostilities …”

So it would appear that the majority Sri Lankan community, the Sinhala, out of bloody-mindedness, started targeting the minority Tamils without provocation to establish their total domination from 1956 onwards. No matter that the Ceylon Tamils were only 12% of the population and that the Muslims (7%) and the Indian Tamils (6%) did not join them and did not feel equally discriminated. There is also no mention that the Sri Lanka government had previously shown itself vulnerable to armed insurrection from 1971 to about 1978 when the Sinhala youth under the Marxist influenced Jatika Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) waged war and at one point nearly overthrew the government. About 60,000 died in this very brutal conflict but international think tanks, NGOs, the UN and the so-called International Community (the Western Nations Only Community) have chosen to ignore this bloody conflict because it was by Sinhala youth. The JVP insurrection probably inspired LTTE leader Velupullai Prabhakaran and convinced him the Sri Lankan government could be overthrown because of its military weaknesses at the time.

Gen. Ashok Mehta and other international commentators now choose to forget that the armed LTTE insurrection was originally sponsored by the Government of India under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Indira Gandhi, angered by the tilt of the J.R. Jayawardena government of Sri Lanka after 1979 towards friendship with the USA and abandonment of former socialist policies and the Non-Aligned Movement, armed and trained Prabhakaran and his fellows and even prepared twice to impose Indian authority through military invasion, plans that were foiled by secret CIA interventions. Detailed accounts of these were contained in the India Today news magazine of that period. India sustained the LTTE for decades with facilities for LTTE arms factories, training centres and hospitals in South India. Open support of the LTTE by India only ended when, through an ironical act of fateful retribution, the LTTE monster created by her assassinated Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, Indira’s own son, in 1991. Indira Gandhi herself was assassinated by her Sikh bodyguard in 1984.

Historical background to Sinhala Tamil relations
Racial discrimination is historically based on ideas of racial superiority. So Europeans, since the 16th century, conquered Asians, Africans and South Americans and justified this on the basis of their being a superior race of people. In the British Empire of yore, “Where the Sun never sets”, the socially lowest White European was held above the highest native chieftain or wealthy Indian maharajah. Even the wealthiest natives were barred from “Europeans Only” social clubs till a few decades ago. The enslavement of Africans and the continuation of their subordinate status in the USA were justified on the same grounds of racial superiority. But never in the 2,600 year history of Sri Lanka did the Sinhala or Tamil people consider themselves racially superior to the other community.

The Sinhala and Tamil people are blood relations as DNA tests indicate that the genetic marker of most Sinhala people is the same as that of the majority of South Indians. The Mahavamsa, the great 4th century A.D. chronicle of the Sinhala people, states that Prince Vijaya’s (the first Sinhala king, around 600 B.C.) followers went to Madurai in South India to obtain from the King of Pandu a royal wife for him and wives for his 700 retainers . The Salagama, Karava and Durawa people of southwest coastal Sri Lanka mainly migrated in the Portuguese period in the 16th century and even up to the 18th century from South India  but became Sinhala simply by declaring themselves as Sinhala Budhhists.

The Sinhala royal families have for two thousand years been associated with the royal families of Madurai in South India with whom they constantly inter-married, as their was no kshastriya caste in Sri Lanka. Of the three great Sinhala kings of the Polonnaruwa period who ruled a united Lanka, Parakrama Bahu the Great was three quarters Pandyan and his successor, Nissanka Malla, was a Prince of Kalinga. From 1739 to 1815, when Sri Lanka lost her independence, the Sinhala Kandyan Kingdom gave the monarchy to the Nayakkar royal family of Madurai as the last Sinhala king, Narendrasimha, had no heir.

Nowhere in the history of the world has there been such an open society as ancient Sinhala society which generously accepted people of other races and religions into their fold and made them their own. It was this trusting spirit that persuaded the Kandyan chiefs to voluntarily offer the monarchy of Ceylon to the British monarch after quarrelling with their own king, Sri Wickrama Rajasinha, in 1815. They did not realise that the British were without honour and that the Kandyan Convention they signed would be discarded within 3 years by the British after consolidating their power to make their country a vassal state.

Development of Communalism
Communalism in Sri Lanka is a product of British rule. In 1833 when unofficial representatives were first nominated to the Legislative Council under the Governor’s powers, the representation was both unequal and unrepresentative: Sinhala (72% of population) – 1; Ceylon Tamil (12%) – 1, Indian Tamil (8%) – none; Muslims (7%) – none; Burghers (1%) -1: Europeans (0.2%) – 3. This ratio of nominated communal representation between Sinhala and Tamil varied later from 1:2 and again 2:3. When the principle of limited franchise was introduced in 1912 there were 3 Sinhala and 3 Ceylon Tamils. In 1921, the limited franchise was based on election to provincial electorates and then the number of Sinhala elected quadrupled while the Ceylon Tamil number remained the same. The Ceylon Tamil representatives protested and the British government in 1923 decreed a ratio of 2 Sinhala for every 1 Ceylon Tamil representative. Sri Lankan politics was henceforth based on race. Since that time, with every advance in constitutional status, the Sinhala and Tamil representatives displayed some element of communal politics. Under the Donoughmore Constitution of 1931 which instituted universal adult franchise for the election of 50 members of the State Council on an electoral basis, the representation by communities in 1945 was as follows: Sinhala 39 (78% of total seats), Ceylon Tamil 8 (16%), Indian Tamil 2 (4%), Muslim 1 (2%). Even here the Ceylon Tamils and the Sinhala were over-represented while Indian Tamils and Muslims were under-represented.

It is undisputed that the Ceylon Tamil minority dominated Sri Lanka during the colonial era in the professions, public service, business and political power in relation to their numbers. The British distrusted the Sinhala for a long time as they had risen in rebellion against injustices under British rule in 1818 and 1848. The Ceylon Tamils on the other hand, displayed loyalty to British rule. Better missionary educational services in the north gave Ceylon Tamils an advantage in entering the public services and the professions and they used this for the advantage of their own community. The economic advance of a minority community, like the Ceylon Tamils in Sri Lanka, is not a bad feature. It can be a factor for progress if it serves as a guide to other communities and works for national development. It was something to be welcomed. But the Ceylon Tamils used this advantage to marginalise the other communities, as we shall see.

The All-Ceylon Tamil Congress Scheme
In September 1944 the Council of Ministers of the State Council, at the request of the British Colonial Office, had set forth their proposals for a new constitution based on self-government through Ceylon Sessional Paper XIV. But when the British government by-passed this and appointed the Soulbury Commission in July 1944 for the same purpose, the Council of Ministers withdrew their proposals and refused to cooperate with the new commission. So the only comprehensive proposal was by the All-Ceylon Tamil Congress headed by G.G. Ponnambalam, though 80 persons or groups met the commissioners with oral and written proposals or opinions.

The All-Ceylon Tamil Congress, led by G.G. Ponnambalam, made a detailed proposal to the Soulbury Commission on a scheme of “balanced representation” which stands as a landmark in aggressive communal politics. The information given here is from the original report by the Soulbury Commission named “Ceylon – Report of the Commission on Constitutional Reform, Presented to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, 1945”, marked “Confidential” and published by His Majesty’s Stationery Office, London.

The All-Ceylon Tamil Congress Scheme, as the Soulbury Report calls it, was the high-water mark of Tamil communal aspirations up to that date. Its assumption was that the majority Sinhala community should be disempowered in future by making them a political minority in order to forestall their potential to discriminate against minorities. Allegations of discrimination by the Sinhala that were presented by them to the Commissioners were rejected by the report as unsubstantiated and false.

The scheme was as follows:
1. The legislature should have 100 electorates for a 100 seat assembly based on elections.
2. 50 seats would be reserved for minorities.
3. Of these 50 minority seats, 25 would be reserved for Tamils and the other 25 would be open to all minorities.
4. The other 50 seats would be open all communities, ie. They would not be reserved for the Sinhala.

When it was pointed out that this was deliberately intended to make the Sinhala majority a minority, the Tamil Congress amended this to state that 50 seats could be reserved for the Sinhala. The proposal advanced numerous dubious assertions to justify their extraordinary demands. But as the Soulbury Commission points out, the intention was really to control executive power with the demand that “The Governor should choose the Council of Ministers in consultation with leaders of various communities in the Legislature, but that it should be provided by Statute that less than half of the members of the Council of Ministers should be chosen from any one community” . The Soulbury Report rejected these demands and concluded thus:
“We think that any attempt by artificial means to convert a majority into a minority is not only inequitable, but doomed to failure. ”

It was clear that the Tamil minority that had achieved a dominant position in the professions, in business and the public service, was bent on expanding this power to marginalise the majority Sinhala for ever. This was something that even the powerful South Indian Chola invaders had failed to do in ancient times. This is the real Original Sin in Ceylon’s communal politics.

According to the report, the population ratio at the time in Ceylon was as follows:
1. Low Country Sinhala 2,596,479 (42.8%)
2. Kandyan Sinhala 1,467,429 (24.2%)
3. Ceylon Tamils     697,032 (11.5%)
4. Indian Tamils     812,113 (13.4%)
5. Ceylon Moors     339,456 (5.6%)
6. Indian Moors       44,499 (0.7%)
7. Europeans       10,938 (0.2%)
8. Burghers/Eurasians       39,666 (0.7%)
9. Malays       18,058 (0.3%)
10. Veddahs         6,078 (0.1%)
11. Others       29,588 (0.5%)
Total 6,061,336 (100%)

Post Independence
Despite the outrageous efforts of the All-Ceylon Tamil Congress to marginalise the Sinhala, D.S. Senanayake, the first Prime Minister of independent Ceylon, offered the All-Ceylon Tamil Congress two senior cabinet portfolios. G.G. Ponnambalam took the sensitive post of Minister of Industry and proceeded to build large state manufacturing enterprises in the Tamil dominated areas: The Paranthan Chemicals Corporation, the Valachennai Paper Corporation and the Cement Corporation factories in Kankasanthurai and Puttalam. Yet he lost the support of the majority of Ceylon Tamils who voted at the next elections overwhelmingly for the Federal Party that demanded a separate federal state for the Ceylon Tamils.

Despite the efforts of D.S. Senanayake to accommodate an intransigent Tamil political leadership, his successors could not bridle the frustration of the Sinhala majority, particularly the rural Sinhala majority, who saw continuing plans by the Tamils to marginalise them.  This led to the 1956 Bandaranaike government and the Sinhala Only Act and the aggressive communal stance of a section of the Sinhala population, the hitherto “Silent Majority”.

Concept of Original Sin
The concept of Original Sin exists only with the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions. It does not exist in the traditional South Asian religions: Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism. In the South Asian beliefs, Good and Evil are two sides of the same coin, and Man must use his intellect and perform meritorious deeds to be reincarnated into a better life in the next birth. The doctrine of Karma decrees that no amount of pleading with Gods can change one’s fate. In Hinduism, people may constantly ask favours of gods for their personal problems but these gods cannot change a person’s Karma. The Christian priest addresses his congregation as “Sinners” and calls upon them to repent and ask forgiveness from God. The Buddhist monk addresses his audience as pinwathuni or “people who do meritorious deeds” and explains to them that the path of the Dharma and righteous behaviour is the only path to betterment.

Neo-colonialism is active around the world dictating to their former colonies in Asia, Africa and South America and continuing their age-old strategy of creating disharmony among communities to weaken these states. Now that the economies of the West are in decline and the Asian economies are on the rise, they are becoming targets of malicious propaganda. Sri Lankans need not fall into this trap. Terrorism that destroyed and maimed tens of thousands in Sri Lanka is over, and since the legislation which was the basis of discrimination like the Sinhala Only Act and others have been revoked, the people of that country should cease to harp on Original Sin which is alien to their culture and religions and seek to build a harmonious society. Sri Lanka has the highest Quality of Life indices in South Asia and is the only country with the real potential in the region to become a developed country soon. It should not be led astray by those who stole their freedom in the past.

Kenneth Abeywickrama
20 July 2011.

Copyrights reserved. This article may be copied in part or whole with the permission of the author.

Billionaires of the World Unite!

You have the Whole World to Gain!

The great democracies

Arrive in Mumbai (Bombay), the commercial heart of India,
“the Largest Democracy in the World” with 1.2 billion people. Taxing from the
airport to the city along the main highway, see mile upon mile of wayside
shanties made of rusty iron scraps, discarded boards and plastic. Countless
millions live here all their lives, eating and defecating on the roadside. The
stench of human waste and rotting garbage overwhelms the nostrils if you open
the vehicle windows. But drive in comfort to the luxurious hotels or residences
of this vast city where the very affluent in a style unimaginable to
foreigners.

Two of the world’s richest billionaires, Mr. Lakshmi Mittal and Mr. Mukesh Ambani, built homes that cost over US$ one billion each in this city. Several floors in each are assigned for hundreds of luxury cars. Others accommodate the 350-400 bearers (servants) and staff who work in the house for the family. The rooftop has helipads. About three floors are maintained for the few family members when they visit the city. In other rich residential areas, multi-millionaire businessmen maintain mini palaces
with a staff of 40-50 bearers.

Democratic India is home to 400 million of the world’s poorest according to UN statistics. They live shanty towns in urban ghettos, in mud-walled straw thatched huts in villages and some millions even as forest dwellers. Caste humiliation is an added economic deprivation for many of the poor. The ancient Vedas and the laws of Manu, dating back to 600 B.C., divided Hindus to 5 classes into which they were born and died: the Brahmins (teachers and priests), Kshatriyas (warriors, big landlords and kings), Vaishyas (merchants, farmers and craftsmen), Sudras (manual labourers) and Untouchable (human waste and carrion removers). These are each divided into thousands of sub-castes and still govern social behaviour in many instances, despite the best efforts of the great independence leaders like Gandhi, Nehru and Ambedkar. Indian legislation contains the world’s most progressive affirmative action legislation for the under-privileged castes but the problem has not been eliminated.

Now welcome to the USA, the richest country and “the Greatest Democracy on Earth”, carrying its message of freedom and dignity to the ends of the world through money, propaganda, non-governmental organisations and aid projects, and some other times through military invasion and occupation of other countries. Officially, 9.2% of the workforce are unemployed, another 10% are under-employed or have given up seeking jobs. Over 10 million families have lost their homes to mortgages they could not pay because of the economic downturn or because mortgage brokers sold them what they could not pay for. In the big cities, there are more beggars often with signs “Homeless Veteran, Please Help”, than in Colombo, Sri Lanka (where I did not see a single beggar during one whole holiday month). In California, New York and some other states the homeless are living in tents in wooded areas like forest dwellers or camping under bridges and over-passes. The number of people seeking food stamps has risen to 45 million and 40 million have no health care benefits.

Then look at the other happy side. According to a recent US National Public Radio news item, 400 individual Americans own 35% of all national assets. Of the 55 individuals who earned over US$500 million in 2010, 34 paid no taxes on their incomes. The gap between the rich and the poor is the highest in the world. Many of the largest corporations paid little or no taxes, while some also got government subsidies.[1]

Political theology

Political economics is not a science in that it has no eternal laws though it always pretends to be one. In that sense it could be better called political theology because it claims eternal truths but its substance is rooted in an environment at a particular phase of history. Democracy arose in the small Greek city states where all adult males (not females and slaves) gathered to debate and vote on public affair. Such practice is only possible now in social clubs like Rotary (which also did not admit women till the 1980s). Nation states have
millions of people while two nations have over a billion people each. In 600 B.C., Manu in India and Confucius in China laid down political philosophies that had relevance then but are irrelevant today. So did more modern political theorists like Thomas Malthus, David Ricardo, Robert Owen, Karl Marx, Vladimir Illyich Lenin, Thorstein Veblen, Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes, Joseph Schumpeter and many others who are now relegated to historical analysis. Political theory survives and is nurtured in a favourable climate and dies with change. The political theory of the “Divine Right of Kings” died in England when King Charles I was executed in 1669, and died in France when Emperor Louis XVI was beheaded in Paris in 1791.

The current Western-origin concepts of democracy based on individual rights has been fashioned and refashioned by the giant business corporations that control much of the world economy that it would be unrecognisable to those who have only learnt of democracy from college textbooks or the corporate media. Democratic institutions that were designed to safeguard the ordinary citizen and ensure his basic rights are being eroded by the power of giant corporations whose financial resources buys political power
and privilege. When the election of the last presidency of the USA was obtained by spending U$750 million by that candidate, or where a senator or congressman has to spend tens of millions of dollars to be elected, and then be beholden to his wealthy sponsors, where are the rights of the man in the street? How does the theory of political democracy reconcile the overwhelming power of the wealthiest corporations with the helplessness of the man in the street who has lost his job, his home and his healthcare? When the some of the biggest financial institutions sold bad housing mortgages and piled up credit card debts and converted these “toxic assets” into triple A rated Credit Default Swaps and securities which destroyed a part of the world economy, the US government allocated US$1.5 trillion to bail out these corporations and also took over about US$3.0 trillion worth of their assets that had become toxic. But when lesser income earners were losing their homes and jobs, such generosity was not forthcoming.

The evolving political theology

The forthcoming US elections have already paved the way for some new political theories sponsored by large corporate donors and lobbyists (there are about 35,000 lobbyists for the US legislators’ attention) that would astonish people elsewhere. Let’s recall a few of the key theories that are being proclaimed now as eternal truths.

• The privileges of the rich are sacrosanct as the entire health of the nation
  depends on them. The rich must not be taxed. Government revenue
  must come from consumption taxes which will contributed mainly by the vast
  number of lesser income households. So the richest pay proportionately
  little, or no taxes (because of carefully introduced tax loopholes for the
  wealthy), while the poor have few tax relief measures.
• Corporations must not be taxed or they will invest elsewhere in the world. Actually, the nominal corporate tax is a myth as built-in tax loopholes enable the
  wealthiest corporations to pay little or no taxes and even may get huge
  government subsidies. Oil companies make tens of billions in profits and
  gain annual subsidies of around US$20 billion. European corporations pay
  higher taxes and still remain profitable. Large US
  corporations also cheat on taxes by using tax havens like Grenada and the Caymen Islands
  where their official headquarters is sometimes only a post office box.
• Corporations must not be regulated by the government or else they will flee elsewhere. The highest corporate investment in the world is in China where all business is subject to heavy government regulation. What is attractive in China, India and other developing countries is the lack of labour regulation and poor wages.
• Trade unions create unemployment by hampering business so unions must be undermined and eliminated. The Governor of the State of Wisconsin has already done that. Germany, which is the manufacturer and exporter of the largest volume of high value industrial products has privileged labour unions where it representatives, by law, must be on the Boards of Directors of corporations.
• Government activity must be minimal, as its work infringes on the liberty of the individual. But it must maintain a trillion dollar military
  for foreign interventions. And it is legitimate to subsidise large
  corporations and help overseas expansion of corporate business, even using
  political or military muscle.
• State sponsored social benefits for the needy must be minimised or eliminated. Social Security and Medicare for the retired, benefits for the elderly and the
  incapacitated, are a drain on the government and state budgets. Unemployment
  benefits must be cut, even though trillions were allocated to corporations
  bankrupted by fraudulent or bad management.
• The public and the government have no right to prevent CEOs and top corporation mangers paying themselves billions of dollars in bonuses and salaries even though the corporations are surviving because of infusions of public money that saved them from bankruptcy.

There are many more strange theories in currency in the USA that would be
laughed out in Europe or even many of the developing countries. But the mass followers of these theories, who are themselves mainly among the under-privileged, are now sufficient to have elected enough legislators to create an ultra right-wing majority in the House of Representatives. None of these theories are part of an overall political
philosophy that can stand up for scrutiny and approval by scholars. These
theorists are not Adam Smiths or Maynard Keyneses. But that does not prevent
them from being accepted as political theology by the large masses of Americans
whose exposure to ideas is limited to the corporation owned mass media and
corporate funded activists.

The Billionaires’ Club

The world billionaires club met again at the Bilderberg Conference in St. Moritz,
Switzerland, during June 9-12, 2011. What they discuss is secret, as is their membership. But their aspirations are no secret. Joseph Stalin trumped over his opponents like
Leon Trotsky by getting the Communist International gatherings to agree that
the triumph of communism in one country, the USSR, will eventually lead to the
communist take over of the world. Three decades later, after World War 2, he
seemed to have succeeded in part by subordinating Eastern Europe. But 4 decades later still the communist states were finished. Does the billionaires club believe that the USA could be the launching pad for the new corporatocrarcy that will eventually govern the
world and own its resources? We must somehow believe in the sanity of the human
race and agree that this is an improbable finale.

Thepanis Alwis

09 July 2011

Copyrights to the article in part or whole are
reserved. Reprints may be approved on request from the author.

[1] The list
includes Google, News Corp, Boeing, Pfizer, Oracle, Altria (Philip Morris),
IBM, Time Warner, Morgan Stanley and Microsoft. See http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/551168/10_of_the_biggest_corporate_tax_cheats_in_america

/

The Case of Sri Lanka  

Refugees worldwide  

Not since the partition of India in 1947 has the world seen refugee problems of the magnitude that we see today. Wars, terrorism, economic deprivation and unprecedented natural calamities have combined to make this the major humanitarian problem of our present time. 

The largest numbers today are from the Iraq war. According to the UN High Commission for Refugees report of January 2009, there were 1,955,000 Iraqi refugees in the neighbouring countries of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Turkey, Iran and the Gulf States[1]. This is apart from the over two million Iraqis displaced within their own country, categorised as Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). The massive earthquake in Haiti on January 12, 2010, left 300,000 dead and over a million internally displaced persons. Even with the high profile President Clinton as rehabilitation fund manager, over 80% of the displaced are still living in squalid camps with poor sanitation and no access to potable water. In 2005 Hurricane Katrina devastated large parts of New Orleans and the central Gulf States of the USA due to poorly constructed levees protecting the land. It killed 1,836 and permanently displaced a million people who have sought refuge in other parts of the country. After nearly 6 years, only half the population of New Orleans were able to return to the city. 

The latest unfolding story is in Libya where the European Union has just formulated new regulations to prevent the entry of tens of thousands now fleeing to escape the fighting in a conflict to which they are a party. 

International aid by rich donor nations for catastrophic refugee problems receives high media publicity. But eventually, barely 30% of the promised aid is delivered, corruption and mismanagement eats even a part of this, and eventually attention is focussed on a new problem elsewhere and the victims are forgotten. 

The earthquake in Wenchuan County, Sichuan Province, China, which killed 80,000 local residents in 2008 is an exception[2]. Reconstruction work to build new cities, schools and factories are now 91% complete. The Chinese have a reputation for successfully completing massive reconstruction projects at great speed, with their own resources. 

Sri Lankan problem 

The international community (the international community refers to the Western elite nations, just as when we say London society we do not mean the city population but its small social elite), international media, UN Human Rights Commission and Western human rights organisations have shown extraordinary concern about the refugee problems in the North and East of Sri Lanka since the defeat of the LTTE terrorist military machine on 19 May 2009 after a 35 year insurrection marked by terrorist attacks on schools, villages, government offices, infrastructure and personalities that left over 100,000 dead. 

Hence we went to Sri Lanka to visit Jaffna and Trincomalee districts, two of the main centres where people were uprooted by the final military conflict between the LTTE and the Sri Lanka security forces in 2009, to ascertain the situation on the ground for ourselves. 

Trincomalee is normal and is prospering. There are no evidences of war damage remaining, either within the huge Trincomalee Fort or outside. We had a long conversation with a Muslim trader from whom I bought Indian sarongs. He was of the view that Trincomalee was one of the most prosperous markets in the country. He had clothing stores in Badulla and Maharagama but he said his shop in Trincomalee was outperforming the others. 

First impressions 

The first impression of a visitor who has visited Sri Lanka before is that it is safe to travel in the country. After more than three decades, the ever present danger of a terrorist bomb in public places has been erased. In the North and East, where the LTTE restricted travel and enforced taxes on visitors and commercial goods, movement is free. The small towns are prospering again with shops full of local and imported goods and small restaurants. Near some Hindu temples which are usually crowded with worshippers, modern ice cream parlours are a big attraction. 

For three decades many parts of the north and east had been under the iron rule of the reclusive LTTE leader, Prabhakaran, who was referred to as the Sun God. It can be assumed that almost the entire population of these regions, where not the slightest opposition was tolerated, would have been associated with this organisation in some form as there was little choice within this brutal dictatorship. But in our conversations with traders and local villagers, we could not find one person who would now admit to having any association with the LTTE. 

The refugee situation in the North and East of Sri Lanka is unique and we found it involved three broad categories of former residents: 

1. the affluent Jaffna middle class
2. the Muslim (Moor) residents of Jaffna numbering 100,000 persons and the Sinhala resident numbering about 27,000.
3. the lower income Tamil farmers, fisherman, craftsmen and traders.

The Jaffna middle class 

 The Jaffna middle class was among the most affluent in the country, having been specially privileged from colonial times. They had homes in Jaffna but lived mostly in the south where business and professional interests gave more opportunity for making money and gaining influence. The terrorist movement created divided loyalties for them when it became so powerful militarily as to control large tracts of the North and East, even in areas under government control. The 1983 communal riots which affected middle class Tamils also had a negative impact on their perception of the Sri Lanka government’s ability to protect them from unruly mobs of criminal elements. Many of these families migrated abroad but many others continued to live in the south and abandoned their Jaffna homes to the LTTE. Others, whose main interests were in the north and east of the country, paid the LTTE large sums of money (the tax for leaving territory) and left for developed nations in the West, notably, Canada (with its liberal immigration policy), UK, France, Switzerland, Norway and USA. Over three decades, the Tamil diaspora in the West has risen to a million. They continue to remain a powerful political force for the LTTE which is now extinct in Sri Lanka. 

During our visit to Jaffna, we saw thousands of large abandoned bungalows belonging to this affluent class lying in ruins. During the prolonged war, these had been the scene of hand to hand fighting between the LTTE and government forces and the houses had been a cover for fighters. We met a dozen of these expatriate Tamils who had come from Europe and North America to reclaim their property rights with old title deeds. Local officials assured us that their properties would be restored, even though some of these had been taken over by their poor neighbours. These people were primarily interested in establishing their claim to the property and they had no intention of repairing their damaged houses till the areas were cleared of all land mines and the local infrastructure was fully built. It is in the nature of things that the rich will always survive calamities. 

Muslim and Sinhala refugees 

These people were among the most deprived and harassed but the international media and the HR organisations that champion the cause of the Tamils have chosen to ignore them. Unlike the Tamil groups that have powerful connections to important Western politicians, these people have been forgotten both by the Western media and even by the successive governments of Sri Lanka. During the time when the LTTE controlled land in the north and east, they speedily and savagely ethnically cleansed their territory of non-Tamils. The Sinhala resident population and university students were systematically driven out between 1971 and 1981. In October 1990 the 100,000 Muslim residents were given 24 hours to leave permanently and their properties were seized and given to resident Tamils. Those who failed to leave were murdered. The resettlement of these people is still in limbo. They are living still in the south of the country. This tragedy has still not been addressed. 

Low income Tamils 

This group has suffered because of the cruelty and inhumanity of the LTTE and prolonged government neglect of the north. G.G. Ponnambalam, the Tamil political leader who sabotaged Prime Minister D.S. Senanayake’s (first Prime Minister of independent Sri Lanka) efforts to create a Sri Lanka identity by insisting that the Tamils were Dravidians and a separate nation, was yet clever enough to join the government and take the key position of Minister of Industries. He used this position to establish major government industries in the North and East: the Cement Corporation, Paranthan Chemicals Corporation and the Valachennai Paper Corporation. Since Northern Tamil politicians, unlike the Indian Tamils of the Central provinces, refused thereafter to join successive governments and became a permanent opposition, they consequently lost out in public funding for major development projects. While the rest of the country developed, the North in particular was left out as their elected representatives sought only to fight the government, first for federated state and then for a separate Tamil state. The result was that development by-passed Jaffna. 

The cruelty of the LTTE towards its own people after gaining control of Jaffna has been amply documented. They were not interested in economic development. The billions of rupees allocated by the government as food aid were taken by them and food was sold at high profits. Public servants were paid by the government but had to do the bidding of the LTTE. Taxes were levied on every conceivable activity. The youth and children were conscripted and trained for warfare or as suicide bombers. 

In the last stage of the so-called Eelam War IV in 2009, the retreating LTTE military forcibly took along the local population to be used either as fighters or labourers to serve their military and build bunkers and massive defensive earthworks. How many died of ill-treatment by the LTTE and how many were war casualties during the LTTE’s military retreat is unrecorded but many of them are now classified as “missing persons” and are one aspect of the LTTE and Western political campaign against the government which is now held accountable for these missing people. These 300,000 hostages are those who escaped to the government side as the LTTE fought its last unsuccessful battles on the eastern coastline. They became refugees till they were able to resettle in their former villages. 

Post-War reconstruction in Jaffna 

After two years in refugee camps, 85% of the poor Tamils displaced by the war have been re-settled. The major bar to reconstruction is the presence of hundreds of thousands of landmines laid randomly by the retreating LTTE army towards the close of the war. De-mining teams can usually access maps of mined areas when mines are laid by regular armies. The departing LTTE scattered mines at random making de-mining extremely difficult. 

In Jaffna, the two major industrial complexes, the Kankasanthurai Cement factory and the Paranthan Chemicals Corporation have been destroyed. The Cement factory closed when the LTTE murdered the Sinhalese managers at the site. The prospects for future industrial development to absorb the non-farm population and provide managerial jobs for locally qualified personnel (the Jaffna University functioned throughout the war as part of the Sri Lanka university system) depends on government’s ability to quickly develop the infrastructure which is still poor. The government has offered capital and fiscal concessions Colombo businessmen to establish factories in Jaffna. But one such businessman who had done a preliminary of survey of Jaffna told us that felt he should wait till the roads, railways and electricity services improved. 

However, the Jaffna farmers, among the best in the country, have shown their resilience by expanding agricultural production. Agricultural loans in the Jaffna District were the highest for any district in the country in 2010 and the carefully tended farmlands are now among the best in the country. 

The fishing industry has revived with the restrictions on deep-sea fishing removed after the end of the war. But it has still to catch up with the industry elsewhere in the country where large locally-made trawlers have now replaced the old catamarans and small craft with limited capacity. The industry needs more investment. But the Jaffna fishermen are also resourceful. Travelling the five mile long causeway across the sea to the island of Karaitivu, we saw enclosed fish and prawn farms on either side as far as the eye could see. 

Developments in Vadamarachchi East 

We visited the Assistant Government Agent (AGA, chief local area government officer) of Vadamarachchi East, Mr. N. Thirulinganathan, to discuss resettlement issues in his area. His domain covered 18 Grama Niladari divisions (village clusters). He said that people in 11 divisions had been fully resettled while 7 divisions are awaiting re-settlement. He said that the delay was due to landmines which are still being cleared in these divisions. Except for a small area in the northern part, most of the other lands were sandy and unsuitable for cultivation and fishing was the major occupation. He said that larger loans to fishermen were required to enable them to obtain bigger boats and better fishing nets. In the meanwhile, one of the few major industries in the area was mining sand from the numerous sand dunes to supply the local construction industry. The AGA had the authority to issue sand mining permits which were used by small operators as well as a giant operator, Maheshwari Foundation, which employed hundreds of tractors. 

Role of the Sri Lanka Army 

The Sri Lanka Army still plays a key role in Jaffna as security is still an issue after the war which lasted three decades. Overseas Tamil political groups in the USA and UK have formed Tamil Eelam Governments in Exile and threaten to resume the LTTE cause in Sri Lanka. While some High Security Zones under Army control have been handed back to the civilian authorities, others remain. Regular army patrols were stopped about six months ago but after a spate of robberies, murders and other activities by criminal elements the army resumed its patrols at the request of local residents. 

Unlike the common scenario where military presence is used to intimidate the local population, the army in Jaffna is now on a high public relations mode. All outside vehicles entering Jaffna through Elephant Pass are checked by security personnel and given written and verbal instructions to be polite and civil to the local population and to drive with extreme courtesy. I have never come across such an effort in any other conflict zones of the world which I have visited as a business traveller. 

In the Amban Grama Niladari Division in Vadamarrachchi East, we found that the army personnel were building 500 houses for local residents with money contributed by soldiers. Presently, 150 houses are complete and occupied. We visited several households here and talked to the occupants and they all had a good word for the army. This new relationship bodes well for the future. 

Adequate good quality housing is still a problem in the settlement areas. An Indian government aid project was to build 50,000 houses and construct the destroyed railway lines from Vavuniya to Jaffna[3]. The work still remains to be done. 

[1] Quoted from the study by Drs. Philip Marfleet and Dawn Chatty of the Oxford University’s Refugee Study Centre accessible at http://www.rsc.ox.ac.uk/publications/policy-briefings/RSCPB4-Iraqsrefugees.pdf 

[2] http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/special/2011-05/10/c_13864797.htm 

[3] The LTTE had dismantled the railway and used the steel lines to reinforce their military bunkers.

Kenneth Abeywickrama

13 May 2011 

The China bogey

The recent statement by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that the economy of China will probably overtake the USA in overall Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in five years has the pseudo-economist talk show hosts of the Western media agog with their analyses. The Chinese media and government, meanwhile, remain silent except to maintain that China is still a developing country with a long way ahead. Both parties are only partially truthful.

 The rapid economic expansion of a developing country and its massive levels of poverty reduction should, normally, be welcomed. But the world economy and its politics is still within the control of the former Western imperial powers who still retain their white supremacist attitudes and strive to dominate the non-European world by economic manipulation of currencies and political manipulation of the mass media and international organisations. When Germany or Australia grows, it is hailed as an important contribution to the world. But if a non-European country grows, the media pundits and the pseudo economists will find reasons to decry it and claim that the growth was achieved using unfair practices. When Japan began its rise after World War 2 they faced the same hurdle till it decided to become a part of the Western imperial team. But China is not likely to subjugate itself in this manner. And Indians must remember that the praise showered on them as the prospective second largest economy of the world (the Indian GDP is less than half that of China and any prospect of it catching up with China is too remote) is only because of the West resents the growth of China much more.

 Calculation and miscalculations

The expression GDP is parroted without the majority of us having any idea of what it constitutes. Gross domestic production cannot be measured by taking the value of all products and services because much of these are the myriad activities that go into the final product that is sold to consumers. So the calculation is based on the consumption of the final product or service either by consumers or the government. Since such sales are subject to taxes which have to be declared to the government revenue department, a calculation of their value is possible. About 68% of the US GDP comprises private consumption and about 27% is public consumption.

 There arise immediate problems when we compare different national GDPs. Actual costs differ from country to country. On the whole, costs in poorer developing countries are much less than in rich developing countries. A pound of wheat bread that costs US$2.50 in a developed country will cost US$0.50 in a poor country. Since incomes and costs in developing countries are lower, the costs of comparable services will be much less. Many developing countries in Asia, including China, also have some forms of price control to prevent excessive profiteering by certain businesses. For example, a course of antibiotics that costs US$40 in the USA costs a little as US$5.0 in India or Sri Lanka, even though it may be produced and sold by the same transnational corporation.

 The United Nations and World Bank statistical data now tries to overcome these national price differentials by translating costs to their purchasing power parity by using a concept of “the law of one price”. This gives a more realistic assessment of value as it exists among different nations.

 But even then the GDP of a country is not a real indicator of a country’s economic health. When we assess a company’s worth we take into account both assets and liabilities. When liabilities are also factored into the economies of some countries with seemingly high levels of prosperity, they are now seen to be unsustainable.

 The following table gives a brief glimpse of the GDP figures converted in this manner plus the national debt levels in actual US dollars (there may be slight variations in debt levels as data was drawn from sources at various times in 2010).

Future prosperity

The Republican opposition in the US Congress has suddenly discovered that the approved US debt ceiling of $14.5 trillion should not be increased further as the rising national debt is unsustainable, though the Republican Party itself was responsible for most of the debt while they were office since the presidency of Ronald Reagan. The rating agency, Moody, has declared that the US economy will be downgraded from its premium status if measures are not taken to curb the debt within three months.

 The US, the UK and some EU nations are living largely on debt-based prosperity. Their consumers and the governments are both enjoying an extravagance based on continuous borrowing. They are akin to the village spendthrift who puts on a grand show by ever increasing borrowings from more thrifty neighbours.

 How was this possible? It all goes back to the dominant role of Western industrial nations after World War 2. The dominance of the US economy after the war allowed it to establish the US dollar as the international currency at the Bretton Woods conference in 1944. The British pound sterling was also an international currency. The euro was created by many EU nations in 1999 and also established as an international currency. So other nations of the world had to buy these currencies both to trade internationally and keep as currency reserves in Central Banks. This allows these privileged countries to create excessive money selling bonds, securities and different treasury bills. But extravagant money creation to pay for profligate spending will eventually come home to roost. Despite promises to rein in spending, there is no evidence that meaningful actions will be taken. Compulsive spending is an addiction for which there is no known cure.

Foreword to Restorative Justice

 Terrorism is a major feature in the developing countries of South and East Asia, disrupting civil society and wreaking violence on the civilian population: in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines and Xinjiang in China. These are internal law and order problems though all these terrorist movements have external actors who are encouraging, funding, arming and even training these terrorist movements for geo-political reasons. The long running terrorist movement in Sri Lanka by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) began in 1976, funded and armed principally from external sources, proved to be one of the deadliest. The CIA dubbed it the equal of Al Qaeda, which it bettered by creating an army, navy and air force with external support and encouragement, creating even its own mini-state. It boasted the largest army of young suicide bombers. But on 18 May, 2009, the Sri Lankan security forces, after a two year military campaign, wiped out the LTTE military machine and its military leaders. It was the first and only real military victory to completely eliminate a terrorist movement in a country and secure lasting peace in our present times.

In the face of defeat in the final military campaign, the LTTE, with criminal lack of concern for the local civilian population around them, rounded up around 300,000 civilians of all ages and used them as hostages. Using this human shield, LTTE artillery fired and bombarded the security forces with impunity and asked their powerful international friends to persuade the government to give up its offensive so as not to risk the hostages. The security forces offensive was carried to a successful conclusion, with all possible care for the nearly 290,000 civilians who were rescued by the security forces at great cost to themselves. In what was principally jungle warfare using infantry (not aerial bombardments, as in other wars), 6,500 security personnel lost their lives in the entire campaign and 25,000 were injured. But Sri Lanka was vilified for its achievement and faces international censure by the West.

 The author of this article examines the legal implications of the international inquiry that the United Nations Secretary-General has initiated, primarily targeting the Sri Lanka government and military for its unique achievement in ending a terrorist movement and instituting a wide-ranging rehabilitation process in areas controlled and devastated by the terrorist movement.

 Restorative Justice is better than Accountability

 Contributed by Neville Laduwahetty

 The United Nations Secretary General (UNSG) has appointed a panel of experts “to advise him on the issue of accountability with regard to any alleged violations of international human rights and humanitarian law during the final stages of the conflict” (statement by the spokesperson for the UNSG on Sri Lanka).   This final stage of the conflict could be characterized as either an armed conflict or as an internal law and order situation.  If it designated an armed conflict, international humanitarian law prevails, while if it is designated an internal law and order situation, human rights laws apply. Both sets of laws cannot apply simultaneously.  Consequently, there is ambiguity in the statement as to which law applies. Under the circumstances, establishing accountability becomes a flawed exercise from the outset.

 Pressure to appoint such a panel was initiated by prominent NGOs and elected representatives of governments whose political capital remains the Tamil diaspora resident in Western countries. One such NGO was The International Crisis Group (ICG) which called for an international inquiry into alleged crimes committed during the last five months of the conflict, in a report which stated that there were “reasonable grounds to believe the Sri Lankan security forces committed war crimes with top government and military leaders potentially responsible. There is evidence of war crimes committed by the LTTE and its leaders as well, but most of them were killed and will never face justice” (the Island newspaper, May 18, 2010).

 This report by the ICG became the basis for a debate in the British Parliament during which Labour MP, Siobhan McDonough, “wanted the present government to press ahead with what the previous government had been doing by various means – to pile pressure on the Government of Sri Lanka to go for and international inquiry” (Asian Tribune, June 17, 2010).

 US Supreme Court ruling

The recent ruling by the United States Supreme Court in a case that weighed free speech against national security will have an impact on this decision by the UN to appoint an expert panel. In its ruling “…the court voted 6 to 3 to uphold a federal law banning ‘material support’ to foreign terrorist organizations. That ban holds, the Court explained, even when the offerings are not money or weapons but things such as “expert advice or assistance” or “training’ intended to instruct in international law or appeals to the United Nations” (The Washington Post, June 22, 2010).  While this ruling would not have a direct bearing outside the US, it certainly would affect those in the LTTE diaspora based in the US and others in the US associated with activities that promote post-conflict agendas of the LTTE.  This in turn may affect the enthusiasm of LTTE diaspora supporters outside the US such as Labour MPs in the UK when they realize that there would not have the support of their US counterparts. This is natural, considering the influence the US yields in global affaires, particularly when it comes to issues relating to terrorism.

 The case in question was “Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project”. A Washington Post report (June 22, 2010), stated: “Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. in writing the majority opinion said that those challenging the ban “simply disagree with the considered judgment of Congress and the Executive that providing material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization – even seemingly benign support – bolsters the terrorist activities of that organization”. The law, Robert wrote, “is on its face, a preventive measure – it criminalizes not terrorist attacks themselves, but aid that makes the attack more likely to occur”.  All can agree that money is ‘fungible’, Roberts wrote: funds sent to groups for humanitarian aid could free up money that could be used for violent ends.  But he said the same was true of “material support”.  “It also importantly helps lend legitimacy to foreign terrorist groups – legitimacy that makes it easier for those groups to persist, to recruit members and to raise funds – all of which facilitate more terrorist attacks”. He said that “Under material support statute, plaintiffs may say anything they wish on any topic.  They may speak and write freely about the PKK and LTTE, the governments of Turkey and Sri Lanka, human rights and international law.  They may advocate before the United Nations.  But they may not coordinate the speech with the groups on the terrorist list” he said.

 This ruling makes those in the US who would have participated in efforts to “coordinate” with the LTTE to be in violation of the judgment by the US Supreme Court.  Furthermore, by appointing a panel of experts, the UNSG has failed to recognize the concerns of the US Supreme Court regarding “lending legitimacy” to the LTTE, an entity that continues to be designated as a terrorist organization.  However, it is unlikely that the UNSG would have acted without acquiescence of officials in the US.  Such acquiescence may be the result of efforts by LTTE supporters to “coordinate” with organs of the US Government to internationalize and lend legitimacy to their campaign against the Sri Lanka government.  Whatever may have happened in the past, the US Supreme Court ruling is bound to affect future efforts by LTTE supporters to “coordinate” with organs of the US Government as well as others in the US.  

 UN expert Panel

The statement issued by the UN states that “It will look into the modalities, applicable international standards and comparative experiences with regard to accountability process, taking into account the nature and scope of any alleged violations…”.  Considering the uniqueness of the situation which is without parallel in any previous internal conflict, and where over 300,000 civilians along with thousands of LTTE cadres were held hostage by the LTTE as a human shield behind fortifications, there are no “international standards and comparative experiences” by which the expert panel can establish accountability. 

 The circumstances that prevailed without precedent during the final stages of the conflict caused the Sri Lankan Government to improvise strategies to meet unique challenges presented by the LTTE.  Similar unique challenges are faced by the NATO forces in Afghanistan, and they too are compelled to invent responses on a daily basis.  To assess accountability under circumstances that have no parallel is not possible in the absence of established guidelines.  Therefore, what would be meaningful is to use the challenges Sri Lanka had to face along with challenges in other theatres for the express purpose of developing appropriate guidelines for the benefit of member states when they have to deal with situations such as the use of civilians as human shields; humanitarian needs of civilians held hostage; suicide bombers disguised as surrendering soldiers; firing of artillery from buildings falsely claimed to be hospitals and schools and a host of other subterfuges adopted by non-state actors during today’s asymmetrical, non-international conflicts.

The statement issued on behalf of the UNSG also states: “The Secretary General remains convinced that accountability is an essential foundation for durable peace and reconciliation in Sri Lanka”.  Whatever the UNSG’s conviction, the experience of 17 member states that have had Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRC) was that Restorative Justice fosters Reconciliation better than accountability when it comes to internal conflicts.  It is this conviction that caused the TRC of South Africa to grant amnesty at least to those who sought amnesty for the violations committed by them.  Other TRCs granted a general amnesty to the perpetrators of violations based on the conviction that it was a better foundation on which to build the healing process of reconciliation than processes of accountability. 

 Conclusion

Restorative Justice is a better foundation for a durable peace and reconciliation than accountability.  Restorative Justice is an approach that focuses on the needs of victims, offenders and community instead of accountability that attempts to punish only the offenders leaving the victims unattended except from the satisfaction from the punishment meted out to the offender.  Therefore, if the UNSG is serious about establishing the “foundation for peace and reconciliation”, he should encourage the Government of Sri Lanka to set up processes that fosters Restorative Justice, because it benefits both victims and offenders through solutions that promote repair, reconciliation and rebuilding of relationships.  

 Processes of accountability on the other hand detract attempts at reconciliation.  By advocating an accountability process the UNSG has fallen victim to the agendas of the LTTE diaspora and their supporters.  The agenda of the LTTE diaspora is to obstruct reconciliation because maintaining an irreconcilable relationship is their raison d‘etre in order to justify Tamil Eelam.  For their supporters, punishing those responsible for ending the conflict is sweet justice, judging from the limits they were prepared to go to in order to save the LTTE leadership.  Under the circumstances, the UNSG’s action regarding establishing accountability is tantamount to providing material support to the LTTE, a banned terrorist organization.

Muammar Gaddafi in Sri Lanka (1976)

by Maj.-Gen. Lalin Fernando, Sri Lanka Army, Retired

Colonel Gaddafi visited Sri Lanka in 1976 for the Non-Aligned Conference in 1976 and was an immediate sensation because of his maverick behaviour. His first personal contact with Sri Lankan officials was at the previous Non-Aligned Meeting in Algeria. Here he sent out an invitation to Mrs. Bandaranayake, then Prime Minister, to have afternoon tea with him. Nonplussed by the extraordinary invitation, she declined and forsook the opportunity to tap into the Libyan leader’s legendary munificence which went out generously and without restraint, albeit mainly to support revolutionary movements, especially in Africa. His behaviour during his short time in Sri Lanka would have shown anyone that the Colonel was suffering from a major mental imbalance. But a six foot Sri Lankan artillery officer who was his liaison officer, Major Ranjith Wanigasundera,  alone tried what many world leaders failed to do. He battled Gaddafi eccentricities but eventually had to admit that Gaddafi was incorrigible.

Gaddafi’s arrival in Sri Lanka was preceded by an ill advised if not crazy advance party of eighty five excited Libyans who arrived at Katunayake Airport without passports in a then state of the art Boeing 707 jet. They had just a sheet of paper listing their names, and in Arabic to boot. After much discussion at the highest levels it was decided to refuse them entry and quarantine them in the nearby Air Force base. A huffed Gaddafi arrived the next day in another Boeing. He ignored the traditional 100 strong Guard of Honour and the Sri Lankan Minister who was to meet him and headed straight for his transport. He was fast tracked to his hotel in Colombo with Major Wanigasundera, his liaison officer, and police security, leaving the Protocol Division and the Security Forces officers responsible for the arrival ceremonies bemused.

A hundred other Libyans too arrived in another plane. They had absolutely no role in the hundred and one (101) heads of state conference but were to make their presence felt satisfying the sensation starved multitudes in Colombo by their eccentric behaviour. This lot however had passports. The previously quarantined Libyans were sent back in the same plane via Karachi.

 All the heads of state and delegations were housed in the then newly built Oberoi Hotel and the Inter-Continental hotels except for Mrs Indira Gandhi (in Temple Trees, the Prime Minister’s residence), Hoari Boumedienne (also a colonel when he took over power in Algeria and was deposed later) who had been head of the last Non-Aligned Conference in Algeria (at the luxurious Acland Guest House) and Marshal Josip Broz Tito whose presidential yacht was moored in the Colombo harbour.

Gaddafi possibly took Colombo if not the Non-Aligned Conference by the tail outside the Conference, even though world renowned figures like Indira Gandhi, Tito, Anver Sadat, Archbishop Makarios, Afghanistan’s King, Sadham Hussein, Hafez al Assad, Jamaica’s  charismatic Michael Manley amongst others were famously present. His arrival at the Oberoi Hotel saw almost all the ladies of the hotel staff, travel counters and shops mulling around to get a look at him. This happened every time he moved into and from the hotel. He had striking looks accentuated by his flashing green eyes and was dressed in flowing Bedouin robes. He in turn did not hesitate to have a good look at the ladies there and also when he moved around Colombo.

His first impulsive if irrational act was to demand arrangements be made immediately for him to visit Boumedienne, long after the state banquet given by the President of Sri Lanka, William Gopallawa, ended.  The time was well after midnight. All the other delegates had long gone to bed. Boumedienne, despite the late hour, had been cajoled to agree. There was no way that Gaddafi’s  security escorts and VIP convoy of vehicles could be rustled up at that hour as they had been dismissed many hours before and would be available only for the next day’s sessions. He insisted. He had however not bargained for Major Wanigasundera’s response. A stubborn stickler for protocol, the Major was adamant that he would not make such arrangements as it went against all the protocol and security arrangements. Gaddafi however had his way even if it was by hiring some Mercedes Benz cars instead. These were immediately made available thanks to the organizational acumen and far sightedness of the Foreign Ministry that had placed tour operators on 24 hour duty at the hotels. No one, not even the other wary Arab leaders who had long  humoured him, cared to know what was discussed that night in ‘secret’. The Sri Lankan Major, in retrospect, was one of the few persons who had stood up to Gaddafi without blinking. Gaddafi made no complaint.

The following days saw the over hundred Libyan ‘supporters’ touring every part of the capital city distributing big glossy photos of Gaddafi like it was confetti. They also tried to buy every single parrot that was available for sale in the country. They were seen everywhere in trucks carrying an apparently inexhaustible supply of parrots in cages every day while dishing out Gaddafi photos.

While no one can remember what Gaddafi said at the conference, it was in the committee rooms that he made his mark. Every insurgent and revolutionary movement around the world sought a meeting with him. He was rumoured to be dishing out money lavishly to them. The gigantic Joshua Nkomo, who must have been the largest built insurgent/revolutionary in the world, was most visible amongst others as well known. Gaddafi’s meetings were preceded by his rambling discourses that often prevented other countries that had booked the committee rooms from using them at the times given. On one particular day this delay became unacceptable to many. Many liaison officers to other delegations, together with Major Wanigasundera, tried to impress on Gaddafi’s staff that other country delegations had to use the room as well but to no avail. Someone sent word to Col. Cyril Ranatunge who was one of the coordinating officers on duty but in plain clothes. He came forward sure that Gaddafi’s military body guards (who were all men then, unlike now when all forty of them are supposed to be virgin women), would listen to him. They being fluent only in Libyan Arabic could not read the impressive details on Ranatunge’s identity card and would not budge. The small made Ranatunge then decided to push past a strongly built son of the desert descended from the likes of Hannibal who defeated the Roman Scipio. That was a mistake. Suddenly Ranatunge went flying as the Red bereted Libyan shoved back hard.  The liaison officer for Nigeria remonstrated with the Libyan and shouted ‘Hey man, that is a Sri Lanka Colonel’. The visibly moved Libyan hurried to apologise profusely in Arabic and gave way.

Gaddafi also asked to speak to the local Muslim community. Those assembled in the Holiday Inn Hotel were prominent, well-heeled but elderly leaders of that community. Gaddafi had two special messages for them. He wanted to see only younger Muslims next time and wanted them all to produce about 10 children in each family to make up for the demographic imbalance in the country which has only a small Muslim minority!

One thing that was very apparent was that Gaddafi took every step to avoid meeting Egypt’s Anver Sadat. Many Arabs, however wealthy and powerful they are, have a complex about Egyptians. They were also wary about the maverick Gaddafi.

When arrangements for Gaddafi’s departure were made, Major Wanigasundera having had enough, delegated his deputy, Captain Asoka Amunugama (Army Volunteer Force-later Major General) to do so. Gaddafi’s remaining assorted Bedouins arrived some time later at the hotel to see their leader off. They were highly agitated when told that he had already left. They scrambled into hired lorries and hared off to the airport.

There was no doubt Gaddafi was certifiable. What was surprising was that so many world leaders, despite their misgivings, dealt with if not exonerated him, no doubt lured by the oil wealth Gaddafi commanded. He wanted at different times to turn Libya into a socialist paradise, unite the Arabs into one huge pan-Arabic state and latterly thought of himself as the King of Africa. (He dressed latterly in African, not Arab robes). He supported terrorists and global terrorism and was guilty of arming them, including the IRA. He waged war on neighbours. He spent his nation’s wealth lavishly to improve his international image while his own people were limited to state hand outs to survive. Yet the Libyan per capita income was said to be US$ 14,400.

He was despised by many Libyans and not trusted by his fellow Arab leaders, Islamists and even his own military. He not strangely had friends in Cuba and Venezuela. He isolated himself, distrusting, persecuting and murdering so many of his own countrymen. While there is little proof that he made himself rich, his family members had a stranglehold on Libya’s wealth. He himself lived a simple life. He did not drink, smoke, gormandise or womanise. His preference was for living in a tent. He promoted himself from Captain to the rank only of Colonel, even though he was Commander-in-Chief. (He was serving as a Captain in the Army Signals when he led the bloodless coup that deposed 72 year old King Idris). The elements were so mixed in him that no one knew what he was trying to achieve, especially when he talked, sometimes four to eight hours on the go in an Arabic dialect few outside Libya comprehended. He was responsible for the Lockerbie air crash that killed 270 people. The cracking point for the Libyans was reached this month after 42 years of repressive, dictatorial brutal and completely mad rule.

The lesson that is clear and not only in Egypt and Libya, is that military men who overturn governments by force eventually become infinitely worse than the people they had overthrown. Gaddafi was referred to as a  ‘mad dog’ by President Reagan. The sad thing is that despite countless examples of dictatorships becoming rotten, there are still people in impoverished Third World countries who like a flutter of dictatorial rule to win back/sustain their personal ill-gotten wealth, privileges and power. Unfortunately, Western leaders back most such leaders if they have oil and mineral wealth to share. Gaddafi’s disappearance, as with Middle Eastern or other dictators being deposed by people’s power, will not be grieved. In 1976 he was in need of psychiatric help. Today he has declared genocide on his own people and faces awesome retribution. Even our Major Wanigasundera could not have prevented that!

Foreign Aid & Economic Transformation:

The Case of Sudan

“One should attach enough importance to giving aid and send more envoys ….”  Sun Tzu (Chinese military strategist, 500 B.C.), on the need to control strategic regions, as interpreted by General Tao Hanzhang of the Chinese Peoples’ Liberation Army in his book, Sun Tzu’s Art of War, The Modern Chinese Interpretation, English edition published by Main Street, a division of Sterling Publishing Co., New York, p 86

 Sudan, then and now

When I visited Sudan in 1996 it was a poor Third World country despite all the assistance provided by international agencies and Western aid programs. Khartoum was a dull city with dilapidated buildings from British colonial times. The twin city of Omdurman was a gigantic slum and had a vast dusty bazaar with camel and donkey carts. Outside the cities, drought had reduced harvests and high food prices had led to hunger and malnutrition. There were no signs of economic progress.

 Up to 1999 Sudan depended on IMF/World Bank advice and foreign loans from Western countries and the IMF/World Bank duo. To obtain these funds it had to adhere to fixed guidelines and targets that characterised the Structural Adjustment Programmes of the Washington Consensus[1]: privatize public enterprises, remove subsidies[2] and liberalise imports, reduce corporate taxes, reduce import duties and liberalise imports, restrict bank credit, increase interest rates, reduce social programs and cut public expenditure. By 1990 the country had external debts of over $21 billion and was defaulting on payments and had little to show for the loans or Western inspired programs. This is an excerpt from my report of 1996[3].

 “Sudan is among the least developed countries in the world with a GNP of US$10.1 billion (1990) and a per capita GNP of US$401 (1991). The economy is weighed down by an external debt of over US$20 billion requiring a debt service of US$21 million per annum with arrears of US$1.7 billion to the IMF alone. Government measures to liberalise the currency exchange rates to allow free-floating exchange rates and reduce government spending , coupled with increased food production in the last year, reduced inflation from highs of 100% per annum to a current rate of around 65-70%. The budget for 1995 also reduced corporate taxes, land purchase taxes and some import duties. However, Sudan’s inability to meet the IMF demands for loan payments led to a suspension of the Structural Adjustment Facility which the IMF has again refused to reinstate this year. The withdrawal of the IMF assistance also means that Sudan has lost the support of other bi-lateral aid donors that now follow the IMF lead.”

 That was in 1996. When we arrived in 2007 the country was transformed. The GDP had increased almost five times in the ten years and stood at US$49.7 billion. There was a massive construction boom in Northern Sudan, despite the tribal wars in the Western Region and the uneasy peace in Southern Sudan where the principal rebel group had joined the government. In Khartoum and Omdurman there were modern 4-6 lane highways, over and under-passes on highways, several new bridges over the River Nile, modern buildings and supermarkets and many other constructions were coming up. The roads were filled with new cars and trucks, mostly from the local Hyundai car manufacturing plant and the Mitsubishi truck plant. Foreign investment was flowing in from the Middle East and Asia. Khartoum had the appearance of a boom town. This is an extract from the introduction to my report of 2007[4].

 “The economy of Sudan has received a boost due to the peace treaty with the Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement (SPLM) and petroleum exports which, since 1999, has become the engine for economic growth. The oil industry has revived light industry and the export processing zones and helped stabilize the currency exchange rate. Sudan has been implementing IMF macro-economic reforms since 1997 and the economy is generally on a sound footing. Consequently, GDP growth is in the range of 9-12% annually and, despite some serious imbalances due to deficit budgeting and Balance of Payments problems, the future prospects are brighter. These economic imbalances could be eventually resolved with an increase in industrial production and exports. There are some other favourable signals. Direct Foreign Investment (FDI) in Sudan is increasing and the levels are high for a developing country in Africa. FDI in 2005 was US$2.305 billion and in 2006 was US$3.533 billion.”

 Both projects we worked on in Sudan were of minor significance to Sudan but being UN consultants in the country gave us the opportunity to have personal meetings with policy makers at the highest levels: cabinet ministers, secretaries of ministries and heads of departments, chambers of commerce and top corporate executives.

 Sudan’s economic transformation

What was the secret of the dramatic economic transformation? Without a doubt oil was the major catalyst for change. Oil extraction and exports commenced in 1999 and by 2007 Sudan was extracting close to 475,000 barrels a day. With the new concessions that were being given out in 2007, it is expected to reach one million barrels a day in the next decade, making Sudan a major player in the oil market which is seeing an endless escalation of market prices. But this happy situation did not take place till Western corporations and aid agencies abandoned Sudan (except for much publicised Western aid to refugees in South and Western Sudan), deeming it a pariah state that was grossly violating human rights, thus providing the opportunity for Asian and Middle Eastern states to participate in Sudan’s economic development.

 The story of Sudan’s oil needs to be told as we had the opportunity to meet the four leading corporate players in the business to seek their views on vocational training needs: China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), PETRONAS of Malaysia, ONGC Videsh of India and the Sudanese corporation SUDAPET. All four corporations were working with the Sudanese Greater Nile Petroleum Corporation (GNPOC) which was given the operation of the pipelines and also recruited non-executive workers for the industry on behalf of the oil companies.

Oil exploration started with the US oil corporation, Chevron, in 1974. In 1984 an attack by the Southern rebels led to the death of four Chevron employees and relations with Sudan gradually soured. The Americans left and were replaced by the Canadian company, Talisman Energy. This company was sued a few years later by a US human rights organization for “supporting a country that violated human rights” and they left under US pressure, selling their shares eventually to ONGC Videsh Ltd. of India in 2001.

 The departure of Western corporations, the US trade embargo and the constant demonization of Sudan by Western governments provided the opportunity for the Asians: the Chinese, the Malaysians and Indians. Their approach to business was markedly different from that of Westerners. Instead of being arrogant and dictatorial, the Asian companies worked in close collaboration with the government. Though the Asians brought in the investment and the expertise, financed the oil drilling and constructed the pipelines, they gave a Sudanese company to operate the pipelines and also recruit and supply the non-executive workers. The Asian companies have set up technical training schools to train prospective employees and send higher level staff to their own countries for further training. The Chinese funded, constructed and equipped what is the best and the largest vocational training school and gave it to the Khartoum State education department to manage.

 Increased oil revenues and vastly improving infrastructure is making Sudan a prime destination for foreign investment in Africa. But Sudan has still a long way to go before it becomes a mature developed economy. The Sudanese economy, apart from the oil industry and foreign investment, is being driven by an active private sector. Governance and the public administration are still in a weak state. During our work in 2007, efforts to obtain basic data on economic performance were usually futile. During visits to government departments and ministries we would often find that most officers were absent from their desks and very little work was being done. Government offices were ill-kept and shabby and only the office of the cabinet minister was kept in proper order. Computerisation was minimal. Yet the available staff were always friendly and tried their best to be helpful.

 The longer term prognosis for Sudan is good. With rising affluence and a greater demand for skilled workers, the present disparities will diminish. Affluence is bringing hope and a new sense of confidence and pride to both the government and the people. This change will be easier if the West is less critical of the Sudanese and takes a lesson from the Asians: that more can be achieved by friendly cooperation than by dictation and belligerence. Since Sudan’s vast oil resources are now operated by Asians, this amount of goodwill will not happen soon. It will also require a fundamental change in Western attitudes to developing countries which prefer tutelage to partnership.

 Contrasting forms of aid

The Chinese, who had 70% of the oil facilities at the time of our visit, had earned the highest reputation among all foreigners. It was common to hear people say “China is our best friend”. Chinese goods flooded local markets but the Chinese kept a low profile and their presence was hardly visible to the public. China is increasing the capacity of the Khartoum oil refinery to handle one million barrels a day and built the oil pipelines from the South to the refinery and to the Red Sea port. But instead of controlling these pipelines, these were handed over to a Sudanese government corporation, the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Co., for operations and the foreign oil companies pay this company for its services.

 Contrast this with the situation in another country that I worked in as a resource person on a Commonwealth Secretariat training course on public enterprise management, Nigeria. Nigeria has the highest levels of oil production in Africa and Western oil companies that operate on the basis of a cosy relationship with corrupt local politicians are hated in the local areas where they have their facilities. The violence runs into regular attacks on oil company executives and facilities and armed retaliation by the government security agencies. Now the Chinese are making quiet inroads into this country with generous offers of grants, loans and investments[5], much to the chagrin of Western powers who demand that Chinese assistance to Africa should be conditional to human rights and improvements in governance. These moral conditions do not apply where Western interests are involved in the worst dictatorships in Africa, the Middle East and South America.

 What was visible was a fundamental difference in the approach of the IMF and World Bank and the Western aid agencies to developing countries and the operations of Asian governments and corporations. The Bretton Woods Twins came with a list of pre-conceived conditions of their own which they customarily applied to all aid recipient countries, often making the recipient countries economically weaker and debt-ridden. The position of aid-giver to aid-recipient was a form of master-servant relationship, with the recipient having little say and being subject to punishment by having aid withheld for any failure to meet compliance or deadlines.

 The anger of the Sudanese government against this kind of treatment was palpable during our visit in 1995/6. When we called on the Minister of Industry, Hon. Badr al-Din Suleiman, he burst into a tirade against aid agencies. When he paused for breath after about ten minutes, my colleague, Prof. Husnu Can Basar from Turkey, intervened and said that both us came from developing countries and that we understood and empathised with the country’s problems and were only there to help in our own small way. The minister was mollified and apologised for his seeming rudeness.

 Some of the conditions imposed on Sudan were helpful initially. Sudan had  very controlled pseudo-socialist economy of the type favoured by many developing countries in the post-World War 2 era. We noted in our study of the pharmaceutical industry that the liberalising of some imports and the freer availability of foreign exchange for industrialists and businesses helped industrial growth to some extent. But many other conditions provided the very basis for the failure of the development program. The restrictions on credit and high interest rates, though it reduced inflation, severely restricted industrial growth and local investment. But more importantly, the reduction of public expenditure and revenue (as a result of reduced taxes and import duties) undercut the very basis for development.

 It is recognised today that investment cannot be lured by low taxes, duty free manufacturing zones or investor seminars in Europe (a favourite tool of the UN system and the World Bank to attract Western investment to the Third World). Investment generally seeks countries with good infrastructure, an educated workforce and reasonably good governance. All these require planning for the longer term and investments by developing country governments on improving infrastructure, education, health care and improved public services. The investments required are very high. Without adequate public revenue or external aid for these areas, these long gestation projects are not possible.

 The result was that Sudan received stop gap assistance to survive but could not develop the capacity for sustainable growth as there was no investment or industrial expansion. It also became heavily indebted.

 In the final analysis, it is not oil but the changes in the global economy that led to the transformation of Sudan and other developing countries. The economic change in Sudan is the best example of the changes in Africa resulting from the changing world economy. Up to close to the end of the 20^th century, finance was the monopoly of the industrialised West and, with the control of the World Bank and the IMF largely in the hands of the US and EU administrations, they dictated foreign aid and development policies. But in the first decade of the 21^st century, the sovereign funds of the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries has completely overshadowed the external resources of the World Bank/IMF and the West.

 Chinese role in African development

The historically unprecedented economic growth of China has made it the main market for most of the world’s raw material exports. Africa, heavily dependent on commodity sales, saw commodity prices decline over four decades, leading to increased poverty, not development, despite all the aid given by the aid agencies. But China’s trade with Africa has reversed the situation and has been the catalyst for rising growth in Africa. According to the World Bank itself, global development is now more dependent on China than on the USA which is still the world’s largest economy. African economists, who have long pleaded that “Trade, not Aid” was what they needed for development, are now getting their wish.

 But this is not the only change in the developing country scene. While the US, the World Bank, the IMF, and to a lesser extent the EU countries, tread heavily in developing countries of Asia, Africa and South America, China with its larger resources, walks lightly, seeking cooperation and friendship without conditions. Chinese trade is supplemented by substantial grants and the construction of essential infrastructure using Chinese expertise. In Sudan, apart from building the oil infrastructure, China was building the Merowe hydro-electric complex in 2007 at a cost of US$2.0 billion which would supply all of Sudan’s electricity needs by end-2008. When I arrived in Sudan on a project in 2009, the Merowe hydro-electric were already operating, providing electricity for most of the country.

 The World Bank/IMF twins are being increasingly marginalised throughout the developing world while the angry chorus of criticism of China is ever rising in the West.

 Good Public relations are high on the Chinese agenda. Unlike Western aid donors, they do not publicise their aid provisions. In fact, much of their aid budget is unreported though it is acknowledged that the volume of Chinese aid to developing countries exceeds that of the World Bank/IMF. Chinese working in foreign countries maintain a very low profile. When we visited the offices of the oil companies in Sudan, the CNPC was the one company where the front office was only manned by Sudanese nationals who talked to us and the Chinese were invisible. Though hundreds of thousands of Chinese work in developing countries, there presence is hardly noticeable as they keep to themselves.

 Several examples illustrate the fundamental difference between Chinese aid and Western aid. Western aid is often given in measly sums, for limited purposes, after much negotiation and without much involvement by the local authorities in the final aid package. Furthermore, promises of aid given at highly publicized aid consortium conferences rarely materialise as promised, with only a small percentage of the promised aid being delivered. Aid to Haiti after the 2009 earthquake is the most recent and glaring example. Chinese aid is always generous, comes without strings and involves the local authorities who are given the lead role. China is also welcomed because it provides valuable assistance outside business and economic activity. Throughout Africa, China is gifting modern hospitals, cultural centres and public infrastructure and coming up with generous loans for infrastructure development. They come as friends, not stern teachers. They have also written off bad debts without the usual round of publicity that accompanies such events.

 A common criticism in the West is that aid fails in Africa due to widespread corruption[6] and the incompetence of governments[7]. This is due to the structure of World Bank/IMF and other Western aid projects that allocate large sums to consulting services and contractors where local officials have the opportunity to interfere. Such problems do not occur with Chinese or Indian aid as these countries send their own corporations to take full responsibility for the project planning and implementation so that local interference is kept to a minimum. When the Chinese build an infrastructure project, they bring their own experts, equipment, materials and take full responsibility for project completion. Unlike Western project contractors, the Chinese never have cost over-runs and finish projects ahead of schedule. And the costs of Chinese or Indian construction may be at least about 50% less than that of Western companies.

 The increasing prosperity of Africa and its rising GDP is due mainly to economic growth in China and, a lesser extent, India. African countries are mainly raw material producers and raw material prices steadily declined after the 1960s as Western buyers kept depressing prices. With the emergence of Asians as the major industrial producers with phenomenal growth rates, raw material demand and prices have escalated, helping many developing countries, and even developed countries like Australia. Even at this juncture, Greece is in discussion with China for Chinese aid and investment in a number of infrastructure projects. The aid flow from the East is expanding while West is trying to deal with their own economic problems created by its ideological commitment to unregulated markets and unbridled capitalism. Macro-economic theory will surely have to be re-written in the coming decade based on the current realities.

The IMF has now gone some way to refashion its image and moderate its conditions for assistance. It is hoped that the Western countries also can follow this trend to ensure their fuller participation in effective international development.

Kenneth Abeywickrama

01 March 2011.

Copyrights to article reserved. It may be reproduced with author’s permission.

[1] The Washington Consensus consists of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the United States Treasury, all headquartered  in close proximity to each other in Washington, which worked together like a family with common interests and formulated development policies for developing countries.

[2] While World Bank/IMF demanded the removal of fertilizer subsidies, huge agricultural subsidies for EU and American farmers hurt Africa where small farms are the main livelihood.

[3] UNIDO Fact-Finding & Preparatory Assistance for the Industrial Utilization of Medicinal & Aromatic Plants in Sudan, report by K. Husnu Can Baser, Chemical Technologist, and Kenneth Abeywickrama, Economist/Marketing Consultant, January 2996.

[4] UNIDO report on Enhancing the Capacity of Khartoum State in the Delivery of Pro-Poor Vocational Training Services, August 2007.

[5] The Chinese government gave Nigeria a concessional loan of US$1.0 billion to modernise its railways in 2006. The World Bank’s offer of a US$9.0 million conditional loan to improve the railways was scuttled when the Chinese offer of aid arrived.  Earlier, the Chinese oil company, CNOC, paid US$ 2.3 billion for a stake in a Nigerian oil and gas field.

[6] Many Western corporations, mainly in the oil and arms industries, have also bribed political leaders in Africa on a large scale.

[7] See article in Wall Street journal for an elaboration of this view at

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123758895999200083.html

Savaging Sudan    

“Thus ended the Battle of Omdurman—the most signal triumph ever gained by the arms of science over barbarians[1]. Within the space of five hours the strongest and best-armed savage army yet arrayed against a modern European Power had been destroyed and dispersed, with hardly any difficulty, comparatively small risk, and insignificant loss to the victors.”

Winston Churchill writing on the Battle of Omdurman, Sudan, in 1898.   

I was warned against working in Sudan on a UN project in 1995 by my friends and my mother. It was a dangerous terrorist state. The international media had been savaging Sudan for quite a while and it is the main source of information for most of us. But I did not heed my mother. Parental control is vastly diminished when you are over sixty years of age. So I went to Sudan.   

I made three visits to Sudan on UN work, in 1995/6, 2007 and 2009, and missed seeing this demonic behaviour, either by the government or the people. These visits in an official capacity gave me the opportunity to meet with several cabinet ministers and senior officials and travel in the country. Sudan was not a well-governed country: the administration and public institutions were incompetent and at times borders on the chaotic. But it was a country trying to cope with enormous political problems, rebellions and infighting between various tribal groupings in the South and in the Western Regions where the writ of the government was tenuous at best. North Sudan, or the traditional Sudan proper, on the other hand, was a peaceful region that was perfectly safe to live in.   

Sudan, like the rest of Africa, had been subjected to the depredations of Western imperial powers that occupied the continent, subjugated and partly enslaved its people, carved up states irrespective of existing boundaries, and exploited its material resources without making significant inputs for economic or political sustainability. When they left the continent in the decades after World War 2 by giving self-rule to their territories, they did not leave behind a competent ruling classes or politically viable nation states. Within a decade, most elected governments had been seized by military dictators and adventurers. So began the second phase of imperial dominance when imperial powers, including the former Soviet Union, vied to install obedient vassals as dictators through the supply of military assistance and financial aid to their clients in these countries.   

Sudan was saddled with two deadly rebellions: one in the Southern region, now declared an independent state, and the other in the Western region. Neither of these regions was part the original Sudan proper. The tribes in the Southern regions were governed by Belgium as an extension of their empire in Zaire and ceded to British Sudan in 1892. The Western region was part of the French West African Empire and was ceded to the British in 1899. In 1917, this region which was the Sultanate of Fur (the Fur were the major tribe) was incorporated with Sudan and was known as Darfur.   

The accretion of these two appendages to Sudan left it the largest territorial state in Africa with some of the largest problems of nation building. The effort to integrate these regions has failed: because of heavily armed rebel movements in the South and centuries of tribal friction in the West for control of the dwindling water wells, a process exacerbated by global climate change and the inflow of modern weapons which makes warfare in Africa more destructive and rebels harder to subdue.   

The Southern Sudanese tribes have little in common with Northern Sudan in terms of religion, culture and language and rebelled against the government from the earliest stages. It later developed a formidable rebel army that challenged the North with tanks and artillery, thanks to Western benefactors who supplied weapons through clients in Uganda. None of these benefactors nor the rebel leaders, who travel in helicopters and live in wealth , have done much to improve the condition of the people of the South who live in desperate poverty and are constantly ravaged by war. Two million refugees, some displaced three decades ago, lived in Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs, as the UN calls these people) camps in Khartoum State and in the North some of which I visited.   

By the time of our second visit in 2007 the peace agreement with the Southern People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) in 2005 had brought in a cessation of fighting by the inclusion of the rebel leaders as cabinet ministers in the Government of Sudan with all the privileges these offices carry[2].  Southern Sudan then became an autonomous state and its President was the Vice-President of Sudan and many other Southern political leaders were cabinet ministers. But even these gentlemen seemed only mildly concerned with the fate of their poor fellow Southerners and those in the IDP camps.   

While the peace settlement with the South was under way in 2003, the tribes in the Darfur region in the West rebelled again. Settlement of these demands by the rebellious groups is complicated because there is no single rebel movement to deal with. The rebels in the South have at least two major factions while the groupings in the West number at least 80 tribes or clan groups. There are nomadic and sedentary communities among them and they are broadly categorised as fully Arabic, partly Arabic or non-Arabic. The definition of Arab or non-Arab is based on language use and cultural habits, not race. The Darfur humanitarian crisis, designated the Sudanese genocide in the West, is in the forefront of international attention and is now the main weapon to bludgeon the government of Sudan.   

Genocide in Darfur is a popular media headline. But the problems in Darfur, we discovered, go back many centuries and has its basis in ecology, not in race or religion as made out by the Western media and politicians. It is a vast desert and semi-desert region where small scattered tribes have tried to eke out a living around the waterholes. With increasing global climate change and Saharan desertification, the traditional competition for the waterholes, which are now diminishing, have become murderous. At the same time, over-grazing due to the increasing number of animal herds required with increasing population has led to conflicts between herding tribes and sedentary farming tribes. Instead of lancers and muskets, the tribes are now armed with assault rifles. Several armed groups also now make a living out of plunder rather than agriculture or herding. Even African peacekeeping forces have failed to pacify this vast sparsely populated region. Several UN and other aid workers have been targeted. One of the requirements for UN consultants in Sudan was to pass a very detailed security clearance examination which required us to learn how to behave when attacked or captured by armed bandits!   

North Sudan stands out in my mind for other reasons. The Sudanese are the most hospitable people I encountered in Sub-Saharan Africa during two decades of work in the continent. Sub-Saharan African colleagues and associates are not usually given to entertaining foreigners, even though they show a lot of camaraderie. But Sudanese are different and in this respect are closer to North Africans and Middle Easterners. During visits, ordinary Sudanese associates who survived on small incomes, opened their homes for family dinners and even took us on week-end picnics at their expense. One week-end picnic on the banks of the Nile stands out in my mind. Our host was a university professor. We were taken to his house where the household staff loaded a truck with foodstuffs, fresh vegetab  

les, pots and pans, and finally a big trussed up goat. Arriving at the picnic spot about 150 kilometres from Khartoum, the goods were all unloaded and the staff kneeled down to pray. My colleague, a Turkish professor, urged me to join him in a walk away from the scene. When we returned, there was the large fresh goat skin and the cooks were busy making different dishes with the goat meat. I lost my appetite for the meal and told my colleague that I was a vegetarian on this day. But there was no way out: he rightly pointed out that this would insult our host. Eventually, we ate a delicious meal and frankly enjoyed it.    

The other feature of Sudan that impressed us was that it is one of the safest countries in the world to work in. Most large American cities have areas where law-abiding people will not venture into, with foreigners running even higher risks. But the risk of personal violence or harassment, ever present in most of Sub-Saharan Africa, is absent in Sudan, except in the war zones of Darfur. It is also free of thieving, an ever present danger in most of Africa. The Sharia laws are severe, and are even more severe against anyone who harasses foreigners. But culture, not deterrent, is the main reason for their law-abiding nature.   

Sudan was a troubled country during my first visit in 1995/6. Hassan al-Turabi, (Dr. Hassan al-Tourabi, Ph.D Law from Sorbonne University of Paris, M.A. Law from University of London), leader of the National Islamic Front and ally of the al-Qaeda terror group and of Osama bin Laden, was a major power in Sudanese politics and Speaker of the National Assembly. He had his own militia groups, was highly critical both of the West and the Sudanese government which feared him. His supporters were seen at times in Khartoum and Omdurman riding open trucks, waving rifles and religious flags and shouting political slogans. He is now a bitter opponent of the government and leads the Justice & Equality Movement (JEM) claiming to represent the Darfur rebels. This former Osama bin Laden supporter is now portrayed very favourably in the Western media as a credible opposition leader.   

It was in relation to this man that in 1996 I encountered a leading member of the Sri Lankan terror group, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam[3] or the LTTE as they are commonly known, V. Padmanabhan. He was the personal guest of Hassan al-Turabi, lodged in the best suite in our hotel and was given a government Mercedes car and chauffeur. He was trying to sell arms in Sudan.   

I never knew whether his business in Sudan succeeded as his client lost power shortly afterwards and was imprisoned briefly by the government which was anxious to clean its image and remove the U.S. label of “sponsor of terrorism” and become accepted by the “international community”. But the US is not a forgiving super-power and international policeman. Though Dr. al-Turabi was removed from all offices and Osama bin Laden was expelled from the country in 1996, the USA imposed a trade embargo in 1997. In August 20, 1998, the residents of Khartoum got a fearful message when the brand new Al Sifa pharmaceutical plant was blasted by US cruise missiles on CIA concocted evidence  (as later half-heartedly acknowledged) that it was manufacturing VX nerve gas.   

As part of our UN project we had visited the 13 largest pharmaceutical companies, including Al Sifa, which was just being completed in 1996 with machinery imported mainly from Europe, India and Thailand and was the most modern of the plants in the country. But President Bill Clinton was under immense pressure at home because of his extra-marital escapades and quickly found scapegoats for the bombing of US embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam by al-Qaeda by bombing sites in Libya, Sudan and Afghanistan. So Khartoum paid the price.   

The return of Sudan to its original geographic location, minus the new state of South Sudan and the still troubled Darfur region, would provide a blessing for Sudan. Neither Sudan, nor the Western powers that incorporated Darfur into Sudan in 1917, can solve the problem of Darfur’s inhabitants without transferring a large portion of them out of the expanding desert into a more salubrious region. Darfur can never be pacified by military intervention or peace talks. Its poverty stricken people need better lands to make a living. Should this be a problem for Sudan or the two Western powers that created the original problem? At present, the old Western imperial powers have taken the high ground and imposed trade sanctions on Sudan which makes a solution to the economic problems of Darfur even more difficult.   

Kenneth Abeywickrama   

15 February 2011   

Copyrights to article are reserved. Quotations or prints require the author’s approval.   

[1] In his disdain for non-Europeans, the historian in Churchill chose to ignore that Sudan’s civilization and nationhood pre-dated that of his own country by over two milleniums. The Kushite and Meroite kingdoms located in present-day Sudan had a civilization and a form of writing linked with ancient Egypt. Around 750 B.C. the Kushite king, Kashta, briefly conquered Thebes and Upper Egypt. There are more pyramids today in Sudan than in Egypt, though they are much smaller in size than the pyramids of Giza. Recent excavations by British archeologists in Merowe, the site of the new hydro-power dam being constructed by China, revealed that the First Kushite Kingdom rivaled Egypt for power between 2,500-1,500 B.C.   

[2] The Abuja peace agreement was brokered by the African Union. The Darfur peace agreements have not held. The SLMA and JEM worked a power sharing agreement but tribal groups and bandit organizations don’t respect these and continue to attack and plunder both government facilities and Western aid organizations. In the confusion, the international media continues to hold the Government of Sudan responsible for all acts of violence.   

[3] The CIA rated the LTTE the most dangerous terror outfit in the world.