A reality check on LTTE

THE NUANCES OF the latest political signals being sounded by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) merit close scrutiny. The LTTE appears to be wooing the international community at this stage by sending out some encouraging signals about its intentions. A reality check will however be required to assess whether the militant group is sincere in its professed interest in a peace alternative and is not engaging in double-speak. At stake is a fully negotiated settlement of the fundamental question about a rightful place for Sri Lanka's minority population of Tamils. Official Colombo and the international community, including India, rightly seem inclined to scrutinise closely the suggestion of some emerging under-currents in Sri Lanka. Now, a fresh `offer' by the LTTE leader, Mr. Velupillai Prabhakaran, to consider non-conditional talks with Colombo should, of course, be read in the context of his parallel insistence on the imperative of a propitious climate for parleys. However, his `offer' is an interesting new development on the Sri Lankan scene. The question is how promising will this be of a final settlement.

The latest flurry of diplomatic interlocution with the Sri Lankan Government by the U.K. and the U.S., besides a Norwegian envoy's preceding talks with the LTTE as well, appears to have alerted the larger international community to the possibility of new nuances. Three aspects of the LTTE's perceived thinking, however tentative or tactical these may be, deserve to be critically examined in the interest of Sri Lanka's unity and territorial integrity. First, any such exercise will necessarily be defined and circumscribed by the LTTE's `claim' to be ready for a negotiated and peaceful resolution of its dispute with Colombo. The other major consideration pertains to the LTTE's `signal' that it may be willing to abjure pre-conditions for the talks per se. Yet, the most decisive element of any de novo analysis of the LTTE's present mood will hinge on the question whether Mr. Prabhakaran has indeed signalled at least a vague intention of considering a final settlement that will entail his giving up the demand for a ``Tamil Eelam''.

Mr. Prabhakaran's current `offer' lends itself to an arguable interpretation that he has delineated preferences at two different levels. Certain pre-requisities have been spelt out by him for the amelioration of the difficult living conditions of the population in the Vanni and other areas of direct concern to him. Nonetheless, if interpreted with an eye to genuine peace, this need not necessarily block the commencement of parleys. The reason is that the Sri Lankan President, Ms. Chandrika Kumaratunga, has said time and again that the welfare of the Tamils in the conflict-ravaged areas was already high on her agenda, consistent with the ground realities.

A logical poser is whether Mr. Prabhakaran will be prepared to bid farewell to arms and the idea of a separate state if his conditions regarding the plight of the war-affected people are realistically addressed. At the other end of the Sri Lankan political spectrum, the mainstream opposition United National Party can usefully ponder these discernible new nuances. The need for bipartisan support for the substance of the President's political package of devolution has not been greater than at present. There might perhaps be some scope for discussion on the nuances of the devolution proposals but there is no question that the mainstream parties need to coordinate closely with the President who has consistently been maintaining that the Tamils must be given a fair deal.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Next     : Failure at The Hague