Conflict in Sri Lanka: Ground Realities - Tamil Nation & Beyond

to power sharing. This behaviour, together with what they hadexperienced of the Sinhala political leadership over the last fivedecades had convinced the Tamil people that there was little todistinguish between the Presidential contenders. As far as theTamils were concerned Wickramasinghe and Rajapakse weresimply two different sides of the same Sinhala chauvinistic coin.The Tamil people’s collective decision to refrain from voting wasbased on this assessment.It is vital that the international community which seeks to helpforge an enduring peace does not continue to delude itself byregarding those with a veneer of western sophistication or liberalpretensions to be less chauvinistic than those who are openlyso.In times of crisis the façade always cracks and the chauvinismstands exposed. The most recent example was the outburst byDr Dhanapala a seasoned diplomat and Secretary General of thePeace Secretariat in Colombo who launched vituperative attackson the LTTE and the Tamil people in the course of his addressesto audiences in Washington. As this writer put it “Dhanapala’sunbecoming conduct ought to be an eye opener to those whosubscribe to the notion that Sinhala chauvinism is simply confinedto the JVP and the ‘patriotic’ parties. The extent to which thischauvinism has permeated Sinhala polity comes to the fore attimes of crisis. This is when the likes of Dhanapala, despite theirveneer of sophistication become undone” 7India, the regional powerIt is only natural that India, the regional power, should havean abiding interest in the manner in which the conflict in theIsland of Sri Lanka is resolved. It is unfortunate, however, thatIndian policy makers have persisted with the policy that was setin motion almost two decades ago when in a misguided attemptto reverse its earlier policy of arming Tamils, India intervened toprotect the ‘unity and integrity of Sri Lanka’.29