Guatemala has a history that reads of passive, unequal, bordered societies, apathetic to powers manipulating its whims. A phantom state now exists, sucking up all its limited resources, a funnel in full view, siphoning moneys into pockets unknown. Everyone knows, no-one speaks, only shrugs of malcontent. After so much subjection is it no wonder small voices calling for democracy, accountability and fundamental institutions are swatted away by bullies, drug-lords and jack boots while lawmen look the other way?
At it's initiation CODOC had a mission which transposed two inter-dependent dynamics at it's heart. To combine smart, direct storytelling with a distinct aesthetic together with an honest, transparent approach to journalism. Our first film, a feature documentary on Sri Lanka's civil war had just won us an award and by the end of the year we were given the opportunity to take our concept to an international broadcaster.
Living up to the Legend
The narratives of nations are often told through the biographies of great men. The annals of history channeling the trials of men who dared to draw lines in the sand, those who chose not to merely sit but to stand, and in doing, drew straying eyes to relevant truths. Those who dared to dream, standing firm against indignity. Those who wished it so, and in doing so changed the game through will and testament.
Tomes are written about such men. And in legend writ their legacy. But there are chapters being written, in the here and now, which will deem whether the singular promise of a unified South Africa will ever make it to reality. Today South Africans live under a government that is in political turmoil, divided down ever increasing ethnic lines. The ruling African National Congress (ANC) have seen many senior members leave after publicly announcing that they want nothing to do with controversial leader Jacob Zuma or the party that he has tarnished with his premiership. Tomorrow these dissatisfied few will formally announce the formation of a new party; Congress Of The People or COPE. What this means is that for the first time since its first democratically held elections in 1994, there will be a viable challenge to the ANC and the dominant-party system that it holds reign. This, the unwritten inheritance of Mandela's South Africa, is to be tested.
The Heirs to his Legacy - Key Players:
An almost Shakspearean history lies behind these three faces. The complex narrative of the political and personal give an indicator as to how South Africa has descended into the mire of madness. Where next the country is headed could equally be mined from the actions these three men dare to take from here.
Jacob Zuma (left) is a populist who has rallied support within leftist constituencies and has maintained support from the youth league and among Zulus, the tribe form which he originates. He was dismissed from his post as Deputy-President in 2005 after allegations of corruption. In the same year a 31 year old daughter of a former ANC member came forward and accused Zuma of rape. During the course of the hearings Zuma confessed to consensual sex with the girl having known that she was HIV positive at the time. He attempted to fend off criticism by claiming he had a shower afterward to 'reduce the risk of infection'. He spoke these ludicrous words while he was the head of the National AIDS Council in South Africa. In the end both charges were dropped however, and Zuma retained his strong support within the ANC and remained popular among South Africa's young and less well off. His past as an aggressive ANC activist during the apartheid era has stuck even during the darkest of times. He has been the target of lampooning for his comments during his trial and was hit with harsh criticism from all sides but in the fallout following his acquittal, his stock would rise in contrast to his critics.
Thabo Mbeki (centre) has had his critics also. He is at the ideological middle ground in policies and has from the very beginning of his tenure been dogged by his aloof presidential style; an apparent tendency to be an elitist in the party of the people will always be a problem. He is seen as the diametric opposite of Zuma in personality and policy and they are now seen by many as sworn enemies. His political critics aim squarely at his acquiescence to big business at the expense of the poor and the unions as another contrast between him and the socialist leaning Zuma. After Zuma's acquittal Mbeki got hit the hardest publicly. His decision to 'go after' Zuma with corruption charges painted the picture of political maneuvering with Mbeki ruthlessly snuffing out threats to his power by wiping out Zuma politically. It had almost worked but he had failed and now he was not to be trusted even by those nearest to him. Power had deserted him and at the 52nd ANC national convention leadership elections he was beaten by his nemesis and resigned shortly after.
Mosiuoa Lekota (right) and Mbeki seem to have more in common than not. Both were former inmates of Robben Island with Nelson Mandela, and both were at the heart of the resistance movement with Mandela during the 1980's. Lekota had from the start outlined himself as a 'conviction' politician. He made his name popular with the media by calling out corruption and immorality even within his own party. This made him a threat to Mbeki early on. During the tentative years of the ANC's first administration, they soon became fierce rivals and as Mbeki became heir apparent to Mandela's leadership, Lekota became more and more sidelined. By 1999 he was marginalized into obscurity and the 'left', after he so vehemently criticized Mbeki's allies, saw him as somewhat of a martyr. It was not until the furor over Zuma's corruption and rape allegations where Lekota once again returned to stake his moral claim on decency, that the left quickly turned on him too.
Roots in Division
Many this time last year saw events in South Africa as a watershed moment in its history, the election results saw incumbent and President Thabo Mbeki lose to a man who only two years before had been sacked after being embroiled in corruption and rape charges. Jacob Zuma and his political allies were swept into power of the ANC party in December 2007. Many across the world looked at South Africa then and asked; how on earth did they go from Nelson Mandela to a man like Jacob Zuma? The consternation within his own party was such that almost immediately high ranking members followed Mosiuoa Lekota's resignation and left themselves. The reasons for the split stem from three main factors:
- Tribal allegiances
- Economic left and right policies
- Democratic succession
The defeat of Mbeki by Zuma in 2007 made clear the stark differences between the two sides emerging within the ANC. Such was the nature of the allegations against him that pro-Zuma and anti-Zuma factions emerged as a result. These divides could be easily be judged to be tribal, Zuma has a large base among Zulus and Mbeki by default has the Xhosa tribes support. But it is important to look beyond narrow tags and see this apparent divide as systematic of broader social concerns within South Africa as a whole. During Mbeki's premiership he was responsible in driving a development policy using conventional, conservative strategies that resulted in unprecedented economic growth. But after advocating commitments to open markets and privatization, whilst continuing GDP growth, unemployment actually dramatically increased between 1996 and 2006. This unemployment negated any capacity to develop the state and in turn has resulted in the crime rate at an all time high. South Africans know there is something wrong when they win to bid the World Cup 2010 while the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. Pro-Zuma factions have used this and used it well, they have allied with the trade unions and have championed re-distribution of wealth, by default this puts the ANC back to the left and COPE to the centre.
Perhaps it is too early to analyse the party before it is officially exists. But the very fact that there is a choice at all is welcomed by many. Without a Mandela as the figurehead of the ANC, the ANC is not the searing beacon of justice and hope it once was, and now with Zuma as its leader, some would say it ensures the necessity for an alternative. Mosiuoa Lekota, who has been at once within and without the ANC on many occasions, is now planning a democratic coup to recapture South Africa, accusing the ANC of 'eliminating democracy from within'. During those years on Robben Island Lekota acquired the nickname 'Terror' for his prowess on the football field. Whether Terror Lekota will emerge from Mandela's shadow and assume the weighted reigns of the leadership of South Africa, and do what Mbeki couldn't, makes for an intriguing next chapter.
Unfinished Chapters
South African politics has been going through a self-perception crisis since Mandela departed in 1999. Come the next election early next year, they will try and place the first decade without Mandela in its historic context both economically and socially. The catastrophe of its handling of the AIDS epidemic looms large, poverty and crime adds to the sense of frustration. Any democratic gains seem modest next to these deplorable failures. Looking forward it will have to take stock and account for these failures and speak to the disconnected and disenfranchised and learn to heal once again. Internationally too, whether it is the ANC or COPE, when ethnic tensions spill over into neighboring nations (Rwanda and DRC) especially with their dealings with Mugabe, it is essential that South Africa set their stall out on the global debate once and for all.
This July Mandela turned 90. Perhaps the ultimate irony is that we, from the outside looking in, hold him to such a standard that we demand his countrymen to posess that same aura of affirmation. The Mbekis and the Zumas will never do for us. We hold them to a mirror of a living legend. We dare to dream of more Mandelas but there are none. And there hasn't been for a while.
Instead dare to act. As he dared to act on the day he took those first steps to freedom, a clenched fist shading his eyes from the glare of a new dawn, believing that one day his Africa would heal and finally begin to testify to his promise.
The camera follows three men laying down the limp body of a man. His feet are bare with dirty soles, he wears orange shorts and a crumpled shirt. His arms stricken and lifeless. The three men place him on a white cloth, a machete tied to each of their belts. In the distance we see a young boy, skinny, curly hair following the men, staring at the body.
We focus in on the young boy.
The man was his father, murdered in front of him by the men with the machetes. As we focus further on the boy, we see him trying to interpret what he is seeing. Too scared to say anything, too confused to cry. He shuffles his feet and looks to the camera.
The power of the digital camera in the arena of advocacy is that it empowers the witness with the tools to transform what they have just seen into a powerful method for promoting change to seek justice. Today I got wind of a new online portal called The Hub that allows individuals, organizations, groups to upload their videos from around the world for global attention. It is an ambitious project set up by Witness.org to present a forum to help fight human rights violations through community led advocacy using uploaded video as key force. The idea being that anyone anywhere can use video as a launching pad for activism, so that instantly a witness can upload their video to educate and perhaps inform a movement in combating violations. Ten minutes browsing through its library I have seen child soldiers in DR Congo, Burmese protesters under fire, Palestinian farmers getting shot by Israeli settlers, Chinese soldiers firing at Tibetan pilgrims in the Himalayas and even police brutality in L.A.
Still in its beta stage, The Hub intends to expand its user capabilities but there is potential right now for this to make a huge impact:
The Hub is organized into three Main Sections:
SEE IT: This is the source. Users can browse uploaded videos from other users as well as collaborating agencies working together with Witness for content. You may view content by key word search or categories such as "highest rated", "most viewed", "most recent", "by issue", or "by region". An invaluable resource for material that will only be readily available on the web due to reasons obvious.
SHARE IT: Any visitor to The Hub can upload human rights related footage onto the website whether through camera, laptop or mobile phone. There are manuals to guide the user through the stages of uploading and reviewing.
TAKE ACTION: Community is at the core of what The Hub represents. It is a network of people and groups who are urged to create profiles and with every uploaded video are encouraged to provide a synopsis about the context of the content. They are invited to create or join groups, start petitions, organize events and share links with members who share similar concerns on particular issues. This is to make sure videos are not only seen but are used to a higher potential; to actually change things.
For the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Witness.org through this new enterprise asks the question:
In an introductory video people from around the world in many languages describe an image, fleeting footage, a vision that seared its meaning into their memory - one of whom speaks of the young boy with curly hair trying to come to terms with his fathers murder. All these people work to promote human rights in some fashion and were moved to do so by an image or video of reality.
There are many reasons why this blog exists. There are many reasons why I chose to pursue a career in current affairs journalism and documentary filmmaking. In regular filmmaking you get the chance to construct a vision in pursuit of the beautiful image or to spin a great story. To use every trick in the book to elicit a tear from every dry eye watching on. But when you take your eye away from the viewfinder and look around, you see another way. When you do that you get to see reality in all its incendiary ugliness carving out the world around you. Its fascination. Its authenticity and truth. I myself hope to spend my entire life bearing witness and capturing images to inspire others to simply give a fuck. Hearing all these people recount the moment they became aware and sought to advocate, is inspiration enough for me. To pin point in my mind what led me to want to advocate is difficult.
But if there was one image recently, that re-affirmed my belief that images have the power to delve into the soul of the witness and move them to speak for the speechless, it would be this one here:
Spend half an hour on The Hub and know better.
"I only wish I had a gun rather than a camera" Sebastian D'Souza the man who took the photo that has dominated the world's media, has transposed the fear and anger of a nation onto one fresh-faced young man. Azam Amir Qasab is the lone gunman involved in the Mumbai attacks to be captured alive. His arrest and subsequent disclosure of how the most strategic and successful terrorist plot in India's violent history was carried out has implications of the highest magnitude, perhaps even that of 9/11.
Qasab's Testimony
According to unverified claims by police, it is now apparent that Qasab interrogation has yielded information that has led the government of India to charge elements within Pakistan with the responsibility of planning and orchestrating the attack. The organization that the police claim that Qasab is thought to be affiliated with is a familiar name within the region but of which little is known beyond the immediate hemisphere of British and American commitments to the war on terror. The group named call themselves Lashkar-e-taiba. Having had its roots in Afghanistan pre-9/11, its parent organization Jamaat-ud-Dawa and its founder Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, decided to move its base to Pakistan. They are one of the most active terrorist organizations within South Asia and are known to run several terrorist training camps inside the disputed region of Kashmir. 21 year old Azam Amir Qasab is thought to have been trained at one of these camps.
According to The Times of India, when found he played dead for several minutes until found out, upon capture he appeared to break down after seeing the dead body of his colleague. He pleaded for mercy begging hospital staff to save his life and that he wanted to live. He is understood to have later revealed the extent of strategic planning that stretched back a year having been trained by Lashkar-e-taiba in Kashmir for three months before being handed the mission. They were asked to 'cause maximum casualties' and to kill to his 'last breath'. It is his boyish face that has dominated the front pages, his youthful, decidedly westernized appearance forgiving his murderous actions. He and his accomplice Abu Ismail Dera Ismail Khan, 25, headed for the CST Railway station soon after arriving having conducted a reconnaissance mission a month before.
An account of the journey based on testimony. Click for larger view.
Did The Terrorists Win?
The testimony itself raises a number of important questions. Questions that have brought down several prominent state officials including top security official and Home Minister Shivraj Patil. The unpopularity of the government has pushed support the way of the opposing BJP party, and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, despite doing his best to appear determinately steady, has suffered by the perception of his office being unable to protect Indians from those who wish to harm them. This notion has ramifications beyond the immediate ludicrous media debate about whether hotel security was adequate. These assault teams were heavily armed and were quite obviously under no orders to undertake sneak attacks. No bombs were planted so the mission was in short a suicide attack from beginning to end, all guns blazing. No amount of checks at entrances and hotel security personnel would have been able to constitute any credible resistance to the amount of bullets being sprayed about so barbarously. What should be in contention is the apparent amount of consideration that had been put into how to maximize the global value and international impact of what these extremists were trying to achieve. In so commanding the eyes of the world's media upon the spectacle over four days, the organizers of the attacks declared the first victory.
This attack is more important than the initial shocking manner in which it was carried out. We must look beyond that at the grander ramifications. If indeed Lashkar-e-taiba were the ultimate perpetrators, it is worth looking at the political motives of Hafiz Muhammad Saeed's organization and ask what they would gain from staging such an attack at this particular time. Timing is the key to the apparent reasoning.
Prime Minister Singh and former President Musharraf
Prime Minster Singh and President George Bush
The last five years has seen an unprecedented improvement in the relations between India and Pakistan. In Kashmir, trade routes have re-opened and commuter services between the two sides are running as normal for the first time in years. This has had a major impact in relation to troop numbers in Kashmir. Both Pakistani and Indian troop levels have eased mirroring a return to civil relations between the two countries but in the face of the United States involvement in Afghanistan this is not all that surprising.
As the U.S's involvement in Afghanistan drudges on, they face an open front at the border with Pakistan in an area called the North West frontier province. In direct consequence it would be in the U.S interest to broker a detente in Kashmir at least for the time being as to urge a re-committal on behalf of Pakistan for a military redeployment of troops from Kashmir to the North West frontier to shore up security in the region. Now with President-elect Obama having also shown urgency in pursuing an ease in relations, a severe jolt to the diplomatic landscape could be far reaching. Obama has long touted a military re-calibration toward the conflict in Afghanistan away from the debacle of Iraq and in doing so probably hoped to gain as much support, militarily or otherwise, from the surrounding countries as possible. This attack has now thrown those plans into disarray.
Map of Kashmiri region with the Afghanistan border on the left.
Beyond Kashmir
Since establishing a base in Pakistan, Lashkar-e-taiba have used violence in the past in order to challenge the legitimacy of India's sovereignty over Kashmir. A regression into old tensions between the two countries would be of great significance to Lashkar-e-taiba's cause. As Prime Minister Singh's pledge to strengthen his anti-terrorism sector will no doubt result in a rise in troop numbers in Kashmir, it would also provoke a response from Pakistan in terms of their own troop levels. But in an interview with Siddharth Varadarajan, the organization's founder Hafiz Muhammad Saeed elaborated on what exactly the ultimate goal of Lashkar-e-taiba is:
"...the restoration of Islamic rule over all parts of South Asia, Russia and even China." It also "...seeks to bring about a union of all Muslim majority regions in countries that surround Pakistan."
They have also declared Hindus and Jews to be the enemies of Islam and India and Israel the enemies of Pakistan. Lashkar-e-taiba has long been suspected of aiding the Taliban against the U.S backed Northern Alliance in 2002. Now it is widely known that the remnants of the former Taliban regime has sought and received refuge in Quetta under the discretion of Lashkar-e-taiba and indeed, Pakistan's powerful secret service: the Inter-Services Intelligence or ISI. The ISI have tolerated various terrorist organizations because of their usefulness against India. Whether or not funding and strategic help was ever given to these groups via the ISI is also an area that should be scrutinized by any intelligence gathering from India's perspective as this is an issue that is gathering a disconcerting level of interest. The motive for this attack might well be grounded in a regional conflict but the complexity of the political and geographical context of the region itself makes this a global event.
It seems to this writer, that India has two options. To be comsumed by the reactionary responses that those who are wronged understandably feel or to handle the procedure with bi-lateral co-operation. India is a proud country, and one who reveled in the positioning of would-be superpower. To be maimed on such a global stage will hurt and shame them. The knee-jerk response to this would be to act without seeing beyond the immediate, and there in lies the danger.
When America was attacked on 9/11 it led to war on two fronts, an economic downward spiral and inevitably lead to the capitulation of its national unity and international isolation. If India were to lash out at Pakistan it would pit two nuclear armed nations against each other. In the end, this is exactly why men like Asam Amir Qasab were sent to die. The ultimate goal; to destablize a globally significant region with a bloody history and plunge it back into the darkness witnessed a few days ago just when it seemed they were beginning to peak over the precipice of normalcy. The challenge will be for India to maintain a level head and instead of falling into the worn tracks of reactionary politics, reach for unity and co-operation with Pakistan against a common threat. If anything is true today it is that this threat has become global. So now, for the sake of us all, this time: no new war.
As the bloody aftermath unfolds and the echoes of grenades and gunfire can be heard behind western journalists reporting from the streets, the world watches as the death rattle of Wednesday's assault heralds a new era for urban terrorism in India. As I write armed militants are still, two days after the initial attack, holding out against India's special forces. Slowly, as the chaotic fog of misinformation dissipates, the question of what happened begins to transform into why it happened and who in fact is behind all the chaos. Such was the global attention that initial suggestions pointed inevitably toward the pre-eminent global threat - Al Qaeda. Three days on however and it becomes less and less clear who it was that was behind such a sophisticated and coordinated attack. As the media focus wasin full swing and the 24 hour rolling news channels across the world were looping pictures of hotels ablaze and panic stricken faces, a group calling itself Deccan Mujaheddin claimed responsibility. However, who this group are and if they even exist at all is under dispute. They may very well be a front for a larger more established militant organization. The truth is no-one will know until the shock subsides and the assessment begins in the wake of what many are calling India's 9/11.
As it seems is the tragic staple of terrorism the world over, the perpetrators were said to be young and carried out their mission with fervor. They came hidden on board a merchant ship and disembarked at the dockyards of India's financial hub. As they fanned out across the district, they left a wake of merciless bloodshed, indiscriminately opening fire on crowds as they went. The crowd itself were of a particular type and that, it seems is a message that rings louder than any other factor in this mess. India is a nation in transition, of a growing economic and political standing on the world stage. That abounding growth has had a fundamental impact on India's entrenched segregated classes. An affluent and wealthy crowd are native to Mumbai, it is a look-at-me city of silver spoons and the well-to-do elite. The result of Wednesday's attack is that for the first time in India's history terrorism has hit the class of the touchable.
The attacks spanned across part of Mumbai in six separate locations:
TAJ MAHAL HOTEL
The Taj is at the heart of Mumbai's financial district and a popular destination attracting affluent foreign travelers and business people. Gunmen stormed in as residents sat down to dinner targeting in particular American and British tourists.
At least one gunmen is still suspected to be hiding out in the hotel and about a 100 special forces are on the hunt after confirming 30 bodies found so far. Fire broke out on a number of floors and it remains to be seen when operations will end.
OBEROI-TRIDENT HOTEL
This hotel is located in Naraim Point a place popular with business people as it is near the Bombay Stock Exchange. Security forces took control of it after gunmen rounded up patrons and tourists. The hostages were brought to safety but in the end 24 of the 100 hostages were found murdered.
CHHTRAPATI SHIVAJI TERMINUS
Armed with rifles and grenades gunmen killed 10 and maimed 30 in an unrelenting attack at this, one of the busiest railway stations in the country. It was crowded with passengers who were in close proximity of each other, the ones who escaped with their lives intact were lucky they made it at all.
CAFE LEOPOLD
Witnesses who were present at the attack at the popular cafe described the attackers as 'young boys'. The restaurant cafe is somewhat of a Mumbai institution. It is famous for being a the favoured hangout of Australian author Gregory David Roberts who authored Shantaram which is also set in Mumbai.
NARIMAN HOTEL
Another indicator toward the intentions of the assault, this residential complex housed a Jewish outreach centre called Chabad Lubavitch. It attracted many of Mumbai's Jewish quarter and after one of the longer stand-offs between the gunmen and special forces, it was only until Friday that the area was secured. The attack resulted in the confirmed deaths of 6 people including a rabbi and his wife.
CAMA & ALBLESS HOSPITALS
These were hospitals that cared for women and children and there is a suggestion that this attack was carried out by the same group that attacked the nearby railway station. Indiscriminate drive-by shootings were also reported around the same area.
The strategic and specific nature of this attack as a whole shows that the one constant in all the targeted locations is that they were places that attracted western foreign nationals thus maximizing its global profile. It might be pertinent to point out that large scale attacks on Indian cities are not without precedent. Most incidents have stemmed along the lines of ethnic tensions between the Hindu majority and Muslim minority. As recently as 2002 the western state of Gujarat saw the revenge killings of Muslims after an arson attack on a train left 59 dead, all of them Hindu. India also of course shares a border with Pakistan and the continuing dispute over Kashmir means that relations between the two ethnic groups on a national and civil level will always appear fragile.
But in the context of terrorist attacks within India, November 2008 is an important exception. The difference is that planted bombs on trains and market stalls kill the working class and the poor of India, not the elite classes and wealthy westerners. Wheras previously the target was a message of an eye-for-an-eye reflecting ethno-religous tensions, the motive and intentions behind these atatcks could well have been international. This time, the front pages of The Times of London and New York has had the Mumbai attacks on the front page for the past three days. This time, the message is louder and it calls to the likes of us watching worldwide. India's response to these attacks as a nation and as an international burgeoning superpower will be no less as impactful.
Next:
[On Mumbai: Part II - The Pakistan Connection]
February 4th 1968. The Kenyan government had just passed a law denying Asian Kenyans the right to work in their country. Great boats set sail, trains over-packed and heaving, leather beaten shoes left the dry sands of Nairobi as Indian and Pakistani Kenyans set off on a musky uncertain future. They like many burdened eyes across the world looked to Britain whose gateway had creaked open, awaiting was the promise of a hammer and a shilling. On the same day 20 years previous on the tip of the Indian subcontinent, drums could be heard, celebration was in the air. Across the Gulf of Mannar, The British Empire had relinquished its jewel, February 4th 1948, Ceylon had won independence. The pearl of the Indian ocean had gained nationhood, a nation of many peoples, many religions, many differences bound together under one mandate; Sri Lanka.
Today is February 3rd 2008. Tomorrow my mother country celebrates its 60th year as a nation under one name and sovereign. It also mourns it's 25th year of civil conflict and faces the possibility of being a nation held together in name only. The word ceasefire ceased to be relevant this new year, the words amicable compromise are hardly uttered anymore. The 2008 independence celebrations may be the last time we celebrate in a year that promises more bloodshed and violence the likes of which threaten to finally bring our countries economic viability to it's knees.
My father came to England during the first stream of Asian immigrants, much like the Kenyan Asian workers, as a 17 year old boy in the 1960's. He hoped to get lucky, score an idea that he heard about in those paradise stories that he heard from his friends back home. That idea of 'A Living'. A working, viable living, where money was a means to mark a place in the world, for a grounding and a foundation for a family. When my father left his country was called Ceylon and it was a country that was undoubtedly his. He was Sinhalese and Ceylon was very Sinhala.
The civil conflict in Ceylon emerged during the wake of independence. The celebrations were over and the country stepped boldly into the new light as a new nation. At least that was the idea. There are some who say that Ceylon even under the British had been two nations and was never a part of a whole. Much of this comes from the divisions between the ethnic make up of the people and it is this notion that has entwined itself into the bitter struggle for the Tamil people of the north and eastern part of Sri Lanka who lay claim to Tamil Eelam, an area constituting the north and eastern part of the area. The Tamil people are mainly Hindu and Roman Catholic while the majority Sinhala population were devout Buddhist and spoke Sinhala.
It seems colonialism is the root from which many of the prevailing worldwide conflicts stem from, as it is with this one. After the British won control of the island in 1815, they started to bring Tamil laborers from Southern India to work in tea, coffee and coconut plantations. After independence was granted however these plantation workers were disenfranchised as a majority Sinhala parliament gained control. Furthermore Soloman Bandaranaike who was elected on a wave of nationalism went on to implement measures that bolstered Sinhalese and Buddhist interests. Sinhala was made the sole official language and Buddhism was placed at the centre of the countries national religion. In 1958 more than 100 Tamils were killed in wide spread violence after parliamentarians had protested against the new laws and when Soloman's wife Srimavo took over the mantle she extended the nationalization programme further. In 1972 Ceylon became 'Sri Lanka' a name that has a context in Sinhala history and folklore. The Tamil minority became restless and the disillusionment gave way to resentment; how could a Tamil mother send her son to a school where he didn't speak the language that was being taught and was overlooked in higher education and thus in the workplace. The government in response said that it had merely sought to redress the imbalance where under British rule the Tamil's were given a disproportionate amount of top jobs and were felt to be favored by the British over the Sinhala.
The Liberation Tigers Of Tamil Eelam or LTTE were formed in 1976 as the anti-Tamil sentiment intensified in the northern part of Sri Lanka. The group was led by a military leader named Prabhakaran and they used violence for the means in pursuing a separate Tamil state which was by now a real demand that groups like the LTTE would stop at nothing to achieve. As the fires of unrest amongst the distinctive Tamil population began to gather, the flames were something the government could no longer dismiss and marginalize. Anti-Tamil sentiment was rife and the country was on the brink of full scale war when in 1981 a group of Sinhala policemen were accused of burning down the Tamil Public Library in the northern city of Jaffna. Suddenly it became tit for tat. The rule of an eye for an eye has been the mainstay to this day and it began in 1983 when in response to the burning of the library 13 soldiers were ambushed and killed by LTTE rebels which inevitably led to anti-Tamil riots where estimated thousands of Tamils were killed. Some Sri Lankans felt that the large population of Tamils concentrated in southern India were lending considerable support to the LTTE. As the situation deteriorated the then Prime Minister Jayawardene invited talks with Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and as negotiations were brokered with India as a mediator the government made a number of concessions to the Tamils and the official status of the Tamil language together with some devolution of power stayed the bloody hand of civil strife for a time.
I was born in Westminister, London in 1984 the son of a Sinhala Sri Lankan immigrant. I was raised among a tight knit Sinhala community based in North West London where Buddhism and mutual respect was what kept what I imagined a group of first generation settlers together in those first tentative years on foreign soil. Now these uncles and aunties had families and children like me, the second generation, and were still close and firmly held together by a sense of mutual belonging. The first memory I have of a sense of conflict in the country my parents talked about was when in 1993 my father came home to my mother shouting from the living room from in front of the television: 'They killed Premedasa!' she called. Long days in front of the Six O'Clock News ensued. President Premedasa had been killed by a suicide bomber, it had been more violent backlash. After Indian-Sri Lankan relations had soured after India disapproved of the humanitarian violations on both sides, Premedasa had sent the Indians and their troops home. Gandhi himself had fallen at the hands of an LTTE suicide attack in 1991 and the group had now been tagged a terrorist organization commonly known as the Tamil Tigers.
It was another case of coming so close but failing due to intermittent ignorance and short sightedness on both sides of the barbed wire fence. On the ground, brutality of the suicide bombings were countered by the unrelenting surges by the army into the northern provinces. Politically however any concessions to the Tamils gained mass disapproval by the Sinhala majority. This was yet another trend in the struggle that would continue until early in the next century. By 2002 the conflict had amassed thousands of deaths and millions of displaced families. It appeared that without any mediations, hope of peace was false and fading. Enter Norway; another mediator and hope sprung again in the paddy fields of a blood soaked island. A ceasefire was signed, de-commissioning of weapons began and the road to Jaffna was re-opened. The rebels dropped it's demand for a separate state and autonomy and the acknowledgment of a right to exist was something. And it would do, for now. Passenger flights to the north took to the air and people around the world began to remember that the Pearl in the Indian Ocean although now slightly cloudy and had less of the innocent splendor it once charmed, had lost none of its beauty and wonder. Tourism boomed. The economy showed signs of recovery, yes, everything it seemed after nearly 20 years of civil war, was getting better in 2002.
Yet I write now on February 3rd 2008 a day before the 60th Sri Lankan Independence and things seem more dire than they ever were. Last month the government and the rebels had officially pulled out of the 2002 peace accords although a steep incline of violence during the last 2 years meant that this 'official' pull out was a formality after the fact. There are whispers of 2008 being the year war ravages this nation. I, myself, am surprised that the nation still stands to be ravaged or that there is anything to ravage at all. The few years of peace and prosperity after 2002 gave way and again it seems, we were so close yet so far. But what consistently brings this writer to a utter dismay was not the futility of the 2002 peace agreement but it was an event on Boxing Day 2004 after which I stood with many a political commentator at the time with real hope that this one thing, if anything, would bring the country together; it was the Tsunami. 30, 000 Sri Lankans were killed that day when massive tidal waves ripped through the coastal communities of the island, not just Tamils, not just Sinhala, nor Buddhist or Hindu, Sri Lankan's lost their lives and loved ones that day. I held the firm belief that looking at the devastation caused, perhaps those that make the decisions in Colombo and Jaffna would have gained a new perspective. That maybe it would take this, enormous, heartbreaking tragedy for Tamil and Sinhala men and women alike to set aside their differences and work together rebuilding their one nation. Never were we so close, not in '85, not even in 2002 with the Norwegians did we stand on the very threshold of facing a common disaster and thrust forward to face it together. This was the opportunity needed, I felt, to show the world we could do this. In London, England, Sri Lanka suddenly became a charity case; send your clothes, send your money send your food. We became one of those stories. Aid was send from many nations around the world to help Sri Lanka rebuild and fight through. Let us show them, I felt. Let us share the burden.
$3 Billion was sent to Sri Lanka in the coming months. And in July 2005 what did Sri Lanka do? We rowed, we quarreled and wouldn't let go. $3 Billion was sent to us and we couldn't share $3 Billion. We took up the arms of ignorance and distrust and aimed it squarely at our feet. And then again, inevitably, we aimed it at each other. In August 2005 the Sri Lankan foreign minister was killed in a suicide bomb which led to renewed fighting in the northeast. Tit for tat, an eye for an eye once again. For the past 25 years over and over we reached the point where opportunity was brokered, sought and fought for and then on one morning in December opportunity was handed to us by an act of a merciless God, and even then we failed and we fell into the same old design. The same old ways that bring us to February 3rd 2008 on the eve of the celebration where we are reminded of the birth of our great nation. I for one do not see anything worth celebrating, I for one feel let down. For all the pride I have in my father and the generation that swept across continents to build lives worth living, braving new worlds in endeavour, why do I not feel as proud when looking back at the history of the country from which they hailed? Tell me what we, the second generation, should be proud of? What hope have you left us for the future?
Become a Fan of Relevant Truth on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Relevant-Truth/8197653882?ref=share
As an amateur cameraman films a hazy blur of people, commotion, blood and fear. We hear a man's voice ask 'Where do we go?' 'What do we do now?' Another man stares at the camera, being jostled by the panic stricken protesters swarming past, he looks up and says 'Nothing, keep on filming till they shoot us.'
Truth is hard to come by in Burma. It's a place where the barrel of a gun jams closed the songs of free speech. If you find yourself in this South-Asian travel book paradise, you might find the local Burmese people hurried and disengaged. Do not mistake silence for rudeness. The truth is if any of these slight and devoutly spiritual people were to be heard speaking too freely with you, then it's likely that they would be sentenced to ten years hard labor.
In 1962 Burma was taken over by a military junta. Total power was reigned in to the hands of dictator Ne Win a Stalin like figure who turned Burma, a nation founded on Buddhism, socialism and democracy into what Amnesty International calls a 'prison without bars'. Since then the military regime behave like a corporate body and regard themselves as separate from and superior to it's people who had not, nor will ever have, a say in their countries actions both domestically at home or abroad. It is the remnant of the British Colonial mindset, a regime separate and superior to it's people. Yes, truth is hard to come by in Burma because of the very fact that truth and all its freedoms are illegal. Freedom of expression, books, films, free press, anything that would inspire one of the most literate societies in Asia have been banned. Nothing that can hold a threat or indeed hold the regime accountable for innumerable human rights violations are altogether banned and are illegal.
Foreign radio are crucial sources of information here, the Burmese whose very thoughts are a struggle have to search for other means to express their disenchantment and anger. But heroes are borne from constraints such as these. Aung San Suu Kyi is the democratically elected leader of Burma and was put under house arrest for twelve of the last eighteen years, forbidden visits from her husband and children, holding firm to the hope that the people's will for democracy will prevail. Things came to a head when in September of last year Buddhist monks held a peace protest in Rangoon only to be shot at by military tanks and soldiers. Pictures of these rallies held a spot on corporate media for a few weeks until it gave way to images of the protest being scattered and stamped out by the tanks and the soldiers. Thus out of mind. But heroes prevail. Poet Saw Wai was arrested this very day for embedding a message into a love poem overlooked by censorship authorities and was published in a journal to commemorate Valentines Day. The poem called 'February Fourteen' was written in such a way that when arranging the first letters of every sentence together spelt 'Power Crazy Than Shwe' referring to the country's military leader. What did he gain or accomplish? This small message garnered world attention. BBC NEWS, AL JAZEERA and SKY all reported it. It got the message across to people like you and me and inspired many - including this writer - to share their thoughts. Aung San Soo Kyi received a Nobel Prize for a commitment to what became a twelve year non-violent silent protest from inside her home. Things people do inspire others to do something to help. To act for others who cannot act themselves. Saw Wai would walk past the house of Soo Kyi just to hear the sweet sound of her playing the piano, the distant melodies the closest he or anyone could get to a rallying cry. This was enough for him to be inspired, to keep his hope alive.
Burma it seems has become yet another sad CNN story about a country far far away whose people are being subjugated and silenced by an authoritarian and militaristic regime. Just another one of those stories. Something is happening. But it's out of sight. It's out of mind. The less we hear, the less we see the less we remember and the less we care. But you know, we shouldn't mistake silence for peace. This, it seems is our tendency to move to a less exotic world to more familiar stories; Heath Ledger is dead don't forget. But soon even that tragedy we will have moved on from. There will always be poets, and there will always be messages snuck into the mainstream from people like Saw Wai. It's the only way the voiceless can be heard without our help. We do not live in a society where books, music, films, even the internet is censored and kept on a leash. We don't face a death sentence for speaking freely nor would we tolerate such a society. The people of Burma have no choice and they are doing their best to let us know.
So let us respond.
Guy Gunaratne
WEBSITE LINKS:
http://www.burmacampaign.org.uk/
http://www2.free-burma.org/index.php
http://www.freeburma.co.uk/
VIDEO:
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=253734287578732261