Diaspora Muslim academic reasons out SLMC politics
[TamilNet
, Thursday, 27 September 2012, 00:28 GMT]
Colombo-born Dr. A.R.M. Imtiyaz, who is currently teaching in a US
university, cautioned this week the SLMC in alliance with Rajapaksa that
it “should be able to read political logic of the Rajapaksa regime.”
The Tamil-speaking academic, while reasoning out the bargaining politics
of the SLMC, and delineating on the areas of lacuna in Tamil–Muslim
understanding, further cautioned the SLMC that “Any failure or any
deception, would very likely trigger tensions and distrust between
Tamils and Moors.” Using the term Moors in his responses to questions
put forth by a TamilNet contact in North America, Dr. Imtiyaz commented
on the SLMC decision that “ It is easy to win diamonds for elites and
politicians in coalition politics, but what is hard is to effectively
win rights and security for the masses”.
Dr. ARM Imtiyaz
“As long as the island of Sri Lanka
confronts tensions and conflict between the Tamil and Sinhalese, it is
very likely that the Moor politicians from the North and East will play a
greater role in bargaining politics,” Dr. Imtiyaz observed in answering
to a question on the ‘minority’ perspective of Muslim politics and said
that the bargaining politics went very well in the past for Muslim
politics.
On SLMC collaborating with a regime that has gone on
record for anti-Muslim activities, Dr. Imtiyaz said that the SLMC is a
political party, not a mass movement.
Power is the aim of any
political party and Muslim politics think that the strategy of the past
still holds good. But sadly the cooperation this time is not winning any
substantial concessions for Moors with respect to security, land and
autonomy. It is based only on political portfolios, the academic
commented adding that he would be happy “if the SLMC would demand for
the devolution of Land and Police powers to the Provincial Councils.”
Agreeing
that there was a great opportunity that should have been used by the
SLMC to build better relations between Tamils and Moors at popular
level, Dr. Imtiyaz shared a communication he had from the SLMC
hierarchy, reasoning out its decision.
“The SLMC’s top leaders
share some concerns about the Rajapakse regime’s tricks. Some of the
SLMC top members think that the regime in Colombo may spark further
internal tensions, and thus the SLMC may face some difficulties. Also,
there is a deep distrust toward the TNA, particularly it’s inability to
come forward strongly against the recent developments pertaining to the
returning Northern Moor refuges from Puttalam and other southern
corners. Some thought that the SLMC-TNA controlled provincial
administration would face severe difficulties from Colombo, and making
the whole exercise futile. Combination of all of these factors
contributed to the SLMC’s decision, and thus they missed the opportunity
for better Tamil-Moor relations at popular level,” Imtiyaz said.
Colombo’s
plans on demographic changes and political weakening of Tamil-Moor
political representation could have been subverted, had the SLMC opted
for SLMC-TNA administration of the East, Imtiyaz observed.
On
building Tamil-Muslim relationship, the foremost suggestion of Imtiyaz
was that “Tamils need to recognize the separate identity of Moors, and
they should disclose this in unambiguous language.”
On this point
the response of Tamil civil activists in the island was that Tamils
shouldn’t have any hesitation in recognizing the separate identity of
any people, when the people think that they should assert to it.
In
the same spirit, the need that has come to Eezham Tamils to assert
themselves a nation having the right to self-determination has to be
understood by the Muslims. Academics of both Tamils and Muslims should
work towards finding out a way for the national aspirations of Eezham
Tamils and minority aspirations of Muslims accommodating each other for
the synthesis and benefit of the both, the civil activists in the island
further said.
The full text of the responses of Dr A.R.M. Imtiyaz to questions asked by a TamilNet contact in North America, follows:Q:
In the Eastern Provincial government elections, the Muslim political
discourse was centered on the notion that the Muslims are "minorities"
and therefore bargaining with the rulers would be the best way forward
for the Muslims. What are your comments?
A: In
deeply divided ethnic societies where more than two ethno-cultural
groups compete for resources and positions, political elites and
politicians belonging to non-major groups often seek alliance and
political cooperation with the major/ dominant ethnic group to gain
maximum political gains and positions. The policies, behaviors, and
actions of Moors’ political establishment since 1948 in Sri Lanka
affirms the point I am making about the functions of ethnic parties in
deeply divided polities.
Such political collaboration in the
name of Moor masses went very well, and Moor politicians did win
significant concessions from the Sinhala polity. When you have a
polarized society where two groups compete for political control, ethnic
groups like Moors can maximize their interests. The recently concluded
Eastern provincial elections confirm this theory. As long as the island
of Sri Lanka confronts tensions and conflict between the Tamil and
Sinhalese, it is very likely that the Moor politicians from the North
and East will play a greater role in bargaining politics, not winning.
Q:
The Mahinda regime is guilty of appropriating lands belonging to Tamils
and Muslims. The regime and its supporters are also guilty of attacks
on mosques and systematically hindering business opportunities of
Muslims. Could one justify the decision of the SLMC to support the
regime to form the provincial government in the East?
A:
The SLMC is well aware of the problems of Moors, particularly the North
and Eastern Moors. The SLMC is a political party. It is not a
mass-oriented political movement. In any political party the ultimate
aim is power. Muslim cooperation with the Sinhala ruling class/political
parties, mainly due to the ethnic conflict and war against the Tamils,
helped the Moor politicians to maximize their interests. The SLMC and
other Moor politicians think that such strategy is still good and would
work. But, sadly, the SLMC’s political cooperation this time with the
regime did not win any substantial concessions to the Eastern Moors with
respect to their security, land, and regional autonomy. The cooperation
was made possible mainly based on cabinet portfolios at the regional
level, and political concessions at the center.
I would be happy
to see the SLMC’s cooperation with the regime to form a government in
the East if the SLMC would demand the devolution of Land and police
Powers to the Provincial Councils.
Q: The
elections for the Eastern provincial government and the results were a
golden opportunity for building Tamil-Muslim relations. In fact, the
TNA, the dominant Tamil political party offered to work with the SLMC.
Why did the SLMC missed this opportunity?
A:
Political parties often take decision to maximize their own interests.
The SLMC is no exception. Yes, it was great opportunity, and the SLMC
should have used it to build better relations between Tamils and Moors
at popular level. My communications with the people associated with the
SLMC hierarchy suggest a few interesting reasons for the SLMC’s
decision: [1] the SLMC’s top leaders share some concerns about the
Rajapakse regime’s tricks. Some of the SLMC top members think that the
regime in Colombo may spark further internal tensions, and thus the SLMC
may face some difficulties. Also, there is a deep distrust toward the
TNA, particularly it’s inability to come forward strongly against the
recent developments pertaining to the returning Northern Moor refuges
from Puttalam and other southern corners. Some thought that the SLMC-TNA
controlled provincial administration would face severe difficulties
from Colombo, and making the whole exercise futile. Combination of all
of these factors contributed to the SLMC’s decision, and thus they
missed the opportunity for better Tamil-Moor relations at popular level.
Q: The Muslim perspective on the Tamil-Muslim
relationship has always been critical of the early negative role played
by Sir Ponnampalam Ramanathan and later in the 80s and 90 s the
atrocities by the Tamil militants against the Muslims that culminated in
the expulsion of the Muslims from the North by the LTTE. While these
are projected as grave historical errors on the part of Tamil
politicians and militants, would you think the decision to support the
Mahinda regime in the Eastern provincial government after campaigning
against it is a grave mistake? What could be the reasons?
A:
The answer is no. It is becoming a kind of style for Muslim political
elites to use the brutal behavior of the Tamil militants, including the
LTTE to justify their co-operation with the Sinhala political class.
Yes, as you correctly said that the Tamil political and military actors
had committed crimes against the Moors. But the Moors are no innocent
parties either. In my studies on the Moors of the Northern and Eastern
provinces, I have exposed the violence by the Moors against the Tamils.
The Moor politicians are no angels. The point is that the SLMC, which
campaigned aggressively against the Mahinda regime, committed a
historical political error. In politics, every decision you make may
have grave consequences. Such consequences may help trigger tensions at
popular level, or may lead to widen distrust and hatred.
Q:
The Eastern province will now have a council of ministers consisting of
Sinhalese and Muslims only. Perhaps this is what the Mahinda regime
wanted all along: to demonstrate that they can change the patterns of
representation in the North and East if they want and east is just the
beginning. What's your take on this issue?
A:
Colombo has been active in changing the patterns of representation in
the North and East and demography for a while. It wanted to
significantly weaken the Tamil-Moor political representations and
population control of the region. Actually, Colombo’s plan could have
been subverted if the SLMC had opted for SLMC-TNA administration. The
SLMC should be able to read political logic of the Rajapakse regime. Any
failure or any deception, would very likely trigger tensions and
distrust between Tamils and Moors. It is easy to win diamonds for
elites and politicians in coalition politics, but what is hard is to
effectively win rights and security for the masses.
Q: What are your suggestions for progressive Tamil-Muslim relationships and programme?
A:
Politicians have their game and moves to win power. They seldom think
about the interests of masses. But political activists and scholars have
a role in the society. That is, to educate the masses and to seek
common ground for better future. In the context of Sri Lanka, both
Tamils and Moors are being denied justice. Both communities have some
deep-seated political as well as socio-economic problems. Just because
these two communities have problems, would not make these two groups
ideal to form a common front. There are political and social forces
within and beyond these communities. These forces often run their own
agendas to weaken any possible working relations among masses of these
groups. These groups often employ distrust and divisions of Tamils and
Moors to pursue their own agendas. But the fact is that there is a
sense of distrust between Tamils and Moors. Moors of Sri Lanka have some
reasonable concerns about the Tamils. These are legitimate concerns.
Tamils need to recognize the separate identity of Moors, and they should
disclose this in unambiguous language.
Groups seek their
destination and claim their identity not only based on language, but
also non-language factors such as religion. Also, Tamil polity should
not take any measures against the Northern Moors returnees. Expulsion of
Moors by the LTTE was a brutal error that the LTTE committed in their
long struggle. Actually, such move progressively weakened the Moors’
trust against the Tamil struggle. On the other hand, Muslim activists
and scholars need to acknowledge the errors and violence committed by
the Moors against the Tamils. And we need to apply a lot of pressure on
Moor politicians to seek better political choices. The politics of
collaboration may help political elites and politicians, but its
consequences would not put masses in any good position in the long run.
[Dr.
A.R.M. Imtiyaz was born in Colombo. He studied political science at the
University of Peradeniya and received his Ph.D in World history from
Nanjing University in China. He currently teaches ethnic politics,
Modern China and Modern India at the Asian Studies program/ Department
of Political Science, Temple University, Philadelphia. His research
studies cover two major aspects—the symbolic politics of elites and
politicization of ethnic differences especially in Sri Lanka. His most
recent research examines issues pertaining to Muslims in Middle East and
in Xinjiang province, China.]
Chronology:
ஆல் தி best
