Email 
Print 
With the ceasefire dead, what now for Sri Lanka?
Written by: Joanne Tomkinson
A soldier holds up a signboard to stop vehicles at a checkpoint in Colombo July 1, 2006. REUTERS/Buddhika Weerasinghe
Violence in Sri Lanka has escalated over the past two years, but there are widespread predictions of even greater bloodshed when a moribund ceasefire officially ends later this month. The 2002 ceasefire halted two decades of conflict between the government and Tamil Tiger rebels, but it began to unravel in 2005. "The last two years have been the most violent in a 25-year-long war which has taken over 70,000 lives," the Wall Street Journal says. The paper asks whether President Mahinda Rajapaksa's "war of attrition" against the Tamil Tigers will work or simply plunge the country into more violence. The rebels are fighting for a separate Tamil homeland in the north and east of the country. Most of the war is being waged in the north but the Tigers have also targeted the capital, Colombo. The WSJ predicts that things will only get worse, stating "over the last month, the Tigers have employed a mix of suicide attacks and mines in the South, mainly around Colombo, causing death, destruction and panic. Next to Kandahar, Colombo is becoming the most dangerous place in the world today." The paper also warns that human rights will likely come under even greater fire. With the government looking unable to end the suicide attacks and roadside bombings, the paper predicts Sri Lanka will see an increase in security checks, further regulation of civilian movement, and further segregation and scrutiny of Tamils living in Colombo. Sri Lankan publication The Sunday Leader laments the ceasefire's formal termination and worries about the fate of Sri Lanka's internally displaced population. It notes that the ceasefire had allowed some 300,000 of Sri Lanka's 800,000 internally displaced people to return to their homes. What of the rest, it wonders. The Leader also worries that the loss of formal scrutiny by Nordic ceasefire monitors will further exacerbate violence. After 6 years in the country, the monitors are packing up - a move the paper views as likely to further decrease accountability on both sides. The Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten doesn't think the termination need necessarily spell the end of Norway's diplomatic presence in the country, but it does acknowledge that the government needs to rapidly renegotiate the terms on which it can remain. The Financial Times also voices concern about the impact of the ceasefire's end on Sri Lanka's worsening economic situation. Although it is South Asia's wealthiest economy on a per capita basis, Sri Lanka's soaring inflation, high military spending and the escalating civil war threaten its future prosperity. Erik Solheim, the Norwegian minister who negotiated the original ceasefire, says in The Economist that although he believes negotiations will resume eventually, "many people will die in the meantime".
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
8 responses to “With the ceasefire dead, what now for Sri Lanka?”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
Unlike some other content on this website, the written content in this article may be republished or redistributed by any means free of charge. Any use of photographs and graphics on this website is expressly prohibited. You must check whether written content contained in other articles on this website may be republished or redistributed without the express permission of Reuters or the relevant third party provider.
10 Jan 2008 18:49:47 GMT
Just give the Tamil's their own chunk of land! What's the big deal? They live there already anyway, fighting about it is NOT worth the loss of lives on either side.
11 Jan 2008 12:09:04 GMT
Next month will be end of six years for CFA agreement. Srilankan Ethnic conflict history ( started after 1958 riots)will be nearly fifty years old. Srilanka became an independent nation from the British rule sixty ago next month. The way thing are moving we don't know what will happen to this nation from next month. Many attempts made locally and with international help in the last fifty years to find peace in the ethnic conflict has failed. Many thousands have died thousand of families have been displaced. Human rights abuses have increased. Will the right thinking world organisations UNO EU and international society will intervene to bring peace to this trouble nation.
14 Jan 2008 12:51:47 GMT
Mr James Schultz, it is such a shame that you have made a comment such as the above, how on earth a minority counts to less than 20% of the total population should get a large chunk of the island. You cannot just give away separate land to separate minorities, even if you did what will happen to the Muslims and the Christians in the country, does it mean that they should get their own piece of the island too, What happens to the more successful Tamils who live in Colombo, Kandy and other part of the country now? Does it mean that the government should pack their bags and send them all to the North?. Sri Lanka is a small country and dividing it into little pieces as you have suggested would be the perfect recipe for disaster.
Unfortunately we have lost a great number of civilians and some of the greatest leaders we ever had, If we roll back the years Singapore and Malaysia were trying to compete with us in the 60's they wanted to be the next Sri Lanka on the world map, look at them now and look at our nation. I am not saying that what happened to the Tamil population back in the early days is fair its far from it, however the point is that LTTE and the Tamil public had the chance to put it right on so many occasions and they chosen not to, I perfectly understand that there were some Politianâs in both parties who never wanted this war to end as it will punch their wallets. The fact of the matter is that even though at the initial stages LTTE did represent the Tamil population and did fight for it, has been transformed into a large financial organization where a lot of personal interest of a minority lies. If you stop the war that pathetic money and power hungry minority of people on both parties will get bust. It is easy for a guy like me to sit on the computer with all the comforts in the world and criticise these things as I have never heard a shell blast next to me or heard my little cousin just got raped by 20 men in the Sri Lankan army, It is tough being a Tamil in that country at this moment of time, however the point is that other minorities are still living peacefully in Sri Lanka. Unless the Tamil public realize that the LTTE does not have its interest on its people and it is only an investment opportunity for a lot of money hungry devils who cannot lose the sight of controlling or governing people. It is such a shame that at these moment of time our people have elected the stupidest president we ever had and it is unlikely that until Mr Rajapaksa has been removed from his chair and there is a true Tamil representative organization there will be no ending to this bloody conflict. We are proud of our nation and we have a long history our kings built ponds, castles and the Sigiriya rock when the rest of the world had no clothes to put on, most of the Sri Lankans want the clock to roll back its years so we can be proud of our selves again, all we want is a peaceful nation so the pearl of the Indian ocean can come to her REAL MEJESTY once again. Proud to be a Sri Lankan and it is sad to see the country has gone to the dogs.16 Jan 2008 08:03:37 GMT
Mr. Tash, you coudn't be more right and it is great indeed to see such hope for a better tommorow. Being a Singhalese I am ashamed of the injustices perpetrated on the Tamils by a small section of misguided Sighalese(mostly induced by power hungry politicians), particularly in 1983.
However all communities have suffered in this war, and like you, still I too have not lost hope of a better tommorow. We can indeed roll back the years and live in peace and prosperity once more like we did in the past. I do ofcourse understand the need for devolution of power and the space for Sri Lankan Tamils to manage their destiny, as was championed by moderate Tamil leaders. However devolution need to take place without deviding the country in two and needs to be acceptable to the moderate citizens of all communities in the Country. While denouncing the tendency to wage war by the present regime, many who are moderates in the Singhalese community do not see a realistic chance of arriving at a peacefull solutution as long as Mr Prabhakaran and the LTTE is present. And also as long as the LTTE is omnipresent, many do not see any hope of a moderate Tamil leadership emerging, to give an alternative to the present impasse. Whereas allmost all agree that any devolution of power needs to be meaningfull and extensive, it is commonly observed in most parts of the country that even the paupers are willing to undergo immense economic hardship and death and destruction to life and property, to overcome the present crisis and put an end to the LTTE. To that extent all seems content to put their faith in the present regime to find that solution militarily, that which eluded the peace loving public after years of peace talks. It is a dangerous cycle of violence, but that to most seems the only solution with the remotest chance of success.16 Jan 2008 08:06:01 GMT
The Tamil people are entitled to rule the North and parts of the east of the country as they always had a sovereign administration prior to colonization. However they have still failed to unilaterally declare independence as they are aware that most members of the International community will not accept another military junta by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in the South Asian region. My own Singhalese community is fighting a vicious war which will finally end up in two separate states. The unilateral abrogation by the Sri Lankan government will be the most serious mistake in the history of this island and will lead to a complete separation between the Tamil nation and Singhalese as it was prior to colonization. The oppressor will not succeed in its objectives to dominate the minorities as they are unable to resolve the root causes which led to the violence and opposition of the minority. In this context it is justified that the Tamils regain sovereignty to govern their own homeland with dignity. I have great trust that the UN will eventually establish a peace keeping mission once the two sides are separated that will allow new peace talks to define the borders and create sustainable peace on the island. This process will not take too long as the LTTE remains to have the capacity to liberate the north and parts of the East within the upcoming months however they must establish a democratic administration prior to recognition by the international community. We can embrace ourselves for a very tough and bloody period which will result in the separation of the island as it was prior to the illegal colonization by Portuguese, Dutch and British.16 Jan 2008 10:31:53 GMT
I agree with mr Schulz, as european I have been following news about sri lanka from all different sides and points of views. the ONLY reasonable and peaceful solution is to give back the original homelands to the tamils as they have lived there for centuries and centuries! Sinhalese should mind human rights and stop the atrocities on innocent tamils and their children. This is the only reason why the LTTE exists!!!
16 Jan 2008 13:04:01 GMT
Mr. Jos van Kamp, I beg to differ on your opinion. However, considering the highly effective and potent pro LTTE propaganda in Western Countries, I am not surprised.
Perhaps you may be surprised to know that there was a significant percentage of Singhalese and Muslims living in the North and the East of Sri Lanka prior to the start of civil war? It was with great sadness I witnessed the disintegration in to full scale war and the ethnic cleansing of the North of the country by the LTTE. To day there are no Singhalese or Muslim civilians in any of the LTTE controlled areas. For over two decades those civilians - driven from their habitats due to war - Singhalese, Tamils & Muslims, languish in Refugee camps. If the country is divided what would happen to them, and the hundreds of thousands of Tamils living in amity with the majority Singhalese for over centuries in other parts of the country? Should they be sent packing to the North and the East like what happened post Independance of India and Pakistan? What about the other minorities? Should they too be given their seperate homelands. There are more ethnic Tamils in London than in the whole of Sri Lanka. Should they too be given a seperate country in London? Should all ethnic groups in the world be divided in to ethnically homogenious states? Do we forget what happened in Rwanda and is now happening in Kenya? Should this tiny Island of 20Million inhabitants made up of 74% Singhalese, 18% Tamils and 8% others (please refer reuters country profiles based on UN reports) be broken in to several pieces? I have visited the country regularly over ten times, and I have friends in all communities. I can tell you that the only Tamils that still support seperation and LTTE are those that live very very far away from the LTTE. Confirmation of this may be found on the web site of the University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna), on their latest communique. This is a web site of a group of Jaffna University Scholars (Mostly Tamil), who have won international accolades for their fearless and impartial reporting on the ground situation in Jaffna (infact some of them had paid with their lives for their impartiality). Further insight to the LTTE and its long march of horror for a seperate state in Sri Lanka could be had on the Reuters itself - please refer "chronology on decent to war". Those Tamils still in the clutches of the LTTE are dreadfull of them, and pays up large amounts of money using all their hard earned life long savings, pawning jewelry, and selling their ancestral properties etc to clandestinely escape LTTE clutches and migrate to Singhalese dominated areas or to other countries. In fact today there are more Sri Lankan Tamils in Colombo and other parts of mainly Singhalese dominated areas than in the North East, which is claimed to be the Traditional Homeland of the Tamils by the LTTE. They have suffered long enough under the influenze of LTTE and the mirage of a seperate state, which in the current state of affairs could only appeal to a demented mind oblivious to human suffering. Also please beware of writers claiming to be Singhalese or Tamils from various parts of the country to further their ends, as I can again confirm with responsibility that there are no Singhalese or Muslims civilians in Jaffna. They were all driven away in 1990 after giving two hours notice. Those that remained behind were massacred and hacked to death by the LTTE. LTTE is now banned in the USA, EU, Canada, India and a host of other countries as a Terrorist group. The LTTE infact brought a new dimension to Terrorism and perfected the art of suicide bombing, which is being copied by extremists all over the world (including Al Qaida and Hamas). In fact last week the FBI declared the LTTE as the single most dangerous terrorist group in the world (please refer the official FBI web site). Does the world still need a seperate country run by an organisation like the LTTE? Please think!!! The world would be a better place without them.04 Feb 2008 12:21:28 GMT
Mr Andreson, The following is a article written on the FBI report, I've added it for your knowledge here "2. The story asserts: "[T]he Tamil Tigers are among the most dangerous and deadly extremists in the world." But the story does not assert that the Tamil Tigers have ever threatened or killed an American, whether civilian or military. Yet federal law, section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, stipulates that a foreign organization must threaten Americans or the national security of the United States to be listed as a foreign terrorist organization. The story neglects to explain how the Tamil Tigers impair the national security of the United States in its conflict with the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL). That government is or has been allied with enemies of the United States, including Iran, Cuba, Saddam Hussein, and Yasar Arafatâs PLO. Indeed, the GOSL is a state sponsor of terrorism itself, and tacitly support Iranâs support for international terrorism. Furthermore, the United States Department of State has urged the GOSL to negotiate with the Tamil Tigers."
Source: http://www.tamilsforjustice