Ethnic Crisis: Inadequacy of Traditional Interpretations

By Victor Ivan

This article is meant to analyse the inadequacy of traditional interpretations of the ethnic crisis and point out limitations inherent in them.
It is not incorrect to treat this issue as an ethnic crisis. Yet, in my opinion, it is not correct to treat it only as a conflict based on ethnic differences that prevail between the majority Sinhala community and the other minority communities -Tamils and Muslims. In other words, the crisis scenario embraces different facets that extend beyond ethnic lines. The traditional interpretation has its own limitations and according to which it is only an outcome of an ethnic conflict among the Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim communities. It has overlooked the implicit conflict that prevails among different religious groups and social divisions based on caste system. Consequently, religio-social dimensions of this crisis have been either ignored or excluded and the issue is defined only in terms of ethnic differences.
In my opinion, ethnicity, caste and religion constitute three significant components which are intrinsically tangled in the ethnic issue. They are inseparably interconnected. Under these circumstances, the ethnic crisis ought to be understood in its right perspective and as an inclusive issue which embraces ethnic, religious and caste differences that prevail among different communities without reducing it to a mere conflict  stemmed from ethnic differences alone. These factors impact on each other. The roots of ethnic crisis go deep down these sources. It is therefore, important that the ethnic issue is perceived from all angles and understood in its totality if a lasting and sustainable solution is to be found.  Fragmented analysis of the problem would not lead to adopting practical and realistic solutions.
The traditional interpretation that defines the ethnic crisis as an outcome of ethnic differences between the majority Sinhala and the  minority ethnic groups has apparently been developed by several associations such as the Centre for Ethnic Studies, Marga Institute and the Social Scientists Association. The Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF) established by the Tamil political parties in 1977, their demand for a mandate for a Tamil Eelam at the parliamentary election in 1977, emergence of a number of organizations in the north asserting an armed struggle for an Eelam and awful incidents like 1983 Black July invariably caused to attribute a greater importance to the ethnic factor eclipsing other constituent factors such as caste  and religious differences. In this back drop, the caste and the religious factors were pushed to the background as insignificant, unimportant and irrelevant. This trend invariably resulted in creating an impression that ethnic differences was the one and only factor of the ethnic crisis.
The unpleasant incidents that occurred during the deplorable Black July and subsequent migration of a large number of Tamils into European countries as refugees resulted in attracting international attention to the ethnic issue. Apart from that the ethnic conflict became a lucrative industry that yielded large sums of foreign currency. It eventually became a popular fashion that proliferated diverse research work on the subject developing an abundant literature on the ethnic crisis  making numerous analysis, interpretations, recommendations and wide and varied solutions. In the face of this popular academic trend, the caste and religious factors were completely ignored and the crisis was defined as a mere ethnic issue between Sinhala and Tamil people and a conflict between the majority and the minority communities.
There are a number of issues of significant importance that the intellectuals and scholars who dealt with this problem academically had completely ignored or overlooked. They are as follows; they had an interpretation of their own about the insurrection in the North led by Prabhakaran yet, they failed to make a realistic analysis in regard to the insurrection in the South, led by Rohana Wijeweera and explain the real reasons that led to it. According to them the violent Tamil movements that sprang up   in the North was an outcome of an ethnic crisis. But, they were unable to grasp the exact reasons that led to the JVP uprising in the Sinhalese South, which they had completely ignored in their interpretations. Prior to the emergence of the LTTE, the traditional political scene in the North was dominated by the Vellala caste. Yet, it did not have a place in the violent political struggle launched by the militants. Obviously, the intellectuals have not focused their attention on the role played by the caste factor in analyzing the origins of the LTTE.
Both Wijeweera and Prabhakaran belonged to a lower rank in the traditional caste hierarchy in their respective communities. Under the Sinhala caste system the Govigama caste was ranked the highest in the order of importance while the Vellala caste remained the predominant caste under the Tamil caste system. Both Wijeweera and Prabhakaran belonged to an intermediary caste.  Wijeweera belonged to the Karava caste while Prabhakaran belonged to Karaiyar caste which enjoyed only an intermediary position in the caste hierarchy. It is interesting to note that the majority membership of the Central Polit Bureau of the JVP of Wijeweera and the LTTE of Prabhakaran consisted of  low caste people, which is a characteristic generally not to be seen in the traditional political parties like the UNP, SLFP, Tamil Congress and the Federal Party. The majority of foot soldiers of the JVP and LTTE consisted of the representatives of the oppressed castes in the Sinhala and Tamil communities. The intellectuals in their research work into ethnic crisis do not seem to have focused their attention on this factor.

Arunachalam and the Caste factor

It was after Ponnambalam Arunachalam defected from the National Congress that the traditional Tamil leaders began to move in two different directions. Initially, the leaders of the National Congress had promised Ponnambalam Arunachalam the nomination to contest the Colombo city constituency at the parliamentary election held under 1920 reforms and   later they changed it in favor of James Pieris prompting the former to abandon the National Congress. That was the main reason why he defected from the National Congress. A close study of this incident would reveal that it was not the ethnic factor but the caste factor that had influenced this situation.  Bryce Ryan, in his book titled “Caste in Modern Ceylon” asserts that the most decisive conflicts in the country since the nineteenth century up to about 1925 had emerged among different caste groups rather than the ethnic groups. The origin of polemics on caste discrimination in written form can be traced back to 1890 when G. A. Dharmarathna published a booklet called “Kara-Govi Contest”. The author had been extremely critical of a statement claimed to have made by Ponnambalam Arunachalam in Matara on 12 September 1885, in which the latter had made a comment extolling the superiority and the prominence of the Govigama caste of the Sinhala caste hierarchy. This is clear evidence to show that even Ponnambalam Arunachalam had been involved in the caste conflict prevalent among the Sinhalese at that time.
Thereafter, in December 1911, when the election was held to  fill the  seat of the  learned Ceylonese in the Legislative Council, the forerunner of the present parliament, the rich Govigama Sinhalese made use of  Ponnambalam Ramanathan, the brother of  Ponnambalam Arunachalam  to defeat the candidate  fielded by  the rich Karava. At that time the right to vote was restricted only to the educated rich. When the Govigama Sinhalese realized that it would not be  possible to defeat  Dr. Marcus Fernando, the candidate of the Karava caste by fielding a candidate from  the Govigama  caste  they opted to invite Ponnambalam Ramanathan, who was in retirement in India,  to contest the election.  All the Tamils voted resolutely for Ponnambalam Ramanathan while the Govigama voters too, followed suit enabling Ponnambalam Ramanathan an easy win over Dr. Marcus Fernando. This marked an occasion in which the caste conflict had reached its climax.
K. M. De Silva, in his biography of J. R. Jayawardena has mentioned that JR’s uncle while addressing the meetings during this election had publicly humiliated the Karava caste. Ramanathan joined the contest knowing very well that it was going to be a contest between the Goyigama and the Karava caste. Apparently, he too, had not done anything to prevent it. It is evident that this unpleasant contest created an animosity between the Tamils and the elite of the Karava caste. Marcus Fernando who contested Ramanathan at this election happened to be the brother-in-law of James Pieris. It is evident that the explicit disrespect shown by James Pieris towards Arunachalam had its roots in the involvement of the Ponnambalam brothers in the caste conflict between the Karava and Govigama castes.
The Buddhist renaissance movement had to find a foreign leader of the caliber of Colonel Olcott to steer the Buddhist renaissance movement mainly because the Sinhala Buddhist leaders were unable to select a leader from among them due to overwhelming caste differences that reined supreme among them. I have made a comprehensive analysis of this situation in my book titled, “The Revolt in the Temple”. The role played by Anagarika Dharmapala in the renaissance movement was far too superior compared to that of Olcott. Yet, even Dharmapala was not able to command the degree of consensus and acceptance of Buddhist leaders that Olcott enjoyed as a leader among Sinhala Buddhists. Even today, a wide spread opinion prevails among the non Govigama politicians that it is of no use for a person outside the Govigama caste to aspire for the position of the head of state. It was only Ranasinghe Premadasa who sturdily contested that opinion. However, if not for the blood-spattered insurgency that prevailed in the country, his dream to become the head of the state would have remained a dream only. Though he overcame the hurdle, the caste factor had a significant impact in creating problems that eventually led to threaten and shorten his survival.
After the insurrection of 1971, the government ventured into a special study of the caste background of the detainees. The government had recognized it as an uprising of the youth who did not belong to the Govigama caste. Even the Presidential Commission appointed to explore the circumstances that led to the Youth Unrest in the aftermath of the second JVP insurrection had recognized the significant impact of the caste factor on the JVP insurrection in the South as well as the LTTE in the North.

Religious factor

Religion is another volatile factor behind this crisis. Language and religion constituted two main factors in the religious movement that made a significant impact on the political change in 1956. According to Howard Riggings, at the ‘56 election, apart from the anti Buddhist attitude of the Prime Minister Sir John Kothalawala, the religion of the wife of D. S. Senanayaka, the first Prime Minister of independent Ceylon too, became a hot topic. D. S. Senanayake and his brother D. C. Senanayake were connected to the Dunuwila Walawwa by marriage. The Dunuwila family was not Buddhist. They were Christians. Wriggins asserts that this   connection led the critics of D. S. Senanayake to claim that the Christian church had a profound influence on him.
During the Dutch period, the predecessors of both the Bandaranaike and Jayewardene families remained followers of the Dutch Reformists’ church.  During the British period their successors changed their denomination and became Anglicans. But S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike and J. R. Jayawardena were prudent enough to foresee the direction of the wind and converted to Buddhism thereby removing a major obstacle in the path to state power. It is evident that the religious factor is being used callously against Ranil Wickremasinghe. The fact that his father’s brother was a Christian Bishop has been used as a major negative factor in portraying a non Buddhist picture of him. Consequently, Ranil is compelled to adopt a policy of placing more weight on Buddhism to get his Christian brand mark removed.
S. L. Gunesekara undoubtedly is a straightforward and sincere person. Even for him religion has posed a major obstacle in maintaining the recognition he had gained in the Sinhala movement, plunging it into crisis. His opponents used to describe him as a whisky drinking Christian Sinhalese when they chose to blemish the recognition he had earned in the Sinhala Buddhist movement. Any one of these three factors can be utilized to ruin the career of an opponent. The opposition was capable of using the caste factor successfully in depriving Wimala Surendra, the pioneer of the Laxapana hydro electric power project of his parliamentary representation. They used the caste factor as a major weapon against him.  The opponents of E. W. Perera manipulated the religious factor to diminish the recognition he had earned. Recently, a television channel which is against Ranil questioned the validity of the appointment of John Amaratunga when he was appointed acting leader of the UNP,  consequent  to Ranil Wickremasinghe going on a foreign tour, citing the fact that  John Amaratunga is an ardent  Catholic. All these examples illustrate the oppressive nature of the impact of caste distinctions and religion on the social and political life of the people. This clearly explains that ethnicity is not the only factor that has affected the crisis that the country has faced. The religion and caste too, play a major role in this scenario. There are marked divisions in the ethnic groups as much as there are divisions among them. All Sinhalese are not equal. Similarly, all Tamils are not equal. This is a clear indication that asserts that ethnicity is not the only cause that divides the nation and creates internecine conflicts among and within communities. The religion and the caste factor too, have a significant hold in this phenomenon to a greater or lesser degree.

Mahatma Gandhi

The speeches delivered by Gandhi during his visit to Sri Lanka in 1927 bear ample proof to his understanding of the true nature of the problem this country has faced. Addressing the Hindu leaders in Jaffna, he pointed out the inter-relationship of Hinduism and Buddhism; he emphasized the fact that the Buddha had vehemently condemned and rebuffed   the caste prejudice  stressing on the need for Tamils to reject the extreme caste discriminations  based on untouchability.  Moreover, he asserted the importance of minority communities living in harmony with the majority community.
Addressing the leaders of the Ceylon National Congress he introduced Shobal as his mentor who was the pioneer in adding spiritual values and principles to politics. He further claimed that the Buddha was the unique reformist ever born to reform Hinduism. He further stressed that self rule is not something that could be captured by force or won from outside. It is a condition that has to be realized within oneself, he further stated.
Truthfulness, courage and compassion, Gandhi  said, are the essential pre-requisites for a successful independent struggle and stressed the need for ignoring communal differences such as Sinhala, Tamil and Malay and religious divisions such as Buddhists, Christians, Hindus and Muslims and insisted on the need for forging one common force that raises one voice. Then only, could they rise against oppressive colonial rule and emancipate themselves from foreign oppression.
Mahatma Gandhi built the Indian nation by rejecting the formal recognition of communalism, castism and religionism. While trying to forge a religious harmony between the Hindus and the Muslims he launched a mammoth campaign to erase off the formal acceptance of untouchables and caste discrimination which afflicted the life of the people. He fought against communalism, casteism and religionism whilst at the same time trying to forge all religions, castes and communities and create a positive nationalism that embraces all divisions and ensure equal recognition for all of them. Eventually, he was able to win his ideological vision. This is the cardinal point that we as a nation have missed. What we did was to divide the nation in terms of caste, religion and language. Consequently, the country was plunged to the point that it was soaked with an incessant blood bath.
The biggest drawback of our country is the lack of a theoretical vision about the challenges that it has faced. The Indian Congress led by Gandhi had a clear understanding of colonialism, the independence that they had been fighting for, a vision for the new nation that they aspired to create and the implications based on religion, caste and communal differences that were inherently associated with that objective. Above all, it had a strong vision of the nature of the new India that they were going to build. The leaders of our country lacked such a vision. They did not have a right vision and in-depth reading of the ethnic crisis of the country. Even the traditional interpretation of the crisis is nothing but a provisional analysis adopted with superficial considerations merely to suit the occasion.  So long as this crisis is perceived only as a conflict between the majority race and the minority groups ignoring the impact of the caste and the religious factors in it , it will not only deny the opportunity to see the problem in its true nature, but also deprive us of the prospect of finding a lasting and sustainable solution to the problem.
Conflicts prevail between ethnic groups and religions. Similarly, conflicts exists within as well. Not that all the Sinhala people are the same and enjoying equal rights. This is equally true of Tamils. Similarly, all Buddhists are not equal, nor are the Hindus or all the Muslims equal.  There are various divisions and differences among them and within themselves.
Buddhism is primarily associated with the majority Sinhala community while Hinduism and Islam are confined to Tamils and Muslims respectively. Yet, there is a marked distinction in Christianity which has spread among the Sinhalese and Tamil communities assuming the place of a second religion that is being observed by a section of both communities. Despite the LTTE of Prabakaran being a movement against the domination of the Sinhalese majority it had an anti-Vellala content as well. Similarly the JVP launched by Wijeweera despite having an apparent socialist context had an anti-Tamil and anti-Govigama content as well. In view of the above, it would not be possible to capture the true picture of the problem until and unless all three factors – ethnicity, caste and religion are taken into account. Emphasis on the ethnic factor alone as being the only cause of the issue would invariably prevent a visionary analysis of the crisis. It is therefore necessary that all three factors are viewed in their right perspective. Then only would it be possible to comprehend it correctly and find the right solution.