The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.

htm

The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon

Part 20

Sachi Sri Kantha

[27 October 2001]

Implications of Indo-LTTE War

Pirabhakaran’s ‘Judgement’
Leave it to Bertrand Russell for explaining in simple sentences, the distilled
essence of principles in logic and life. Here is one of his gems about what we
usually call as ‘judgement’ – a gift few leaders are blessed with.

“One of the most important parts of education, and one of the most
neglected, is that which teaches how to reach true conclusions on
insufficient data. As a logician I am conscious of uttering what is,
in strict logic, mere nonsense when I say this; nevertheless all
success in practical life depends upon ability to perform this
apparently impossible feat. The successful general is the one who
guesses correctly what his opponent will do; the successful
organizer is the one who can choose good subordinates after brief
interviews. Even the successful man of science makes a guess,
which afterwards is verified. In politics, the data are hardly ever
sufficient to enable a rational man to reach a reasoned conclusion,
but they are often such as to enable a man who is both rational and
shrewd to reach a sagacious conclusion. To do this, requires the
scientific absence of bias and power of hypothetical thought, but it
requires also something else – that quality which is vaguely called
‘judgement’.”
[Russell, in Education and the Social Order, 1932, p.227]

Every word of this short paragraph is pregnant with meaning. Russell

describes the traits of a successful general, a successful organizer, a
successful man of science and a successful politician. One can assess for
himself, how Pirabhakaran levels up with Russell’s attributes on
‘judgement’ a leader is worth possessing. Since his ascent, Pirabhakaran’s
judgement has served him well in countering the (1) patricians’ guiles of
J.R.Jayewardene and Indian power brokers, (2) street-smart toughness of
Premadasa, and (3) pseudo-peacenik’s charm of Chandrika Kumaratunga.

1 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

IMPLICATIONS OF INDO-LTTE WAR (1987-89)

I could trace three major outcomes of the Indo-LTTE War to Pirabhakaran.

These are,

(1) International Recognition to the LTTE

(2) Expansion of the Sri Lankan Army

(3) Harassment of Pirabhakaran by India’s Intelligence wallahs

Implications-wise, among these three outcomes, the first one was positive;
the second one was neutral; and the third one was negative. Two reasons
allow me to mark the second outcome (Expansion of the Sri Lankan Army)
in the neutral column. First, LTTE also benefited to an extent from the
capture of arms stored in the military camps which fell to them, thus
subsidizing their own armament purchase budget. Secondly, it accelerates
the process of ‘breaking the will of the Sinhalese foot-soldiers’ to fight an
unwanted war, despite the prodding by desk-top generals and the jingoist
vultures of their society.

Now, let me present my assessment on each of these outcomes.

(1) International Recognition to the LTTE

How does one assess international recognition? – Many scales exist. Some
of the recognized ones include, a Nobel prize, an Olympic gold medal, a
cover story in an international magazine, and a photo-news feature in the
first page of the New York Times. Pirabhakaran has neither received a Nobel
Prize nor won an Olympic gold medal. But, he has been featured as cover
stories in international magazines (Asiaweek, Far Eastern Economic Review
for example) more than once. Pirabhakaran’s photo also has appeared in the
first page of New York Times once. That was on August 5, 1987
accompanying a news feature of Seth Mydans from Jaffna, covering
Pirabhakaran’s address to Eelam Tamils at the Suthumalai Temple.

How many other Sri Lankan politicians (prime ministers and presidents,
both past and present) had their faces presented in the first page of New
York Times. Probably none. Or, Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike could be the
only one other than Pirabhakaran to receive such coverage in 1960. This is
my conjecture, and need to be verified in the Times archives.

On August 5, 1987, the lead editorial of the New York Times carried the
caption, ‘Going for Broke in Sri Lanka’. Commenting on the then recently
announced Rajiv Gandhi-Jayewardene Peace Accord of 1987, the

2 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

editorialist mused,

“… The first test is whether Tamil guerrillas holed up on the Jaffna

Peninsula will honor their promises and yield up their guns to Indian
peacekeepers. Then comes the second test: whether the Sinhalese
majority is reasonable enough to resist unreasoning attacks on the pact
as a sellout. Manifestly, pitfalls abound, but at least they are visible
and, with a modicum of sanity, avoidable.”

The New York Times editorialist was naïve to expect such ‘a modicum of
sanity’ among the politicians and the Intelligence agencies of India and Sri
Lanka. Thus, both tests mentioned by him failed miserably, and the political
game of ‘Going for Broke in Sri Lanka’ is still being passionately played out
in Colombo.

The 54th edition of The International Who’s Who 1990-91 (Europa

Publications Ltd., London, 1990), for the first time carried a very brief entry
on Pirabhakaran, as one of the 20,000 notable individuals. It stated,

“Pirubhakarran, Vellupillai; Sri Lankan guerrilla leader; born 26

Nov.1954, Velvettithurai, Jaffna peninsula; married; one son, one
daughter; joined Tamil movement 1970; founded Tamil New Tigers
guerrilla movement (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam since 1976)
1972.”

Pirabhakaran was neither a Cabinet minister nor a titular head of Sri Lanka;
he was neither an author nor a banker; he was neither an entertainer nor a
Nobelist. Still, he made it to the International Who’s Who on his own
merits as a ‘guerrilla leader’.

A more objective indicator on the success of any leader, any idea or any
movement comes from the recognition received, not in regular mass media,
but in history books or other reliable reference sources such as dictionaries
and encyclopedias. Hundreds of politicians capture attention of the media
by devious means (Pirabhakaran’s critics such as Subramanian Swamy,
Lakshman Kadirgamar are good examples in this game.) But what counts
ultimately is how their deeds are inscribed in the historical sources, for
reflection, study and remembrance by the posterity.

One of the earliest dictionaries to include a description on Pirabhakaran’s

movement was The Penguin Dictionary of Third World Terms (1992),
authored by Kofi Buenor Hadjor, a professor of African Studies at the
University of California, Santa Barbara. This compact dictionary provides
descriptions on 251 eminent persons, institutions, organizations, ideas,
movements and terms which became prominent in the Third World since
1945. LTTE receives a liberal one and a half page recognition in this

3 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

dictionary, under the term ‘Tamil Tigers, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
(LTTE)’. This recognition was made, obviously due to LTTE’s relevance in
the South Asian politics since mid-1980s and its confrontation with the
Indian army during the 1987-89 period. It is interesting to note that none of
the other Sri Lankan political leaders receive any recognition in this
dictionary. Compared to the entry on ‘Tamil Tigers’, there is a half-page
entry on ‘non-aligned movement’ and an eight-line entry on ‘Bandung
Conference’ and even under these two entries, the names of padre
Bandaranaike or Sirimavo Bandaranaike are missing.

Other movements which receive recognition in this dictionary include, ANC

[African National Congress], ‘black consciousness’ of South Africa, ‘black
power’ of Malcolm X, Eritrean liberation movement, FDR-FMLN [Frente
Democratico Revolucionario-Frente Farabundo Marti de Liberacion
Nacional] of El Salvador, FLN [Front de Liberation Nationale] of Algeria,
FRELIMO [Frente de Libertacao de Mocambique], Frente Sandinista de
Liberacion Nacional of Nicaragua, FRETILIN [Frente Revolucionario de
Timor Leste Independente], Gandhism, Garveyism of Marcus Garvey,
Guevarism, indegenismo in Latin America, intifada, Movimiento 19 de Abril
of Colombia, Maoism, Mau Mau of Kenya, Movimiento de Izquierda
Revolucionaria of Chile, Malayan Races’ Liberation Army, New Jewel
Movement of Grenada, Nkrumahism, New People’s Army of Philippines,
Pan Africanism, Zimbabwean liberation movement, Zionism.

I list these more than 20 movements to indicate that LTTE, as its detractors
and adversaries want to deny, is a liberation movement and shares quite a
number of distinct features which are common to many of its sister
organizations formed in the 20th century in other countries. In the eyes of
their oppressors, all these movements (many which were older than LTTE)
carried the label of ‘terrorists’.

(2) Expansion of the Sri Lankan Army

When J.R.Jayewardene retired in 1988, the Sri Lankan armed forces stood at
the following level, according to the Asia Year Book 1989 of Far Eastern
Economic Review magazine.

Total armed forces: some 48,000, including active reservists. Army = 40,000
including recalled reservists; Navy = 5,500; Air Force = 3,700.

The Paramilitary component consisted of Police Force = 21,000, including

the Special Task Force consisting of 2,000-man anti-guerrilla unit; Home
Guard = 18,000; National Auxiliary Volunteer Force = 5,000.

To explain how the Sri Lankan army has expanded, I provide a longitudinal

4 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

scan of Sri Lankan news items I have gathered, since the Indian army packed
up and left the island. First, a 1990 Reuter news commentary from my files.
It was authored by Feizal Samath, from Colombo. Excerpts:

“Five months after Tamil guerrillas launched a major new offensive in

their bid to set up a separate homeland, Sri Lankan government troops
are still struggling to crush the rebels. When they broke off peace talks
with the government in June [1990] many felt the war would end in a
month. But the Tigers took on the army in face-to-face battles. When
outnumbered, they slipped into the jungle adopting guerrilla tactics
again.
Government troops control all eastern towns but rebels move freely on
their outskirts. In the north, apart from a few towns, the army is
confined to camps surrounded by fortified Tiger bunkers. The
government says more than 800 members of the security forces and
1,640 rebels have been killed since June. Hundreds of civilians have
also died in the fighting. These figures cannot be independently
verified…
‘From now it is all-out war. We will annihilate the Liberation Tigers of
Tamil Eelam, take over the east and then go for the north,’ Deputy
Defense Minister Ranjan Wijeratne told Parliament in June. ‘We will
fight them till they retreat to the Indian Ocean and our Navy will wait
for them there,’ he said. But Wijeratne’s battle scenario never came to
pass…
The war has eaten into Colombo’s meager financial resources. Defense
spending has risen to seven billion rupees ($ 175 million) this year.
Other government funding has been cut.” [Asahi Evening News, Japan,
Nov.30, 1990]

In late 1990, one dollar was equivalent to 40 Sri Lankan rupees.

Five months later, after Ranjan Wijeratne’s departure from the scene,
S.Sivanayagam, the then editor of Tamil Nation monthly, wrote a sarcasm-
tinged editorial on the expansion of the Sri Lankan army. It is worth a
re-read for its splendid distillation on the history of a laboring army, from
1948 to 1990. But, this editorial will never be read by the Sri Lankan army’s
fresh recruits. Excerpts:

More Generals Mean Less Peace in Lanka

[Tamil Nation, May 1, 1991, p.1]

“Have you noticed? – the plethora of Army Generals that Sri Lanka
has been producing lately? With pips, stars, medals, ribbons and the
whole trappings?… How did Sri Lanka manage to give birth to so

5 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

many Generals within such a short period? The answer probably is

‘Field Marshal’ Prabhakaran!
…Time was when during the first six years of Independence
(1948-1954), the Ceylon Army was commanded by two Britishers –
Brigadier the Earl of Caithness and later Brigadier F.S.Reid. It took
three years for the army to achieve a strength of 70 officers and 610
other ranks. It was not until 1955 that a Ceylonese assumed command
for the first time, and he happened to be a Tamil – Col.Anton
Muttucumaru, promoted Brigadier, a dignified product of Oxford
University.
The first functioning General appeared on the scene twelve years after
Independence in 1960, in the person of Major General
H.W.G.Wijeyekoon. Apart from the 1958 riots in which the army did a
creditable job in putting down Sinhala mob terrorism, it had seen very
little action. Until Junius Richard Jayewardene began his war against
the Tamils, the only possible army casualties, if at all any, could have
come only through cirrhosis of the liver, by hitting the ‘bottle’ hard!
Who would have ever thought that the country today, yet without any
signs of foreign invasion, would become chockfull of prattling
Generals, not only overseeing action on the Front, but even
chit-chatting at cocktails at Canberra, Ottawa, London? President
Jayewardene was running short of diplomats and discredited politicians
that he began sending defunct Generals and Brigadiers to represent the
country abroad in various world capitals – some are still there we
believe. Grant it to that man; he did not only militarise the society,
politicize the army, but militarized diplomacy as well! The Sepala
Attygalles, the ‘Bull’ Weeratungas, the Denis Pereras, were all in their
own ways the architects of the suicidal military policy against the
Tamils, later to serve as accredited ambassadors.
…The Generals know, and we know, that army recruits, trained hastily
and sent to the battlefronts in recent times are not at all suitable ‘war
material’. There were several instances, at Mankulam and recently at
Mannar, where they simply dropped their arms and fled. One cannot
blame them, because thousands of youths unemployed for years, joined
the army for a monthly income, not to fight a war and die, but to live
and support themselves and their families…
The point to be realised is, that behind every artillery piece, there is a
man, and behind that man (or woman) there is a commitment. If every
Tiger casualty is a determined, willing sacrifice, every soldier who dies
is an unwilling casualty, or a helpless victim. Unfortunately, the
Generals have to talk war, because war is their business; and bread and
butter…”

6 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

Let me present some numbers to highlight the expansion of Sri Lankan

army, from openly available sources of information. The Asiaweek
magazine, of July 10, 1992, presented the increase in Sri Lanka’s defence
expenditure from 1982 to 1992 as follows:

Year Defence % of
Expenditure Government
($ million) Expenditure

1982 52.9 2.90

1984 90.4 4.29

1986 207.0 8.32

1987 360.0 14.68

1989 246.9 9.42

1990 256.8 8.94

1991 403.7 12.37

1992 348.9 12.00

Two years later, the same Asiaweek magazine commented,

“Sri Lankans have a sense of exhaustion. Now in its eleventh year, the
war between government troops and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Eelam (LTTE) who are fighting for a separate state in the north is
slowly bleeding the country. Keeping the guerrillas at bay costs $1
million a day and siphons off most of the rewards of the country’s
burgeoning economy. Strain on the army has a taken a harsh toll.
Suicide and desertion are common…” [Asiaweek, July 27, 1994,
pp.20-22]

Chandrika Kumaratunga exploited this sense of exhaustion felt by the

7 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

Sinhalese by donning the peace mask. But what happened during the last
seven years is best told by the bulging numbers of army generals and their
foot soldiers. At the end of 2000, the Sri Lankan armed forces has been
expanded, according to the US State Department’s Country Reports on
Human Rights –2000 (Sri Lanka), as follows:

Army (including the Army volunteer force) - 120,000

Navy - 17,000
Air Force - 18,500
Police Force - 60,000
Home Guards > 15,000.

And, when the then Deputy Defense Minister G.L.Peiris, while presenting
the Budget Appropriation Bill in the Sri Lankan parliament on February 8,
2001, recorded that the military spending for the year 2001 had leapt to 63
billion rupees (= 720 million dollars, at the currency exchange rate of $1 =
88 rupees). This staggering amount, according to the Ceylon Daily News
report of Feb.9, 2001, is being split into four components as follows:

Army (120,000) - 29.2 billion rupees (= 331.8 million dollars)

Navy (17,000) - 8.3 billion rupees (= 93 million dollars)
Air Force (18,500) - 10.7 billion rupees (= 121.6 million
dollars)
Police (60,000) and Home Guards (>15,000) - 12.4 billion
rupees (=140.6 million dollars)

Disregarding the incurred costs for different niches of expenditure such as

equipment purchase, maintenance, commission, training, health and welfare,
insurance premium, multi-media media propaganda and (last but not the
least!) entertainment, I calculated the per head per annum costs for each
member of the four branches of armed services. It works out as follows:

Army - $2,765
Navy - $5,519
Air Force - $6,572

Police including Home Guard - $1,875.

Now the Sri Lankan ‘composite’ army (consisting of army, navy and air
force personnel numbering 155,500 individuals) bills itself as the biggest
‘employer’ in Sri Lanka.

In business terms, the health of an employer is certified as ‘good’ if it

generates revenues. But the status of Sri Lankan army is equivalent to that of

8 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

a perennially sick person. What was responsible for the Sri Lankan army to
be assessed in such contemptuous terms? – a larger share of credit should go
to Pirabhakaran’s ‘judgement’. One should also not discount the ineptitude
leadership of Anuruddha Ratwatte and paranoia of Chandrika Kumaratunga.

In his October 1997 interview to Thilak S.Fernando, Major General Algama

confirmed some of the observations made by S.Sivanayagam in his Tamil
Nation editorial of May 1, 1991. Excerpts:

“Fernando: After the P.A. [People’s Alliance] Government came

into power 35 retired Major Generals were recalled and promoted to
top ranks. Didn’t that bring about discontent within the Army?
Algama: It was a political exercise which led to a certain amount of
discontentment. Beyond that I won’t be able to comment on that. As
for me, I feel that I performed my duty to the full by the country.
Unfortunately certain high ranking elements in the army decided to
exhibit pseudo-loyalties to the new administration and discredit others.
In the process certain officers were identified with certain political
parties and I was branded as a political stooge of the UNP due to
professional jealousy. Not only that, they involved me in a coup case
also!
Fernando: Is there any truth in the Coup case?
Algama: Absolutely none. The coup story has been primarily hatched
by the Military Intelligence. It was only when investigations
commenced that I realised it was something which had emerged from
within the army. In fact, I have made an appeal to President
Kumaratunge to expedite the inquiry and take disciplinary action
against me if I have done any wrong…”
[Source: Thilak Fernando’s website: London Diary]

Though a snippet, what was revealed by Major General Algama is interesting

about the functioning of Sri Lankan army’s ‘military intelligence section’
and how much the Sri Lankan commander-in-chief relied on it.

Chandrika’s 1997 interview to the Asiaweek and My response

Pirabhakaran’s judgement in deflating the ‘peace-balloon proposals’ of
President Chandrika Kumaratunga was criticized vehemently by the partisan
press in Sri Lanka and elsewhere, since 1995. Chandrika was the ‘new
broom’ which was supposed to clean the Sri Lankan rot. The Sept.19, 1997
issue of the Asiaweek magazine carried an interview she gave to Arjuna
Ranawana. I reproduce her answers to the some questions, in which she
commented about Pirabhakaran.
Ranawana: The army is closing in on the Tigers, and you say you

9 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

will push through constitutional reforms by November [1997]. How

important is this period for Sri Lanka?
Chandrika: It is a very critical time. The military and the political
solutions go hand in hand – a two-pronged attack on the ethnic
problem. I came in on a promise to bring peace. Within 10 days of
taking office, I wrote to [Tiger leader] Mr.[Velupillai] Prabhakaran
inviting him to hammer out a peaceful solution. We had a ceasefire, but
he broke all agreements within eight months. Not long after, we
presented the proposal to devolve power to the regions, which is the
political solution to the problem. We have gone a long way to making
devolution a reality. I have taken a personal responsibility in taking this
to every nook and corner of the country, to every type of people. Such
public discussion of a law or amendment is unprecedented in our
history. You cannot have peace without devolution of power, without
the sharing of power. It is also tied up in the proposed new constitution
with larger guarantees for human rights and for wider democratic
practices, including the abolition of the executive presidency.
Ranawana: But the Tigers have not responded to your constitutional
reform proposals.
Chandrika: When we were having discussions with the LTTE, I
exchanged 44 letters with Prabhakaran, the first time he ever wrote to
any politician in the south. I kept inviting him to agree on dates to start
discussing our political proposals. He kept refusing, dodging [the
issue], going around it, circumventing it, never agreeing to it. He kept
asking for more facilities. All of these we gave, because he kept saying
it was going to facilitate the lives of the ordinary people. We wanted to
remove all the obstacles that the last government had faced for the
normal functioning of civilian life in the north and east. He misused all
that. Now we control much of the north and east and have access to
the Tamil people there. We have found that a crushing majority would
vote with the devolution proposals. The same crushing majority also
keep telling us: please do not allow the LTTE to come back. We want
to rehabilitate the LTTE. We hope that a democratic LTTE will go
back to Jaffna along with the rest of the Tamil leadership and
participate in the democratic process.
Ranawana: Many Tamils believe that Sinhala-dominated
governments are willing to grant concessions to them only so far as
there is military pressure on the government by the LTTE. They fear
that if pressure from the Tigers disappears – if they are defeated –
your government will no longer grant such concessions.
Chandrika: I don’t agree. There used to be some truth in that, but not
anymore. Not under this government. This government has done

10 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

massive work to re-fashion the people’s thinking. The attitudes of the

majority Sinhala people have totally changed. The Tigers became a
reality because previous governments had a different attitude toward
the whole ethnic question. The Tamil people felt they had no
alternative but to take up arms against the government, which not only
turned a blind eye to their problems but used force against innocent
Tamil people in the most heinous fashion one could imagine – thinking
that was the solution. The Tamil people felt that somebody like
Prabhakaran – who, in my opinion, is a ruthless, inhuman murderer –
should be supported because they had no other solution. But
Prabhakaran and his terrorist politics are totally irrelevant today.”

I also reproduce a short letter of mine, criticising this publicity by Chandrika

for her ‘War for Peace’ campaign, which was later published in the same
magazine. My response was:

“I challenge your [Asiaweek’s] statements that President Kumaratunga

has ‘curtailed state repression and engineered something of an
economic turnaround.’ In September [1997] it was announced that Sri
Lanka is seeking $500 million loan to revive its unpopular move to
increase the price of bread – another election pledge up in smoke. I
wish that you had asked more penetrating questions of the President.
For example, from where does she allocate money for Sri Lanka’s
spiraling defense budget which stood at $836 million in 1996?
If the Sri Lankan army is ‘winning’ the war against the Liberation
Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), why are there over 20,000 deserters,
despite repeated amnesty offers? Aren’t these deserters better
Buddhists who (by following the preaching of the Enlightened One)
teach something to the Sri Lankan commander-in-chief, who gloats
that ‘the military and the political solutions go hand in hand?’ What
happened to her pre-election pledge of abolishing the executive
presidency?”
[Asiaweek magazine, October 17, 1997]

Chandrika Assessed in 2001:

In the last quarter of 2001, the partisan press which had serenaded
Chandrika and pilloried Pirabhakaran during 1995-97, has turned around
and unabashedly pricks the façade of Chandrika’s peace mask. ‘Arrogance
of Power’ stated a reecent editorial caption in the Island newspaper of
Colombo. ‘Authoritarian disdain’ lamented the self-righteous Hindu
newspaper of Chennai. Let me cite the relevant passages from these two
editorials:

11 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

Editorial 1:
“Innumerable reasons can be cited for the collapse of the People’s
Alliance government within one year. They could all be summed up in
a single expression – arrogance of power. President Kumaratunga and
her government simply did not give a damn about what was said about
her and her government and proceeded to rule on the presumption of
being blessed with eternal power…
The 1994 election manifesto’s pledges were soon forgotten. Pledges
such as to bring down the cost of living, cleanse public life, conduct a
transparent government, end political interference in the public service
and end abuse of power by politicians, all fell by the wayside. Its
ventriloquism on the North-East conflict – promoting anti-war
campaigns such as the islandwide Tawalama campaign while at the
same time appealing for recruits for the armed services and escalating
the war, not only resulted in military disasters but also took for granted
that the masses were naïve enough to believe their propaganda…”
[Colombo Island editorial, Oct.12, 2001]

Editorial 2:
“…the President Ms.Chandrika Kumaratunga, has once again acted
with authoritarian disdain for political propriety by dissolving
parliament with unseemly haste in a cynical attempt to confound her
opponents… it is evident that she has soft-pedaled in respect of several
economic and political policies including her one-time preference for a
quick and fair resolution of Sri Lanka’s national question about the
rights of the Tamil people….” [Chennai Hindu editorial, Oct.13, 2001]

With eggs on their face, these editorialists now confirm Pirabhakaran’s

judgement of Chandrika’s ‘peace-balloon proposals’ as nothing but hot air
blown by a debutant, but crafty, second-generation politician. Pirabhakaran
was correct in calling in 1995 that Chandrika, as far as Eelam Tamils were
concerned, was merely a naked empress. A reader’s letter written by
R.M.A.B.Dassanayake of Matale, was aptly captioned by the Island
newspaper’s editorial team as ‘The balloon has burst’. Excerpts:

“My companion seated on the same bench started off with a veritable
pithy statement – ‘Balloon eka pipuruwa’ – the balloon has burst…
All of those who ran the show, from the apex, centre and periphery
exerted their energies to inflate the balloon. With nothing substantial,
but just a volume of hot air – ‘Ralu Hulang’.
Swollen pride, false utterances, deceptive tactics, incessant ‘mafia’ talk
from a spokesperson nicknamed ‘mafia man’ multiple – duplicity and
contradictory views were the order of the day and these would gather

12 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

greater momentum once again in the run upto the upcoming elections
as well.
They inflated their balloon to such unlimited uncontrollable extent
that it burst with a bang – exploded with cataclysmic sound and
fury….” [Island, Colombo, Oct.23, 2001]

While Mr. Dassanayake’s letter had appeared, I doubt that a letter I wrote to
the same Island newspaper last week about Pirabhakaran’s judgement on
Chandrika Kumaratunga will be published. It was about Pirabhakaran, Sri
Lankan army and the hypocrisy of Colombo’s partisan press. Thus I
reproduce relevant excerpts of this letter sent by email on October 19.

The Editor,
Island,
Colombo.
Dear Mr.Weerakoon:

A Question of Principled Journalism

…This letter is related to your most recent editorials: ‘Pre-election
skullduggery to the fore (Oct.17), ‘A question of principled politics’
(Oct.18) and ‘Santa’s early arrival’ (Oct.19). In all these, you take
issue with President Chandrika Kumaratunga’s style of governance,
arrogance and cavalier disregard for accepted norms of politics. It is as
if, you have stumbled on these issues only lately. But Prabhakaran and
LTTE thinkers have scaled these same traits of the current President in
1995 correctly.
Mr. Editor, you cannot have your cake and eat it as well. On one hand,
you have been preaching that Prabhakaran cannot be trusted since he
will never give up his fight for Eelam and come to the negotiation
table. This stance is fine, if the other party has been a model of virtue.
You say now that Prabhakaran’s main adversary during the past 7 years
is a bungling buffoon who is not worth her salt. You had stated that,
‘Many will differ from the President’s estimation of herself’ (Oct.19).
Bless you for saying that openly now. So, isn’t your lament confirms
Prabhakaran’s position for all these years. How about some principled
journalism on your part, Sir?
In your 20th anniversary editorial you bragged, ‘We are of the opinion
that all communities got equal rights’ (Oct.4). Then, how come the Sri
Lankan army consists of 95% (or more) Buddhists, when the Buddhist
population in the island is only 75%? Either you should be
mathematically challenged to believe that 75 equals 95, or you are a
hypocrite to say, ‘We are certainly not against the Tamil community.
We support their rights and say that they are citizens of this country as

13 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM
The Pirabhakaran Phenomenon Part 20 http://www.sangam.org/PIRABAKARAN/Part20.htm

much as those of any other community are’. If you sincerely believe

what you say, will you campaign for proportional representation of all
communities in the Sri Lankan army…”

(3) Harassment of Pirabhakaran by India’s Intelligence wallahs

This negative outcome of the Indo-LTTE war has continued since 1991 for a
decade. It can be explored under three main themes, namely

(A) Anti-LTTE propaganda in the Indian news media.

(B) January 1993 piracy by the Indian Navy against LTTE in

international waters leading to the tragic deaths of Kittu and his
associates.

(C) Criminal Case No. 329/91, implicating Pirabhakaran in the

conspiracy to murder the former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.

All three themes are inter-related and available literature remains scattered. I
will try to analyze the material, which I have gathered during the past
decade (Continued)

14 of 14 12/12/2008 5:59 PM