Columns

Is it ‘War Heroes’ Day?’ Is it ‘Remembrance Day?’ Is it ‘Armed Forces Day?’ Is it ‘Victory Day?’The variety of terms used in the media to describe commemorative events held on May 18th – 19th six years after the end of the 30-years war, is a reflection of some confusion as to how this watershed event in Sri Lanka’s history is to be ‘officially’ recorded and remembered by future generations.

The formal state function with an armed forces parade to which government officials, dignitaries and diplomats were invited was held on the 19th in Matara. The day before, an event at Wellamullivaikal beach in Mullaitivu where Prabhakaran and his cohorts were killed in the final battle against the LTTE, was held with Northern Province Chief Minister C V Wigneswaran as chief guest. The Daily News editorial on the 20th asked “Can a government allow parallel celebrations to what is essentially a state event?” But no, the question was not in relation to Mullivaikal. It referred to the ‘Victory Day’ celebration held at the Viharamahadevi Park in Colombo under the patronage of former president Mahinda Rajapaksa!

War heroes and their families attending a state ceremony at parliamentary grounds to remember those who were killed or disabled in the war

Mullivaikal

The state-run newspaper’s selective comment on one ‘rogue’ event at the expense of the other points to many ironies. What’s a body to think? Are we being told that the killing of Prabha was a ‘good thing’ to be celebrated, or a ‘bad thing’ to be mourned? Some leading TV channels conspicuously omitted the Mullivaikal event from their news bulletins. It couldn’t have been because they didn’t know. Was it because they were not sure, like many who heard about it from other sources, of how to interpret it?

The Mullivaikal ‘remembrance’ event was held in defiance of a (widely publicised) court order from the Mullaitivu magistrate banning events in the area to commemorate the LTTE’s war dead, for 14 days from the 18th. However Wigneswaran is reported in the media as having said the magistrate’s order only prohibited ‘processions.’ It appears that police refrained from enforcing the ban owing to this technicality of the wording of the court order. Hiru TV’s coverage of the event showed some uneasy looking policemen in the background while Wigneswaran gave a voice-cut to the reporter. Police spokesman ASP Ruwan Gunasekera says the police will on Friday ‘report the facts’ to the magistrate, who will then decide on whether the order was violated. About 40-50 persons had gathered, lit lamps and ‘remembered the dead’ he said.

Media coverage

A question arising from the ambiguous news coverage is whether the Mullivaikal commemoration was ‘allowed’ by the government. Indeed, it was reported as such by foreign media. While the state television channel Rupavahini omitted the news item, the Daily News reported Wigneswaran’s speech with pictures, without any mention of the magistrate’s order that sought to ban the event. Among the Tamil politicians who attended, apart from some TNA MPs and provincial councilors, was at least one government member — UNP deputy minister and Jaffna district MP Vijayakala Maheswaran.

Regardless of the media reportage, these multiple events — in Matara, Colombo and Mullivaikal — with conflicting readings of the ‘meaning’ of the events of 18th-19th May 2009, would seem to point to a deep inner disunity in Sri Lanka’s collective consciousness. The Government’s attempted ‘quick-fix solution’ of re-branding the anniversary as ‘Remembrance Day’ instead of ‘Victory Day’ seems to be more in the nature of a sop to Western powers who would have us re-write the war narrative to suit their strategic ends, than a genuine attempt to bring about a healing of ‘hearts and minds.’ Western governments that play host to Tamil diaspora communities would like to see Sri Lanka’s war victory discredited, or at least ‘played down,’ and with UN HRC sessions in Geneva around the corner, some of Sri Lanka’s new political leaders have been trying to cooperate. In other words the Government’s motives in seeking to ‘re-position’this event, are political. So are those of Tamil politicians who act out a different charade in the North.

Relief

It doesn’t require an opinion poll to know that the overwhelming majority of citizens in the South view the death of Prabhakaran with huge relief, and would consider it churlish to deny the armed forces a fitting tribute on the anniversary of that occasion.

The Northern Tamil political leadership do not give the impression that the Northern citizenry is relieved by the death of Prabhakaran. But then, whether these politicians and their pronouncements are truly reflective of the will of the people they represent remains a moot point because (strangely), no alternative Tamil political formation emerged in the North to challenge the TNA, from within the democratic space that was created with the defeat of the LTTE.

At the Mullivaikal event, according to reports, Chief Minister Wigneswaran reiterated essentially the LTTE’s narrative of the war, and referred to the Northern Provincial Council’s resolution which accused every government since Independence of having committed ‘genocide’ against the Tamil people. No other Tamil politician has thought fit to critique that preposterous resolution and put the record straight. The pro-LTTE website TamilNet’s story on the commemoration events planned in the North on the 18th ran the headline “Mu’l'livaaykkaal Genocide Day marked in occupied Tamil Eelam.”

Post-war politics

Amidst this fog of post-war politics, President Maithripala Sirisena’s speech at the commemoration event in Matara refreshingly seemed to strike a balance between sincere gratitude to the soldiers who made immeasurable sacrifices to defeat the LTTE, and the urgent need for reconciliation among communities. He offended none when he noted the reality that in the post-war period priority had been given to the development of physical resources, and not enough attention paid to reconciliation. The next day too, at the Ranaviru Seva Authority’s event for war heroes and their families, he spoke feelingly of the forces personnel who had sacrificed life and limb.

Other government leaders seem to have their own ideas about the anniversary and what it means. Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera for instance is on record on Rupavahini, declaring that president Sirisena had said it was ‘not a victory celebration,’ and going on to interpret it as a commemoration of the services rendered by Sri Lankan armed forces all the way from 1945 onwards.

He thereby effectively diluted the historic military feat of 2009 in the mists of the past. This would fit well with his general pattern of compliance with the Western powers’ campaign to reverse the war victory and discredit the role of the Sri Lankan forces.

Victory and Remembrance

The military nature of the defeat of the LTTE is hard to dispute, or disguise. While it is only humane to allow all parties to mourn their dead, the mistake would seem to lie in mixing up ‘Victory Day’ with a ‘Day of Remembrance.’ Why cannot these events be marked on separate days? As political analyst Dr Dayan Jayatilleka said in a TV discussion programme, “You can’t exchange one for the other — they are both equally legitimate.” Such an approach would keep the dignity of the armed forces and their historic achievement intact, and at the same time — hopefully — create space for all communities to come to terms with a complicated and troubled past.