Sunday Times 2
From colonialism to neocolonialism
Studying historical facts of events that occurred in this country two centuries ago there are many similarities which if given serious consideration could prevent this nation from repeating past mistakes which resulted in the loss of independence. Vested interests and external powers try to destabilize this country that is strategically located in the Indian Ocean to gain a foothold and control shipping lanes from the east to the west.
Perhaps the first sailors to have trade contacts with our country were the Arabs. They were followed by the Portuguese in 1505 who establish a foothold in the Maritime Provinces. The Portuguese were expelled from the island in 1658 by King Rajasinha 11 with the assistance of the Dutch but the Dutch then took over the Maritime Provinces and ruled the territory until 1798. This territory was under Dutch and British dual control from 1798 to 1802. In March 1802 the former Dutch possessions in Ceylon were ceded to the British at the Peace of Amiens.
Though attempts were made by both Portuguese and the Dutch to conquer the whole country these attempts were unsuccessful. In 1803 the British sent an expeditionary force from the Maritime Provinces that were under their rule to capture the kingdom of Kandy. However King Sri Vickrama Rajasinha with the support of his Sinhalese chieftains and his subjects virtually annihilated the invading British expeditionary force. The British colonial administration in the Maritime Provinces after this humiliating defeat decided against direct confrontation and used intrigue to cause dissension between the King and his Sinhalese Chieftains.
The King elated after he defeated the British army used the prestige accruing to him and asserted his authority to restrict the privileges enjoyed by his Sinhalese Chieftains. The Chief Adigar Pilimatalawa was executed in 1810 for revolting and joining the British in a plot to assassinate the King. John D’Oyly an expert on Kandyan affairs made use of the growing dissension that prevailed among the Sinhalese Chieftains including the newly appointed Chief Adigar Ahalepola and obtained their assistance for the British army to capture the King. The king who had lost the support of his chieftains and his subjects was deposed on the 18th of February 1815. The Kandyan territories were ceded to the British through the Kandyan Convention signed on 2nd of March 1815 by Governor Robert Brownrigg on behalf of the British and by the Chieftains on behalf of the Sinhalese.
The Sinhalese peasantry was made to believe by their chieftains that it would be better to be ruled by a just British King living in England than a despotic Nayakkar king living in this country. The intention of the Sinhalese chieftains was to rule the roost under a king who was living abroad. However what they achieved through this regime change was not what they desired. The letter and spirit of the Kandyan Convention was never honoured by the British colonial administration and this resulted in two rebellions. One was in 1818 and the other was in 1848. British were able to crush both these rebellions in the most ruthless manner.
What conspired during the rebellion is best explained by an unimpeachable witness an English doctor serving in the British Army, Dr. John Davy to the House of Commons Parliamentary Select Committee on Ceylon 1849/1850 where he states,
“It would be difficult to give the English reader an accurate idea of the manner in which during the rebellion, hostilities were carried on, on either side. It was partisan warfare, which from its very nature and circumstances, was severe and irregular; particularly when at its height and after lenient measures had been tried in vain. When a district rose in rebellion, one or more military posts were established in it; martial law was proclaimed; the dwellings of resisting inhabitants were burnt; their fruit trees were often cut down, and the country was scoured in all directions by small detachments, who were authorized to put to death all who made opposition, or were found with arms in their hands….When one considers this rebellion and its consequences, one almost regrets that we ever entered the Kandyan country”
The British colonial administration that established its rule over the whole island with such savage brutality was able to subjugate the peasantry by changing a feudal but a self-sustained village agricultural economy to a plantation economy. New legislation such as the waste lands ordinance not only took away the land ownership from the peasantry but also from many village Buddhist temples, making both the peasantry and the village Buddhist temples poor and destitute. The land thus acquired by the British colonial administration was alienated for a pittance to plantation companies owned by the British. After the two rebellions the Sinhalese army led by their chieftains ceased to exist and the people lost the will to resist and were compelled to submit to British colonial rule for survival.
Two hundred years have passed between then and now and reading through history one finds many similarities between events that took place then and the events that are taking place in this day and age so much so as to make one wonder if history is not repeating itself. Like how King Sri Vickrama Rajasinha virtually annihilated the British forces in 1803 at Kandy, President Mahinda Rajapakse was able to annihilate the LTTE in 2009 at Nanthikadal. Chief Adigar Pilimatalawa who gave leadership to the Kandyan Army to defeat the British forces was executed for revolting against the King In 1810. The Army Commander General Sarath Fonseka who gave leadership to the Sri Lanka Army to defeat the LTTE forces was imprisoned after his unsuccessful attempt to defeat President Mahinda Rajapaksa at the presidential election in 2010.
King Sri Vikrama Rajasinha who was able to defeat the British forces with the support of his chieftains and subjects in just over a decade became a tyrant and a despot and lost the support he had from some of his chieftains and the majority of his subjects. His first Adigar Ahalepola betrayed him and helped the British to establish a colonial administration in this island nation. President Mahinda Rajapaksa in less than a decade lost the support he had from some of his ministers and majority of the masses due to nepotism and corrupt practices of his regime. His Health Minister Maithripala Sirisena after betraying him became the opposition common candidate who won the presidential election held on January 8, 2015. President Maithripala Sirisena established a yahapalana government that had the blessings of the American superpower.
John D’Oyly the British expert on Kandyan affairs fueled dissension between King Sri Vickrama Rajasinha and some of his chieftains including the First Adigar Ahalepola that resulted in a regime change in 1815. Was Robert O’Blake the American expert on Sri Lankan affairs responsible two hundred years later for causing dissension between President Mahinda Rajapaksa and some of his ministers including the Army Commander General Sarath Fonseka that resulted in a regime change in 2015?
There is a school of thought that America was deeply involved in a regime change exercise in Sri Lanka by perverting the elections held in 2015. There is no reason to doubt this school of thought given the information available of American involvement in perverting elections in the Philippines in 1950s, Italy 1948-1970s, Lebanon 1950s, Indonesia 1955, Vietnam 1955,British Guiana/ Guiana 1953-1964,Japan 1958-1970s, Nepal 1959,Laos 1960, Brazil 1962, Dominican Republic 1962, Guatemala 1963, Bolivia 1966, 2002, Chile 1964-1970, Portugal 1974-1975, Australia 1974-1975, Jamaica 1976,Panama 1984,1989, Nicaragua 1984,1990,2001, Haiti 1987-1988, Bulgaria 1990-1991, Albania 1991-1992, Russia 1996, Mongolia 1996, Bosnia 1998, Slovakia 2002, El Salvador 2004, Afghanistan 2004 and in Palestine 2005-2006. (Chapter 18 of Rogue State written by William Blum has more details in this regard)
The other important question is whether the UNHRC Resolution cosponsored by Sri Lanka in 2015 will be a sell out like the Kandyan Convention signed by our Sinhalese Chieftains in 1815. The British who were the dominant party in 1815 drafted the Kandyan Convention in consultation with the Kandyan Chieftains. The Kandyan Convention ushered in colonialism. The US as the dominant party in 2015 has drafted the UNHRC Resolution in consultation with the government of Sri Lanka. Will this UNHRC Resolution cosponsored by Sri Lanka usher in neocolonialism?
The involvement of the US in drafting the UNHRC Resolution needs to be studied with suspicion given the fact that it is the only superpower in the contemporary world and is often accused of practising neocolonialism. As pivot to Asia is the current policy of the US, just three operative paragraphs in the UNHRC Resolution considered herein gives credence to such suspicions. The first operative paragraph of the UNHRC Resolution encourages the government to implement the recommendations contained in the OHCHR investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL) that includes establishing an ad hoc hybrid special court. Most OISL recommendations are not only detrimental to the unity and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka and to its sovereignty but will also impact very adversely on the war heroes who defeated the LTTE.
The commitment made by the government in the 12th operative paragraph to review the Public Security Ordinance Act and to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act will result in the release of hardcore LTTE terrorists from prison that can be a recipe for reintroducing terrorism and separatism. The operative paragraph 16 in the UNHRC Resolution among other things encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to ensure that all Provincial Councils are able to operate effectively, in accordance with the 13th amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka. The 13th amendment was foisted upon this country by India sans the approval of the people. The Police and Land powers in the 13th amendment were never devolved to the Provincial Councils as these powers could encourage division and separatism. The Provincial Councils established as a result of the 13th amendment have proven to be white elephants that need to be abolished and not further strengthened. Therefore is this UNHRC Resolution a US neocolonial effort to destabilize and divide Sri Lanka to meet their geopolitical needs?