 |
|||||||
|
Hoodwinking in the name of the Buddha and Gandhi September 11 should have
taught the world the dangers of mixing religion and politics. On
their own, politics and religion are inflammable enough as history
has shown over the centuries. Together they provide a heady mix
whose explosive potential was seen that September day. Still for all,
purveyors of violence and their propagandists - always the pliant
tools ready to dance to the tune of their masters - will gleefully
distort history, denigrate religious leaders and religion as long
as it serves their dastardly ends. About 10 days
ago I attended a press preview of a film titled "In the name
of Buddha", produced by a company "Da'sai films international"
of the UK but could well have been made by "Tiger Studios";
such is its propagandist purpose. The United
States, Britain, the Soviet Union and others produced many films
during and after the Second World War that depicted the valour of
their soldiers and the cowardice and atrocities of their enemies.
Even today such films are being shown and still others are being
made telling stories of more recent wars. But "In
the name of Buddha", does not merely condemn and castigate
the Sri Lankan soldiers for human rights violations. The implication
is that this is done by Buddhist soldiers and in the name of Buddhism. The film begins
with just the chanting of pirith. During the film, soldiers passing
out of a training camp are blessed by Buddhist monks seated by a
waterfall. Immediately after pirith nool are tied on their wrists,
they pick up automatic weapons and go to war. The images of Buddhist
blessings and being provided with arms are closely juxtaposed. This film was
made in 50 days starting in June this year, the director of the
film told me. In short, after September 11. The purpose is quite
clear. At a time when Islam and Muslims in general are suspect in
the West for committing terrorism or supporting violence and violation
of human rights, the attempt here is to tell the western world that
Islam alone is not to blame, that Buddhism is as guilty of violence
as happens in Sri Lanka. The producers
are a Sri Lankan Tamil K Shanmughathas and Sai George who, I gather,
is a Catholic from Kerala in India. The director and screenwriter
Rajesh Touchriver is also from Kerala. The obviously-expensive
literature distributed at the preview with an image of the Buddha
on the cover carries stills from the film and write-ups about the
producers, the director and tells how the film came to be made. Reading what
is said of the film, one might well be inveigled into believing
that it tells story of the Sri Lankan conflict fairly and impartially.
For instance the brochure says that the producers have "always
wanted to make a movie with a difference. The human rights violations
in Sri Lanka have been a theme that kept haunting their creative
imagination". Impartial observers
of the conflict will readily concede that human rights violations
have occurred on both sides of the barricade. But the film
tends to show only violations committed by the Sri Lankan forces
and the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF). Where the so-called "freedom
fighters" shoot and kill it is only when they are attacked
or to show their military prowess such as attacking from ambush. The film covers
the years 1986-87 and supposedly tells the "true story"
of somebody called Siva, a Sri Lankan Tamil, who unable to stand
the violence, leaves the country and seeks asylum in Britain. Even if Siva
is a real person like so many others who sought asylum abroad not
only to get away from the security forces but also to escape from
the Tamil Tigers themselves, what we do not know is whether it really
happened during the years covered by the film. It seems that
the years 1986-87 are carefully chosen so as to establish a historical
truth - the presence of the IPKF and the atrocities and human rights
violations such as rape and murder, committed by the Indians. So
the Tamils are the victims of both internal and external forces. How subtle the film has been in pointing the finger at everyone else but the real practitioners of terror - the LTTE - is that most of the Indian troops and officers are turban-wearing Sikhs. So the perpetrators of atrocities in the IPKF are neither Hindus nor Christians (unlike the Tamils in the north) but Sikhs whose faith is Sikhism. So the producers
and director/screenwriter who are all Christians or a Hindu and
two Catholics have conspired to exonerate their faiths for violence
and lay the blame for atrocities on Buddhist and Sikh soldiers,
blithely ignoring that Sri Lankan armed forces as well the IPKF
consisted of persons of different religions. How contrived the screenplay is clear from the fact that a church with Christians at prayer is shown under attack from the air - artillery shells or bombs is not certain - and another group of Christians singing hymns and crossing a lagoon are shot and killed. Here again the
motive is patently obvious. This film is due to be shown in Britain
in January. These episodes are intended to win the sympathy of western
Christian audiences and raise the ire of Christians and others against
Buddhism. It would not be surprising if the film is exhibited commercially in western countries that have large Tamil audiences so that its propaganda value can be exploited to the full. There are questions
to be asked. Was there an attack on the church in the north during
this time? If I remember correctly a bomb or bombs fell on or near
the Catholic Church at Navatkuli but that happened in the early
1990s. If so, the film has juxtaposed events to make the most of
its propagandist purpose but has acted fraudulently to mislead western
audiences. Moreover the
film carefully avoids mentioning the killing of Buddhist monks and
civilians during the same period. For instance, in 1986 June, 30
Buddhist monks and four civilians were killed and 15 monks wounded
when the bus in which they were travelling was attacked in Aranthalawa. The collective
memory of the filmmakers fails to record that during this same period
hundreds of civilians in the north-east were massacred by terrorists
and even militant Tamil leaders such as Sri Sabaratnam were victims
of Tiger violence. None of this
is shown despite the producers' vowed desire to expose human rights
violations in Sri Lanka. What about the massacre by shooting of
over 100 Muslims at prayer in the East? Don't Muslims have human
rights? The published
brochure says "The freedom fighters, the Lankan army, the Indian
Peace Keeping Force, all vie with one another in inflicting violence
on the hapless victims", meaning the civilians. That is false.
The film shows no such thing. The so-called freedom fighters emerge
as paragons who could not say boo to a goose. All the others are
villains. The producers
claim that the film is an impassioned plea to "all right-thinking
people to shun violence once for all" and turn to the "path
shown by the Buddha and Gandhi". False again. There is no mention
of the path of non-violence preached by the Buddha and the only
such appeal by Siva is to tread Gandhi's path of non-violence. In fact, the
Buddhist are shown as the perpetrators of violence. The Sri Lankan
Buddhists are immediately compared with Nazis. It is now for
the Sri Lanka government to take whatever action it sees fit at
this denigration of the Buddha and Buddhism and the perpetuation
of falsities. It might place
the peace talks above everything else. That of course is a matter
the government will have to settle with the Buddhist people the
world over. They may not take well to being placed along Hitler. The government
is being suckered in step by step into a political conundrum while
the LTTE gathers its arms, prepares its communications, musters
its forces, tries to recover its international image through devious
ruses including profanity. It is moving
on all fronts, while some of the political preachers seem unable
to distinguish the front from the back. Is this film
tantamount to a violation of the UK Anti-Terrorist Act 2000 and
the bans placed on the Tigers in the US, here and elsewhere? So far the
film has been shown to select audiences in Oslo and London. If the
Norwegian authorities are going to turn a blind eye, will the descendents
of Lord Nelson here also do the same? That would
depend on whether the Sri Lanka's Foreign Ministry and its High
Commission here have the courage to raise the issue on behalf of
the Buddhist world. Or is kowtowing to colonial powers - then and
now - the name of the game? Websites: www.inthenameofbuddha.com and www.dasaifilmsinternational.co.uk
|
|||||||
Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers
Ltd. All rights reserved. |
|||||||
