• Tamils have lived in Sri Lanka for thousands of years. There were Tamil Kingdoms before the invasion and rule by the Dutch, Portuguese and the British.
  • The Tamils in Sri Lanka have suffered enormously under 60 years of BRUTAL Sinhala-rule.

"The Tamils had lived as a separate nation in the Jaffna Tamil Kingdom in the North and East until the British merged it with the Sinhalese Kingdom for their administrative convenience. History has been severely distorted and rewritten in recent times by the Singhalese chauvinists and Buddhist clergy and the world is led to believe that the Sinhalese are Aryans, and that they came from North India before the Tamils."

The Politics of Humanitarian Intervention

Nadesan Satyendra
24  February 2009

" The Sinhala owned Sri Lanka Sunday Times reported on 22 February that the donor Co-Chairs are working out a coalition humanitarian task force spearheaded by the United States, to evacuate civilians trapped in the fighting in the Vanni.  It appears that what I wrote three weeks ago on 29 January 2009 in Sinhala Sri Lanka's  Genocide of Eelam Tamils - a Crime Against Humanity, is now coming to pass -

"...the international community will wait till Tamil resistance is sufficiently weakened or  annihilated before it attempts to intervene 'on humanitarian grounds' and in seeming response to 'world wide Tamil appeals'.  Meanwhile the IC will even welcome such world wide appeals by Tamils as that will pave the way (and establish useful contact points amongst the Tamil diaspora) for IC's eventual intervention with 'development aid' with the mantra of not conflict resolution but 'conflict transformation'.

It was the Buddha who said that suffering is a great teacher. The Tamil people are being taught on the hard anvil of death and suffering appropriately enough in Buddhist Sri Lanka that human rights and humanitarian laws are more often than not, political instruments - instruments which States use selectively so that they may intervene to advance their own perceived strategic interests. After all the simplest thing that the international actors could have done to protect the Tamil people would have been to remove the ban on the LTTE so that the capacity of the people of Tamil Eelam to resist the genocidal onslaught launched on them by Sinhala Sri Lanka may have been strengthened. The simple and humane thing that the international actors could have done was not to taunt the struggles against terrorism with the label terrorism but to adopt a  principle centered approach which liberated political language and also helped to liberate a people who have taken up arms as a last resort in their struggle for freedom from oppressive alien Sinhala rule. .."

The Sinhala owned Sri Lanka Sunday Times reported on 22 February that the donor Co-Chairs are working out a coalition humanitarian task force spearheaded by the United States, to evacuate civilians trapped in the fighting in the Vanni.  It said -
"The purpose will be purely to facilitate the movement of civilians from the northeastern coast to a ship in the deep seas. This is for transfer to Internally Displaced Person (IDP) centres or hospitals outside the battle zones." 

The proposed transfer to IDP centres will need to be understood in the context of the London Daily Telegraph report of 13 February 2009 -

"(Sri Lanka) Officials have confirmed they will establish several "welfare villages" to house the estimated 200,000 Tamils displaced from their homes by the Sri Lankan army's "final offensive" against the LTTE's stronghold on the north of the Island. Senior officials have however confirmed that those housed in the villages will have no choice on whether to stay in the camps.

It appears that what I wrote three weeks ago on 29 January 2009 in Sinhala Sri Lanka's  Genocide of Eelam Tamils - a Crime Against Humanity, is now coming to pass -

"...the international community will wait till Tamil resistance is sufficiently weakened or  annihilated before it attempts to intervene 'on humanitarian grounds' and in seeming response to 'world wide Tamil appeals'.  Meanwhile the IC will even welcome such world wide appeals by Tamils as that will pave the way (and establish useful contact points amongst the Tamil diaspora) for IC's eventual intervention with 'development aid' with the mantra of not conflict resolution but 'conflict transformation'."

It was the Buddha who said said that suffering is a great teacher. The Tamil people are being taught on the hard anvil of death and suffering appropriately enough in Buddhist Sri Lanka that human rights and humanitarian laws are more often than not, political instruments - instruments which States use selectively so that they may intervene to advance their own perceived strategic interests.

Having banned the LTTE which was the armed resistance of the people of Tamil Eelam and which could have protected the people of Tamil Eelam against the genocidal onslaught by Sinhala ethno nationalism;

- having called upon the LTTE to surrender to those same armed forces so that Tamils may be saved from genocide;

- having failed to condemn the Sinhala army's brutal genocidal attacks  as genocide but on the contrary having armed and trained the Sinhala armed forces;

- having failed to condemn the shelling by Sri Lanka of  self announced safety zones, which killed hundreds of Tamils and gravely injured many thousands more;

- having failed to prevent Sri Lanka's deliberate targeting of hospitals;

- having refused to recognise that Sri Lanka's resort to genocide was no accident but is directed to give Tamil civilians a clear message – ‘get away from the LTTE controlled areas or die’ and therefore a war crime;

- having failed to prevent Sri Lanka from ordering humanitarian organisations to leave the war-affected areas

- having failed to condemn Sri Lanka for preventing the media from entering these areas as deliberate actions directed to facilitate a genocidal war without witnesses;

- having refused to admit to the horrific truth that faced with the unity of a whole people in their struggle for freedom from alien Sinhala rule, Sri Lanka has resorted to the anti guerrilla strategy of the genocidal destruction of that people, in other words, the civilians, women and children;

- having suggested that Tamil civilians are 'trapped in the fighting in the Vanni' when in truth Tamil civilians are not 'trapped in the fighting' or in the crossfire but  are being deliberately targeted and killed by Sri Lanka armed forces;

- having done all this -

the co-chairs now propose  a  'humanitarian operation', assisted by the United States Pacific Command (US PACOM) to evacuate civilians 'trapped in the fighting' in the Vanni.

Meanwhile, India's acting Prime Minister Pranab Mukherjee told the Lok Sabha  in New Delhi on Wednesday 18 February that his Government had formally offered assistance including logistic support to evacuate civilians caught up in the battle zone. He said the Sri Lanka Government had accepted the offer based on the fact that it was coming from a 'friendly country.' Mr. Mukherjee's concern for Tamil civilians would have been touching if  not for his words in the Lok Sabha on 23 October 2008 -

“We have a very comprehensive relationship with Sri Lanka. In our anxiety to protect the civilians, we should not forget the strategic importance of this island to India's interests,... especially in view of attempts by countries like Pakistan and China to gain a strategic foothold in the island nation...Colombo had been told that India would "look after your security requirements, provided you do not look around". "We cannot have a playground of international players in our backyard." Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee, 23 October 2008

At that time in October 2008, when Tamil civilians were being targeted and killed by Sinhala Sri Lanka's armed forces which New Delhi had armed and trained,  Mr.Mukherjee urged his Parliamentary colleagues that in their anxiety to protect Tamil civilians, they should not forget the strategic importance of Sri Lanka to India's interests.

Now that Tamil villages have been bombed and shelled and Tamil civilians have been driven from their homes into so called 'welfare villages' which they cannot leave, and Tamil armed resistance to Sinhala rule has been weakened, Mr.Mukherjee has formally offered assistance to 'friendly Sri Lanka' to evacuate Tamil civilians somehow  'caught up' in the battle zone!

And Sri Lanka has accepted the offer coming as it does from a 'friendly country' which had been told by India that ' we will look after your security concerns, if you do not look around.' After all what are good friends for if they cannot help each other in time of need.

Again predictably, the United Kingdom engaged in playing the soft spoken Jeff role has voiced its support for a call by Mexico for a briefing on the situation in Sri Lanka at the UN Security Council. The real politick nature of the whole exercise was exposed by Russia opposing the Mexico call. And one would imagine that Russia would not have acted without consultation with New Delhi. Given the changing dynamics of the US-India-China relations and an emerging bi polar world, it should not surprise if New Delhi had turned to its old friend Russia.

 'Humanitarian intervention' to prevent the humanitarian tragedy that is taking  place in the Tamil homeland, had it been early, would have been kind. But the belated attempts that are being made today expose not the humanitarian concerns of the international actors but the strategic interests that impel the international actors to act the way they do.

After all the simplest thing that the international actors could have done to protect the Tamil people would have been to remove the ban on the LTTE so that the capacity of the people of Tamil Eelam to resist the genocidal onslaught launched on them by Sinhala Sri Lanka may have been strengthened. The simple and humane thing that the international actors could have done was not to taunt the struggles against terrorism with the label terrorism but to adopt a  principle centered approach which liberated political language and also helped to liberate a people who have taken up arms as a last resort in their struggle for freedom from oppressive alien Sinhala rule.

Now that Tamil resistance has been weakened, international actors who have armed and trained Sinhala Sri Lanka's genocidal armed forces believe that the time has come to respond to the  'humanitarian disaster' which they helped to create. They are concerned that more genocide will create thousands more martyrs. And they are right.

"...in martyrdom there is an incalculable spiritual magnetism which works miracles. A whole nation, a whole world catches the fire which burned in a few hearts; the soil which has drunk the blood of the martyr imbibes with it a sort of divine madness which it breathes into the heart of all its children, until there is but one overmastering idea, one imperishable resolution in the minds of all beside which all other hopes and interests fade into insignificance and until it is fulfilled, there can be no peace or rest for the land or its rulers." Sri Aurobindo on the Strength of an Idea, 1907

"..But imagine it happens: Killinochchi is flattened, Mr P is dead, LTTE dissolved. Will the Tamil dream of a Tamil Eelam die? Of course not. It will be revived, and new cycles of violence will occur..." Conflict Resolution in Tamil Eelam - Sri Lanka: the Norwegian Initiative- Professor Johan Galtung, February 2007

Genocide is not the path to secure stability in the Indian Ocean region - as the self immolation of Muthukumar, Ravichandran, Thamil Venthan, Sivaprakasam and  Murukuthasan show. But it is not only stability that the international actors are concerned with. Each of the international actors are also concerned to use the humanitarian disaster facing the people of Tamil Eelam to embed their own influence more securely in the island of Sri Lanka - and so they jockey amongst themselves as to how best to intervene. Each is concerned that if one does not, the other would. And it is not everybody who will welcome an intervention spearheaded by the United States Pacific Command (US PACOM). Hence the efforts to assemble a 'coalition of the willing'. The US message to New Delhi was loud and clear: 'We lead, you follow'. I said it some two years ago in Black Pebbles & White Pebbles -

"...US and India may find common cause in 'weakening' the Tamil Eelam struggle for freedom (and the LTTE) - but weaken it in such a way that thereafter each of them may successfully jockey (against each other) for position and influence in the Indian Ocean region.  The 'weakening' in this context means the isolation and annihilation of Velupillai Pirabakaran and securing an LTTE under a 'reformed' leadership."

The international actors may believe that a people who have been bombed, shelled, rendered homeless, starving and who have seen their near and dear die whilst they looked on helplessly, are also stupid - but the people of Tamil Eelam, whatever else they may be, are not stupid. Perhaps, some of the international actors may want to learn by taking time off to see  Gillo Pontecorvo's  film Queimada (Burn!) - a film seen by many Tamils, young and old,  in the Vanni. It is a film which "portrays, quite brilliantly, the nature of a guerrilla uprising. Walker (the British mercenary) seems all too aware of the danger of a popular uprising, when he cautions the white rulers that ...in killing a hero of the people, the hero 'becomes a martyr, and the martyr becomes a myth.'"1

"...Walker, the British mercenary, pursues Dolores the rebel leader ruthlessly, burning half the island while uprooting and killing people, animals and vegetation in his path. He develops a theory that the guerrillas can be defeated only if the peasants among whom they take shelter and who supply them are burnt and driven out of all their villages. The vegetation and trees must be denuded since they too hide the rebels. The logic of defeating a popular movement is inexorably genocidal, entailing total devastation.

Dolores is finally captured and hanged, refusing Walker's "offer" to escape. Dolores has learned that freedom must be seized in struggle. And he knows the offer to free him is designed to demonstrate his subordination. He also realizes that Walker, having smashed the rebellion, wants to avoid creating a martyr and a legend. Dolores, in cool defiance, prefers death as his fulfilment...

The young boy who guards the captured Dolores stays with him and provides Pontecorvo with a means of allowing Jose Dolores to give his ideas expression through dialogue. Jose Dolores does not assail his captor; he tries to inspire and convert him. He tells the young man that he does not wish to be released because this would only indicate that it was convenient for his enemy. What serves his enemies is harmful to him. "Freedom is not something a man can give you," he tells the boy...

The last interview between Walker and Dolores is powerful. Walker desperately wishes to set Dolores free. Dolores refuses to speak to him. The camera focuses on the face of Brando who, having been superseded in his superiority and moral strength by Dolores as a mature revolutionary, cannot understand why a man would give up his life if he has a chance to escape. Dolores has purpose and meaning in his life. Walker by this time has none and only now is confronted, looking at the transformed Dolores, by what Pontecorvo has called "his own emptiness." ..

Pontecorvo zooms to Walker as he listens to Dolores' final message which breaks his silence: "Ingles, remember what you said. Civilization belongs to whites. But what civilization? Until when?"

His business finished, Walker is stabbed to death on the dock by a porter a moment before embarking. The stabbing of Walker on his way to the ship by an angry rebel comes simultaneously with a repetition of the Algerian cry for freedom. Quemada's people are awakened, emboldened, and irreconcilable. The camera pans to many worn faces, their rebellion unchecked and the example of Dolores burned into their consciousness." Joan Mellen - Queimada - Gillo Pontecorvo's Burn!, 1972

But, then again, it may be that the international actors have seen the film and that is why they are acting the way they do.

Donor Co-Chairs working out "coalition humanitarian task force"
Sri Lanka Sunday Times, 22 February 2009

A Donor-Co-chair-backed humanitarian operation, spearheaded by the United States, to evacuate civilians trapped in the fighting in the Wanni is now taking shape.

A high-level team of the United States Pacific Command (US PACOM) from their headquarters in Hawaii is now in Colombo for this purpose. The exercise, The Sunday Times learns, will involve US military assets, including those of the Air Force and the Navy. The purpose will be purely to facilitate the movement of civilians from the northeastern coast to a ship in the deep seas. This is for transfer to IDP centres or hospitals outside the battle zones.

Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama told The Sunday Time he was aware of the intended US led "coalition humanitarian task force" but could not give a date when it would be set up. He said yesterday that the Government was talking to member countries of the Donor Co-chairs on an individual basis."

Mr. Bogollagama added: "we are also talking to several other friendly countries for civilian evacuation. They say they would always be comfortable with the direct involvement of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) carrying their flag with Government approval and supervision." One such offer has come from India.

Their acting Prime Minister Pranab Mukherjee told Lok Sabha (Parliament) in New Delhi on Wednesday that his Government had formally offered assistance including logistic support to evacuate civilians caught up in the battle zone. He said the Sri Lanka Government had accepted the offer based on the fact that it was coming from a "friendly country."

Though the Government has accepted the humanitarian operation in principle, it is not immediately clear when the evacuation exercise will get under way. One of the factors the move hinges on, it is learnt, is the ground situation since the Army has now further intensified its military campaign to regain control of the remaining areas in the Mullaitivu district. Another is the finalisation and co-ordination of logistic details.

The initiatives of the Donor Co-chairs, consisting of the United States, Norway, Japan and the European Union, The Sunday Times learnt, has met with some initial difficulties. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has flatly rejected moves to allow the evacuation of civilians in the Mullaitivu district’s smaller areas which it is dominating. However, further contacts are under way.

In the light of serious concerns over civilian safety expressed by Donor Co-chairs as well as other countries and continued LTTE refusals, The Sunday Times learns, may force the Government to allow the humanitarian exercise to get under way notwithstanding LTTE objections.

However, such a move, highly placed defence sources said yesterday, would have to be after a close review of the ground realities. In the past few days, troops had made more territorial gains.

The re-capture of Puthukkudiyiruppu, now the guerrilla nerve centre, was a matter of days, these sources said.

Estimates of the number of civilians trapped in the battle zones vary from 125,000 to 75,000. This week there have been more complaints from those working for international agencies of LTTE firing at civilians to prevent them from moving to the newly-created Safety Zone. It lay on a thin stretch of land flanked by a lagoon on one side and the Indian Ocean on the other.

Britain to back move against Lanka

The British Government has voiced its support for an earlier call by Mexico for a briefing on the situation in Sri Lanka at the UN Security Council.

Britain’s UN Ambassador John Sawers has told New York's Inner City Press that his government was calling for a briefing on Sri Lanka. This was after the return to New York of UN's humanitarian affairs chief, Sir John Holmes. He ended a visit to Colombo only yesterday. However, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon's spokesperson Michelle Montas told reporters at Friday's noon briefing that Sir John would not be available for a Security Council briefing after his return.

He is to travel to Columbia. In Colombo, last Wednesday, the Cabinet rejected for a second time, a move by the British Government to name its former Defence Secretary Des Browne as special envoy to Sri Lanka.

Earlier, Mexico's call for a Security Council briefing on the Sri Lanka situation was shot down by Russia.

The British envoy's remarks come as Sri Lanka is due to figure at a number of international fora in the coming week.

Tomorrow, the European Union's Foreign Ministers are expected to issue a strong statement on Sri Lanka. On Tuesday, the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hold hearings on developments in Sri Lanka. The US Government's annual Human Rights Report is also due to be released in a fortnight.


The TRUTH about Sri Lanka is well documented on:




Major International Organisations, prominent Journalists and Politicians have already spoken out about the attrocities committed by the Sri Lankan Government/Army/Police.





Dear International Community,


Another 100,000 innocent Tamils to die?

YOU KNOW what is REALLY happening in Sri Lanka.

Both Sinhalese and Tamils just want peace in Sri Lanka.

Please CONDEMN the TERROR unleashed upon innocent Tamils.

Please hear their cries. They are helpless.

There are more than 10,000 CHILDREN stuck in LTTE-held territory.

Please FORCE SRI LANKAN government to STOP KILLING Tamils.

The Sri Lankan Army and Air Force are KILLING INNOCENT TAMIL CIVILIANS EVERY DAY!!!!!!!!!!!!


You cannot remain a silent witness when YOU have the power to stop this mayhem.




DON'T WAIT FOR another,
- 100,000 TAMILS TO DIE.



NO ONE cares about the Tamils in Sri Lanka.
(except ofcourse the Tamil Diaspora & the people of Tamil Nadu)

- NONE of the countries, the UN or Human Rights groups and Aid groups care about the Tamils being slaughtered by Sinhala Sri Lankan Army.

- The Aid and Religious groups are waiting to flock to Sri Lanka, to make money out of the tragedy and spread Christianity and Islam to the vulnerable Tamils who escape from this alive.

- all the countries waiting to make money in SL after the 'END' of the 'WAR' which they think will be soon.

SRI-LANKA  >  has turned into >  SORRY-LANKA

"Peace or Perpetual War?"

Editorial - Tamil Guardian - 24 January 2009

The moment has come for the Tamils to unite as a people and stand fast.

The territorial advances of the Sri Lanka military this month has produced what is said to be an existential moment in the island’s sixty-year-old ethnic crisis. The end of the LTTE is confidently predicted by the Sinhala government, as ever, and various pundits who have begun to speculate on the various futures to follow. As always, we will desist from tactical military predictions. Instead, we will confidently state, once again, that Sri Lanka will not see the end of Tamil militancy until and unless Sinhala oppression is permanently checked. By this we do not mean a political solution, but the concrete impossibility of further Sinhala tyranny. The two are, as is often conveniently forgotten, not the same.
To begin with, the LTTE is a product of Sinhala oppression and Tamil defiance. Just as the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) was a product of Israeli oppression and Palestinian resolve. Although the Sinhalese and the West have preferred to see the LTTE as a project unto itself, i.e. an externality to the imperfect ‘normalcy’ of Sri Lanka, basic political analysis begs the question: what dynamics, exactly, has ensured the LTTE a steady and widening stream of committed fighters, funding and political support from the Tamils for over three decades? And what can be expected of those dynamics in the hereafter?
The Sinhala (and Western) fixation today with eliminating the LTTE and its leader Vellupillai Pirapaharan as a solution to the Tamil question mirrors that of Israeli (and Western) obsession of yore with eliminating the PLO and Yasser Arafat as a solution to the Palestinian question. Observers of the Middle East will recall how the end of the Palestinian struggle was confidently predicted in 1982 after the massive Israeli onslaught into Lebanon ‘boxed’ the PLO into Beirut. However, Palestinian militancy did not end because Israeli oppression did not end. Instead, the latter escalated and the former kept violent pace (it is worth reflecting, at this juncture, on why the PLO and Arafat later became dubbed ‘moderates’).
Tamils have never rioted against Sinhalese. But, even before the armed conflict began, our people had been subjected - in 1956, 1958, 1977, 1981 and 1983 - to what Professor Sankaran Krishna has aptly called “annihilatory violence”. As he also argues, “these periodic explosions of violence against Tamils represent efforts to put them back in their places on grounds they have become too assertive and need to be taught a lesson.” The Sinhala military has taken over from the Sinhala mobs, but the Tamils, it seems, still refuse to learn their lesson, to accept their rightful place under the Sinhalese, that the island belongs to the people of the lion and we – and other non-Sinhalese – are invading interlopers.
The Rajapske government, the other Sinhala parties and the majority of the Sinhala people (save a shrinking handful of progressives) are united in violently teaching the Tamils the lesson begun sixty years ago. Notice how not one Sinhala voice protests the daily slaughter of Tamil civilians in the north. It is not an accident that Sinhala chauvinism is undisguised today: the belief that the LTTE is (finally) being destroyed drives a misplaced confidence that the Tamils can (finally) be subordinated.
The point here is that Sinhala chauvinism is the ‘tectonic plate’ underlying the island’s crisis. The mentality that resulted in ‘Sinhala Only’ in1956 is even more entrenched in the fabric of the state and polity today. The reason a federal answer was impossible then is the same reason it is impossible now, a point those preoccupied with ‘solutions’ ought to bear in mind.
Yet, for the most part, the fixation has been on the LTTE and “its” demand for Tamil Eelam. Many – including even some Tamils– have suggested, especially during the reverie induced by the Norwegian-led peace process, that a federal solution is “enough”. But this logic of ‘extreme’ and ‘reasonable’ demands suggests that the Tamils are being indulgent while choosing from some kind of constitutional menu. But is that the problem in Sri Lanka, our demand for independence? What came before that to precipitate such a radical demand by our people?
As for a ‘political solution’, would the Sinhala people - today baying hoarsely for more blood as scores of Tamil civilians are killed and maimed - have ever agreed to a federal solution? Even if it had been signed with one of the Sinhala parties, would it have lasted – what happened to the much-vaunted PTOMS after the tsunami? Even the anemic provisions of the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord were discarded by the Sinhalese when they thought the moment opportune. Why would things have been any different re: federalism?
It is worth noting that Tamils’ faith in an ‘internal’ solution – whatever it may be – was based entirely on the international community’s integrity as its underwriters. Indeed, in 2003 US Ambassador Ashley Wills even confidently assured the Tamils in a media interview that “now that the international community is watching” they no longer have any need of the LTTE. Well, the West is certainly watching today - just as they did in Sebrenica, in Rwanda or, if the point needs need underlining, in Gaza.
The history of Sri Lanka’s armed conflict has been marked regularly by Colombo’s confident predictions of ‘the end’ of Tamil militancy. Even when much detail of the battlefront was available, escaping the censors best efforts, as in President Chandrika Kumaratunga’s time of ‘War for Peace’, for example, those analysts daring or foolish enough to predict the course of history have been consistently wrong. Yet today, despite an extraordinary blackout, confident predictions abound.
These flow, moreover, primarily from a ‘self-evident reality’ marked out by the Sri Lankan military-supplied binary colored map. The LTTE, SLA commander Lt. Gen. Sarath Fonseka asserts, has been ‘boxed’ into Mullaitivu. Perhaps. But the LTTE has been so cornered before, in Jaffna and in Mullaitivu. It is precisely in this situation that the true colours of the Sinhala have come out, on the one hand, and the Tamils have stood closer together, on the other. In other words, this is when the Tamil project of nation-building and liberation has moved forward.
There are those who ask what the Tamils have achieved after sixty years of conflict. That is self-evident. Lest it be forgotten, this is not a war not of our choosing, but one forced upon us by the murderous ethnocracy the British left behind. Yet we have not been subdued. We have not accepted a place as second-class citizens in our own homeland or surrendered our dignity as a people. No matter what deprivations the Sinhalese and their international allies have visited on our people, no matter how they have sought to erase our national identity we have resisted. We have made defiance our hallmark.
The Tamil struggle for self-determination is at a crucial moment today. This is not about the armed struggle - the will to resist embedded in the LTTE will ensure that Sinhala hegemony remains an impossibility. Rather, it is about how to the Tamil nation moves beyond the myth we have been laboring under, that of peaceful co-existence as equal with the Sinhala nation being possible. The Sinhala nation is today making its greatest effort yet to annihilate the Tamil nation, politically and physically. Having made this possible, the international community is watching and waiting. The moment has come for us to unite as a people and stand fast - until we can never be put in this situation again.


Tamil Guardian article, "Peace or Perpetual War?", Editorial,Tamil Guardian - 24-01-2009


Sri Lanka !!!




a list of 'Sinhala-Sri Lanka's genocidal acts is on the following link:


please read important information on these websites:

Tamil Nation . org



British Tamils Forum


The CHARGE is Genocide,

The STRUGGLE is for Freedom.

Twenty four  years ago, commencing on 23 July 1983, thousands of Tamils were slaughtered in the island of Sri Lanka by armed Sinhala gangs, led in many cases by Sinhala members of Parliament and their henchmen.  It was a planned attack.

    "Clearly this was not a spontaneous upsurge of communal hatred among the Sinhala people.. It was a series of deliberate acts, executed in accordance with a concerted plan, conceived and organised well in advance..." Paul Sieghart: Report of a Mission to Sri Lanka on behalf of the International Commission of Jurists and its British Section, Justice, March 1984

It was genocide.

    "..Under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, acts of murder committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such are considered as acts of genocide.The evidence points clearly to the conclusion that the violence of the Sinhala rioters on the Tamils (in July/August 1983) amounted to acts of genocide." - The International Commission of Jurists Review, December 1983

Amongst the several acts of gruesome murder, one incident serves to illustrate the horror of the ordeal faced by Tamils in the island of Sri Lanka in July 1983:

    "A tourist told yesterday how she watched in horror as a Sinhala mob deliberately burned alive a bus load of Tamils... Mrs.Eli Skarstein, back home in Stavangen, Norway, told how she and her 15 year old daughter, Kristin, witnessed one massacre. 'A mini bus full of Tamils were forced to stop in front of us in Colombo' she said. A Sinhalese mob poured petrol over the bus and set it on fire. They blocked the car door and prevented the Tamils from leaving the vehicle. 'Hundreds of spectators watched as about 20 Tamils were burned to death'. Mrs. Skarstein added: 'We can't believe the official casualty figures. Hundreds may be thousands must have been killed already." (London Daily Express, 29th August 1983)

But Genocide '83 was not the first occasion, when the Tamil people in the island of Sri Lanka were murdered by  Sinhala armed gangs and security forces. Nor was it the last.

Twenty five years before Genocide '83, Tarzie Vittachi wrote in Emergency '58

    "As panic spread, doors were closed in Sinhalese as well as Tamil homes. The Tamils closed their doors to escape murder, rape and pillage. The Sinhalese closed their doors to prevent Tamils running into their houses for shelter…Among the hundreds of acts of arson, rape, pillage, murder and plain barbarity some incidents may be recorded as examples of the kind of thuggery at work... At Wellawatte junction, near the plantain kiosk, a pregnant woman and her husband were set upon. They clubbed him and left him on the pavement, then they kicked the woman repeatedly as she hurried along at a grotesque sprint, carrying her swollen belly... What are we left with (in 1958)? A nation in ruins, some grim lessons which we cannot afford to forget and a momentous question: Have the Sinhalese and Tamils reached the parting of ways?.."

And in 1977, the Tamils were attacked and killed again.

    "A tragedy is taking place in Sri Lanka: the political conflict following upon the recent elections, is turning into a racial massacre. It is estimated by reliable sources that between 250 and 300 Tamil citizens have lost their lives and over 40,000 made homeless...(The Tamils) have now lost confidence in their treatment by the Sinhalese majority and are calling for a restoration of their separate national status... At a time when the West is wake to the evils of racialism, the racial persecution of the Tamils and denial of their human rights should not pass without protest. The British have a special obligation to protest, as these cultivated people were put at the mercy of their neighbours less than thirty years ago by the British Government. They need our attention and support." - Sir John Foster, David Astor, Louis Blom-Cooper, Dingle Foot, Robert Birley, James Fawcett, Michael Scott, London Times 20 September 1977

It was all this and more that led Paul Sieghart to conclude, 23 years ago in March 1984

    "Communal riots in which Tamils are killed, maimed, robbed and rendered homeless are no longer isolated episodes; they are beginning to become a pernicious habit." - Paul Sieghart: Report of a Mission to Sri Lanka on behalf of the International Commission of Jurists and its British Section, Justice, March 1984

Two years later, in March 1986, Senator A.L.Missen, Chairman, Australian Parliamentary Group of Amnesty International declared in the Australian Parliament -

    "Some 6000 Tamils have been killed altogether in the last few years...These events are not accidental. It can be seen that they are the result of a deliberate policy on the part of the Sri Lankan government...Democracy in Sri Lanka does not exist in any real sense..." - Australian Senate Hansard, 13 March 1986

Four years thereafter, on 19 September 1990, Amnesty launched a three month international campaign against Sri Lanka  with a  campaign poster which declared: "Licensed to Kill: State Terror in Sri Lanka". But, two years after Amnesty's campaign Sri Lanka continued to kill with impunity and  Margaret Trawick, Professor of Social Anthropology, Massey University Palmerston North, New Zealand was moved to declare in agony -

    "I have been struggling in my mind against the conclusion that the Sri Lanka government is trying to kill or terrorise as many Tamil people as possible; that the government is trying to keep the conditions of the war unreported internationally, because if those conditions were reported, the actions of the military would be perceived as so deplorable that foreign nations would have no choice but to condemn them. And this would be embarrassing to everybody.  But it seems now that no other conclusion is possible..." Statement of 28 April 1996

Today, twenty three years after Paul Sieghart, 21 years after Senator.A.L.Missen, 17 years after Amnesty, and 11 years after Professor Mararet Trawick, Tamils continue to be  'killed, maimed, robbed and rendered homeless' and the Sri Lanka government continues 'to kill or terrorise as many Tamil people as possible.'  A fair examination of the documented record will prove (and prove beyond reasonable doubt)  that the people of Tamil Eelam continue to be murdered and extra judicially executed in a systematic, deliberate and planned manner by the Sri Lanka authorities and their agents.

The massacres at Chunnakam 1984, Mannar 1985, Kumithini 1985, Tiriyai 1985, Iruthayapuram 1986, Akkaraipattu 1986, Kokkadaicholai1987, Kannapuram1990, Saththurukondan1990, Kokaddicholai 1991, Inspector Etram Milakudiyetra 1995, Jeyanthipuram 1995 , Navali 1995, Nagerkoil School 1995, Kumarapuram 1996, Puthukudyiruppu 1997, Amparai1997,  Kalutara Prison 1997, Tampalakamam 1998,  Ayithiyamalai 2000, Bindunuwewe 2000, Trincomalee 2006, Mandaithivu 2006, Vankalai 2006, Pesalai 2006, Vallipunam 2006, Muthur 2006, Vaharai 2006, and Padahuthurai 2007 have now become a part of the history of the suffering of the Tamil people. And these massacres have gone hand in hand with disappearances and individual extra judicial killings, rape, torture, aerial bombardment and shelling.



The continued attack on the Tamil people is genocidal in intent and is taking place with impunity and under the cover of a controlled and intimidated media. Successive Sri Lanka governments and their Sinhala Presidents have refused to admit to or publicly condemn the terrorist actions of those under their command. On the contrary, the pronouncements of  successive Sri Lanka Presidents, Sinhala Cabinet Ministers and the holding of obscene 'victory' ceremonies have served to encourage the terrorist actions of those under their command. Sri Lanka President Jayawardene,  famously remarked to  Ian Ward of the London Daily Telegraph in July 1983 -

"I have tried to be effective for sometime but cannot. I am not worried about the opinion of the Jaffna (Tamil) people now... The more you put pressure in the north, the happier the Sinhala people will be here.. really, if I starve the Tamils out, the Sinhala people will be happy.."

Deanna Hodgin, Insight Magazine, wrote in 1990 -

    ''..I attended a press conference where Defence Minister Ranjan Wijeratne told the press that there had been no civilian casualties despite heavy bombing. When I volunteered that I had seen many bomb-blasted bodies, and many hundreds of people injured by helicopter strafing and more, the Defence Minister told me it was a pity I had not been shot. That's the mentality you are dealing with - human rights is not an idea with much currency for the Sri Lankan government.... Congressman, I'm writing to you because I am angry. You should be, too.'' Letter dated 7 November 1990 to US Congressman Gus Yatron, Subcommittee on Human Rights,Washington

Three years later, in 1993, Sri Lanka President D.B.Wijetunga declared with equanimity, 'when there is a war, there is no law, there is a race to kill'. And, eight years later, in 1998, the army  blockade of food stuffs and medical supplies continued  leading Professor Jordan J. Paust to conclude

    "As demonstrated in this Essay, there are serious allegations and significant recognitions of human rights violations in Sri Lanka relating to the right to adequate food, the right to adequate medicine and medical supplies, and the right to freedom from arbitrary and inhumane detention and controls. Such denials are sustained by governmental censorship, denials of access to certain areas for investigative purposes, and intimidation of non governmental organisations (NGOs), which in turn involve violations of the human right to transnational freedom of speech. Moreover, these denials are sustained by the lack of adequate governmental investigations, arrests, and prosecutions of alleged perpetrators - patterns that facilitate an air of impunity... the intentional withholding of medicine and medical supplies from LTTE controlled areas is a clear violation of common Article 3 (of the 1949 Geneva Convention) and is a war crime. " 'The Human Rights to Food, Medicine and Medical Supplies, and Freedom from Arbitrary and Inhuman Detention and Controls in Sri Lanka', Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, May ’98)

Today, 160,000 Tamils have been displaced from their homes and Sri Lanka President Rajapakse blocks aid convoys , the armed forces under his command execute aid workers and the tragedy of Vaharai continues to unfold.

And here, it is both important and necessary to ask the question: Why did these genocidal attacks happen?  Why do they continue to happen? The genocidal attacks on the Tamil people did not and do not  'just happen'.  Ethnic cleansing is about assimilating a people. It is about destroying the identity of a people, as a people. And it occurs in stages. The preferred route of a conqueror is to achieve his objective without resort to violence - peacefully and stealthily. But when that is resisted, albeit peacefully,  the would be conqueror turns to murderous violence and genocide to progress his assimilative agenda.

In the island of Sri Lanka, the record shows that during the past fifty years and more, the intent and goal of all Sinhala governments (without exception) has been to secure the island as a Sinhala Buddhist Deepa.  Rule by a permanent ethnic majority within the confines of a single state is the dark side of democracy. The Sinhala Buddhist ethno nation masquerading as a multi ethnic 'civic' 'Sri Lankan' nation set about its task of assimilation and 'cleansing' the island of  the Tamils, as a people, by

    - depriving a section of Eelam Tamils of their citizenship,
    - declaring the Sinhala flag as the national flag,
    - colonising parts of the Tamil homeland with Sinhala people,
    - imposing Sinhala as the official language,
    - discriminating against Tamils students seeking University admission,
    - depriving Tamil language speakers of employment in the public sector,
    - dishonouring agreements entered into with the Tamil parliamentary  political leadership,
    - refusing to recognise constititutional safeguards against discrimination,
    - later removing these constitutional safeguards altogether,
    - giving to themselves an authocthonous Constitution with a foremost place for Buddhism,
    - changing the name of the island itself to the Sinhala Buddhist name of Sri Lanka - appropriately enough, on  the 'tenth day of the waxing moon in the month of Vesak in the year two thousand five hundred and fifteen of the Buddhist Era', and
    - amending the Sri Lanka constitution to render non violent struggle for an independent Tamil Eelam illegal and criminal

The short point is that the deliberate genocidal attack on the Tamil people was directed to terrorise the Tamil people to submit to alien Sinhala rule. It was directed to quell Tamil resistance to assimilation and ethnic cleansing.

The issue is therefore, not simply about genocide. The issue is not simply about the violations of the humanitarian law of armed conflict or the violations of the ceasefire agreement - or for that matter the systematic violations of human rights of the Tamil people. The issue and the conflict in the island is about  the refusal of the people of Tamil Eelam to submit to alien Sinhala rule. And it was this refusal which the manifesto of the parliamentary Tamil United Liberation Front proclaimed in 1977 -

    "What is the alternative now left to the Nation that has lost its rights to its language, rights to its citizenship, rights to its religions and continues day by day to lose its traditional homeland to Sinhalese colonisation ? What is the alternative now left to a Nation that has lost its opportunities to higher education through standardisation and its equality in opportunities in the sphere of employment ? What is the alternative to a Nation that lies helpless as it is being assaulted, looted and killed by hooligans instigated by the ruling race and by the security forces of the State? Where else is an alternative to the Tamil Nation that gropes in the dark for its identity and finds itself driven to the brink of devastation? There is only one alternative and that is to proclaim with the stamp of finality and fortitude that "we alone shall rule over our land that our fore fathers ruled. Sinhalese imperialism shall quit our Homeland"

It was to this manifesto that the Tamil people gave their overwhelming approval at the 1977 General Election in the island of Sri Lanka. The national identity of the people of Tamil Eelam is rooted in their language, in their culture and in their heritage. It is a togetherness consolidated by their suffering and it is a togetherness that is given direction by their aspirations for a  future where they, and their children and their children's children may live in equality and in freedom. And today the struggle of the people of Tamil Eelam, is not about whether alien Sinhala rule should be benevolent or that it should be 'fair and just'. After all, the British too offered to rule fairly and justly (and even benevolently) but this did not prevent those on whom the British sought to impose their alien rule, struggling for freedom.

Neither is the struggle of the people of  Tamil Eelam about devolution. Devolution is about devolving from the higher to the lower. The higher is the ruler and the lower is the ruled. Alien rulers are not slow to offer (from time to time)  'consultation' and 'devolution' as ways of perpetuating their rule, pacifying their subjects and progressing the 'peaceful' assimilation of a conquered people. Aurobindo's caustic comments on the British Morley-Minto devolution proposals for India in 1907 retain their relevance ninety nine years later:

    "Mr.Morley has made his pronouncement and a long expectant world may now go about its ordinary business with the satisfactory conviction that the conditions of political life in India will be precisely the same as before... We find it impossible to discuss Mr.Morley's reforms seriously, they are so impossibly burlesque and farcical. Yet they have their serious aspect. They show that British despotism, like all despotisms in the same predicament, is making the time honoured, ineffectual effort to evade a settlement of the real question by throwing belated and now unacceptable sops to Demogorgon."

The struggle of the people of Tamil Eelam is not about 'sharing power' within the confines of a Sri Lankan state, with a Sinhala army in command. The words of John Stuart Mill in 1872 remain true more than a century later:

    "Free institutions are next to impossible in a country made up of different nationalities. An altogether different set of leaders have the confidence of one part of the country and of another. ...  Above all, the grand and only effectual security in the last resort against the despotism of the government is in that case wanting: the sympathy of the army with the people. Soldiers to whose feelings half or three fourths of the subjects of the same government are foreigners, will have no more scruple in mowing them down, and no more reason to ask the reason why, than they would have in doing the same thing against declared enemies. (John Stuart Mill: Considerations on Representative Government. London 1872)

The struggle of the people of Tamil Eelam is not about how best Sinhala rule may be perpetuated and legitimised. It is about freedom from alien Sinhala rule - and the removal of the alien Sinhala army from the Tamil homeland. And to those who would ask where is this Tamil homeland let us reply with Sathasivam Krishnakumar -

    'Take a map of the island. Take a paint brush and paint all the areas where Sri Lanka has bombed and launched artillery attacks during these past several years. When you have finished, the painted area that you see - that is Tamil Eelam.'

And to those who would deny that Sinhala rule is alien rule, let us say that it is alien rule because the Sinhala people speak a different language to that of the Tamil people;  because they trace their history to origins different from that of the Tamil people; and because their cultural heritage is different to that of the Tamil people.

Finally, to those who would deny that it is Sinhala rule, let us say that it is Sinhala rule because the undeniable political reality is that the political consciousness of the Sinhala people and the way they  exercise their vote, is clearly determined by their separate language, by their separate history and by their separate cultural heritage - in short by their own separate Sinhala national identity. In the island of Sri Lanka, no Tamil has ever been elected to an electorate which had a majority of Sinhala voters and no Sinhalese has ever been elected to an electorate which had a  majority of Tamil voters. The practise of democracy within the confines of a single state has resulted  in rule by a permanent Sinhala majority. And nothing, perhaps, establishes this more directly than the answer to the  simple question:

    Q. Why is it that in Sri Lanka, for five long decades since 'independence', we have always had a Sinhala Buddhist as the executive head of government?

The answer is that  a Sinhala Buddhist ethno nation masquerading as a civic ' multi ethnic Sri Lankan nation', will always have a Sinhala Buddhist as the executive head of government. The words of Tamil leader, Nadarajah Thangathurai uttered in February 1983 (a few months before he was murdered whilst in the custody of the Sri Lanka government) serve to underline this political reality:

    "...Allegations are made that we are asking for separation, that we are trying to divide the country. When were we undivided after all? Our traditional land, captured by the European invaders has never been restored to us. We have not even mortgaged our land at any time to anyone in the name of one country. Our land has changed hands off and on under various regimes, and that is what has happened... What we ask for is not division but freedom. "

In the ultimate analysis, the struggle of the people of Tamil Eelam  is about democracy.  If democracy means the rule of the people, by the people, for the people then it must follow, as night follows day, that no one people may rule another. The right of self determination provides the framework within which democracy may flower. Every people have the right to freely determine their political status and the terms on which they may associate with another people. Democracy and the right to self determination go hand in hand - one cannot exist without the other. The struggle of the people of Tamil Eelam is about their democratic right to rule themselves. Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein, was right to point out in 2001 -

    "...Let us accept the fact that states have lifecycles similar to those of human beings who created them. The lifecycle of a state might last for many generations, but hardly any Member State of the United Nations has existed within its present borders for longer than five generations. The attempt to freeze human evolution has in the past been a futile undertaking and has probably brought about more violence than if such a process had been controlled peacefully... Restrictions on self-determination threaten not only democracy itself but the state which seeks its legitimation in democracy.. "  Self Determination & the Future of Democracy  - Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein, 2001

Professor Margaret Moore was also right to conclude in the same year -

    "...The problem in nationally divided societies is that the different groups have different political identities, and, in cases where the identities are mutually exclusive (not nested), these groups see themselves as forming distinct political communities. In this situation, the options available to represent these distinct identities are very limited, because any solution at the state level is inclined to be biased in favour of one kind of identity over another. That is to say, if the minority group seeks to be self-governing, or to secede from the larger state, increased representation at the centre will not be satisfactory. The problem in this case is that the group does not identify with the centre, or want to be part of that political community...One conclusion that can be drawn is that, in some cases, secession/partition of the two communities, where that option is available, is the best outcome overall. .." Normative Justifications for Liberal Nationalism - Margaret Moore,2001

It is sometimes said that to accord international recognition to separate national formations will lead to instability in the world order. The reasoning is not dissimilar to that which was urged a hundred years ago against granting universal franchise. It was said that to empower every citizen with a vote was to threaten the stability of existing state structures and the ruling establishment. But the truth was that it was the refusal to grant universal franchise which threatened stability - and in the end the ruling establishment was 'persuaded' to mend its ways. As always, conscious evolution remains the only alternative to revolution.

And to those in the international community who continue to speak of their willingness to recognise the 'legitimate aspirations' of the Tamil people (but who refrain from spelling out what in their view is 'legitimate') the time has come to reiterate that which Gandhian leader S.J.V.Chelvanayagam declared 32 years ago and say that it is the legitimate aspiration of the Tamil people to be free from alien Sinhala rule.

    "Throughout the ages the Sinhalese and Tamils in the country lived as distinct sovereign people till they were brought under foreign domination. It should be remembered that the Tamils were in the vanguard of the struggle for independence in the full confidence that they also will regain their freedom. We have for the last 25 years made every effort to secure our political rights on the basis of equality with the Sinhalese in a united Ceylon. It is a regrettable fact that successive Sinhalese governments have used the power that flows from independence to deny us our fundamental rights and reduce us to the position of a subject people. These governments have been able to do so only by using against the Tamils the sovereignty common to the Sinhalese and the Tamils. I wish to announce to my people and to the country that I consider the verdict at this election as a mandate that the Tamil Eelam nation should exercise the sovereignty already vested in the Tamil people and become free."  - Statement by S.J.V.Chelvanayakam Q.C. M.P. , leader of the Tamil United Liberation Front, 7 February 1975

Does the international community agree that the aspiration of the Tamil people to be free from alien Sinhala rule is a 'legitimate' aspiration? Or does it take the view that Gandhian leader S.J.V. Chelvanayagam was wrong and that the aspiration of the people of Tamil Eelam to be free from alien Sinhala rule is not a 'legitimate' aspiration? If the latter be the case, has not the time come for the international community to explain to the people of Tamil Eelam its reasons for insisting that the Tamil people be ruled by a permanent Sinhala majority within the confines of a single state - with a Sinhala army occupying the Tamil homeland?

Perhaps, the time has also come for the Tamil people to engage  in a dialogue with the international community and tell them that they may ban the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam but they cannot ban the cry of a people for freedom from alien rule.

And here let us be clear. The struggle of the people of Tamil Eelam to be free from alien Sinhala rule is not about what the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam may have done or may not have done. The record shows that the armed resistance of the people of Tamil Eelam (warts and all) arose as the inevitable response to decades of efforts by successive Sinhala governments to conquer, subjugate, pacify and assimilate the Tamil people and the enactment of the 6th Amendment to the Sri Lanka constitution set the seal by criminalising all non violent means of struggle for an independent Tamil Eelam state  – an amendment which also violated Sri Lanka’s obligations under international law.

"The freedom to express political opinions, to seek to persuade others of their merits, to seek to have them represented in Parliament, and thereafter seek Parliament to give effect to them, are all fundamental to democracy itself. These are precisely the freedoms which Article 25 (of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights) recognises and guarantees - and in respect of advocacy for the establishment of an independent Tamil State in Sri Lanka, those which the 6th Amendment is designed to outlaw. It therefore appears to me plain that this enactment constitutes a clear violation by Sri Lanka of its obligations in international law under the Covenant ..." - Paul Sieghart: Sri Lanka-A Mounting Tragedy of Errors - Report of a Mission to Sri Lanka in January 1984 on behalf of the International Commission of Jurists and its British Section, Justice, March 1984

The time has come to engage the international community (and that means the trilaterals - USA, European Union & Japan together with India and China) in an honest and open dialogue as to the strategic interests that each of these IC members themselves seek to secure in the island of Sri Lanka - and whether they seek to prevent a resolution of the conflict except on terms which secure each of their own strategic interests. After all, it will be fair to say that there are two conflicts in the island - one the conflict between the Sinhala nation and a Tamil Eelam nation seeking freedom from alien Sinhala rule, and the other the conflict between the international actors in the Indian Ocean region seeking, (amongst other matters) control of the Indian Ocean sea lanes - whether through a string of pearls or by other means.

Indian Ocean Sea Lanes

But all this is not to say that Tamil Eelam and Sri Lanka  may not  sit together as equals and structure a polity where the two peoples may associate with each other in equality and in freedom. An independent Tamil Eelam is not negotiable but an independent Tamil Eelam can and will negotiate. There may be a need to telescope two processes - one the recognition of an independent Tamil Eelam and the other the terms in which an independent Tamil Eelam may  associate with an independent Sri Lanka, so that the national security of each may be protected and guaranteed.

Strange as it may seem to some, the struggle for an independent Tamil Eelam, is not in opposition to many of the underlying interests of the parties concerned with the conflict in the island - and that includes Sri Lanka, India, the European Union, the United States and China.  Tamils who today live in many lands and across distant seas know only too well that sovereignty after all, is not virginity.  If Germany and France were able to put in place 'associate' structures despite the suspicions and confrontations of two world wars, it should not be beyond the capacity of an independent Tamil Eelam and  an independent Sri Lanka to work out structures, within which each independent state may remain free and prosper, but at the same time pool sovereignty in certain agreed areas.

And to say that is not to live in the fantasy world of the fanatic but to understand the unfolding political reality of the fourth world and the processes that resulted in the European Union. It is also to reject the fanaticism of those who insist on preserving the artificial territorial boundaries imposed (and later bequeathed) by the erstwhile British ruler. It is to reject the colonial legacy and to reject the continuing attempt  to replace British colonial rule with Sinhala colonial rule.  The words of Velupillai Pirabaharan, uttered some sixteen years ago, bear repetition, yet again:

    "...It is the Sri Lanka government which has failed to learn the lessons from the emergence of the struggles for self determination in several parts of the globe and the innovative structural changes that have taken place... We are not chauvinists. Neither are we lovers of violence enchanted with war. We do not regard the Sinhala people as our opponents or as our enemies. We recognise the Sinhala nation. We accord a place of dignity  for the culture and heritage of the Sinhala people. We have no desire to interfere in any way with the national life of the Sinhala people or with their freedom and independence. We, the Tamil people, desire to live in our own historic homeland as an independent nation, in peace, in freedom and with dignity.."

And so today, in the shadow of a ceasefire, as the armed forces under Sinhala Sri Lanka President Rajapakse's command  rape Tamil women, assassinate Tamil Parliamentarians,  murder Tamil journalists, execute Tamil students, arbitrarily arrest and detain Tamil civilians,  abduct Tamil refugee workers, orchestrate  attacks on Tamil civilians and Tamil shops, bomb Tamil civilian population centres, displace thousands of Tamils from their homes, kill Tamil school children, and murder Tamil aid workers,  millions of Tamils living in many lands will remember and honour the memory of  their brothers and sisters who were killed, raped and tortured in their thousands, for no crime other than that they were Tamils and because, as a people, they had refused to submit to alien Sinhala rule.

Millions of  Tamils  will remember and honour - and will renew their own commitment to the cause for which their brothers and sisters gave their lives. The charge is genocide!

Tamil Nation


Tamil Net


List of Sinhala-Sri Lanka's genocidal acts at the following link: