Misleading chauvinism

A redeeming feature of what Sri Lanka has been through over the past few days in the context of the killing of Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, is the courage, patience and judicious restraint of the Lankan Government. The State of Sri Lanka has very deservedly won praise from around the world for these exemplary qualities and we too lend our voices to this chorus of praise, for, the need of the hour and in the days ahead, is peace and harmony and a generosity of spirit among all our communities.

The Government under the guidance of President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, through its judicious handling of the crisis which came in the aftermath of the Kadirgamar killing, has sent out the message loud and clear to all sections of opinion that the State of Sri Lanka is for ethnic peace and harmony with paramount importance being attached to the consolidation of the security of all persons, regardless of ethnic origins, religion and social background. The security forces and the police, as vital arms of the State, need to be commended for the delicate handling of the security situation in the country and for the patient understanding they reflect in the discharging of their diurnal duties.

As we mentioned in this commentary on Saturday, the Government has done extremely well to seek a re-engagement with the LTTE with a view to improving the country's peace prospects. We wish the Lankan State well in this attempt at reviewing the implementation of the Ceasefire Agreement with the LTTE because a just peace, which would meet the legitimate needs of all our communities, is the country's most crucial need. There is no alternative to "turning swords into ploughshares and spears into pruning hooks" because the military option would only ensure the fragmentation and complete ruin of Sri Lanka.

Unfortunately, not all sections see current developments in this enlightened perspective. For instance, they would prefer to see the late Lakshman Kadirgamar as one who projected a narrow, nationalist agenda. This is disturbingly reflected in the way the late Foreign Minister is treated in some sections of the country's media, for instance. Kadirgamar was no simple-minded jingoist although he played a principal role in conscientizing the world on the destructive role the LTTE has been playing over the years. What these sections of opinion seem to be preferring to ignore is Kadirgamar's advocacy of a just solution to our conflict, which would meet the legitimate aspirations of all our communities. While he clearly saw the need to defeat the agenda of the separatists he also clearly perceived that there was no future for Sri Lanka outside a negotiated political solution. This aspect of Kadirgamar's thinking needs to be emphasised too.

It is up to the State to defeat this wave of simplistic, jingoistic sentiment which is sweeping some sections. Kadirgamar was very obviously a humanist and a friend of all communities and creeds. This very vital dimensions of the man needs to be written in gold in our annals.

What some mainly, metropolitan-based social groups and their media backers in Colombo think of Kadirgamar couldn't be considered public opinion in the real sense of the word but their brand of nationalism could heighten ethnic tensions.