The demand from civil society for
an inclusive peace process has been a longstanding
one. It reached a peak in the aftermath of the Ceasefire
Agreement signed by the former UNP government and
the LTTE in February 2002.
The standard view of experts on conflict resolution
is that people's participation in the peace process
is essential for its long term success. A major
shortcoming in the peace process undertaken by the
former UNF government was the absence of such people's
participation.
The launch of the National Advisory Council on Peace
and Reconciliation at the initiative of President
Chandrika Kumaratunga marks a watershed in the peace
process.
At its inception, the earlier top down strategy
followed by the UNF government headed by former
Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe brought very
positive results to the country. The Ceasefire Agreement
that ended the war was signed by the Prime Minister
and the LTTE leader without consultation with the
President or with the people. The same was true
of the lifting of the ban on the LTTE, and the lifting
of security barriers and the economic embargo of
the LTTE-controlled areas.
The UNF government's decisions in this regard were
top down because they were not done in consultation
with the people. But they brought the war to an
end, and with it the era of mass killings and mass
destruction also to an end.
While the strength of the top-down approach is the
rapidity with which it can bring change, its weakness
is that it can run out of steam or be toppled by
political opposition at the highest levels. With
the passage of a year, the top down approach to
the peace process initiated by the UNF government
ran into trouble.
The LTTE suspended its participation in the peace
talks. When these problems began to surface, the
lack of public involvement in the peace process
began to take its toll. Rumours and stories began
to spread without the government being able to counter
them.
There was also little or no strong pressure from
the people to revive the peace talks. Instead political
opponents of the peace process took the upper hand.
They sowed fear and doubt among the people.
Today, due to the continuing deadlock in the peace
process, the situation at the ground level is unfavourable
to the peace process. The LTTE's intolerant attitude
towards its opponents, whom it kills in an unrelenting
manner is weakening people's support for the peace
process.
In any situation in which there is no visible progress,
people's attention tends to get focused on the negative
aspects rather than on an appreciation of the positive.
An example would be the role of the Norwegian facilitation
in the peace process. Different groups, including
sections of the state media, are attacking them
for not doing enough to rein in the LTTE. There
is little public appreciation of the contribution
of the Norwegians to the stopping of war. A negative
spiral of mistrust and demoralisation is set in
motion.
Direct contribution
In the context of the lack of progress in the peace
process, the President's summoning of the National
Advisory Council has re-energised civil society.
People who have been working for peace without involvement
in partisan politics now see an opportunity to make
a direct contribution to the peace process.
The President's pledge to conduct a broad-based
and transparent peace process with the full participation
of the people can be seen as a validation of the
claims made by civil society groups for many years.
If the process of discussion is conducted in a positive
manner and reported on comprehensively by the mass
media, there is the possibility of a total re-education
of society as a whole on the essentials of a peaceful
and long term settlement of the ethnic conflict.
Given the positive potential of the National Advisory
Council the decision on the part of the UNP, TNA
and other important political parties not to participate
in the opening session is a disappointment.
It deprives the Council of the different points
of view that constitute the plural society of Sri
Lanka. They appear to be mistrustful of the President's
intentions as a ploy to delay peace talks and to
put the responsibility on the representatives of
political and civil society to reach a consensus
amongst themselves as a first step.
However, the UNP has stated its intention to join
the Council as soon as the government recommences
negotiations with the LTTE. The UNP's consistent
stand has been that the government should recommence
peace talks with the LTTE on the basis of the LTTE's
proposals for an Interim Self Governing Authority.
As of now, the LTTE has been insisting that peace
talks can only resume on the basis of its ISGA proposals.
Perhaps the LTTE will modify their views in the
coming weeks.
At present a senior team of LTTE political wing
leaders are in Europe where they will be meeting
with constitutional experts drawn from both the
expatriate Tamil and international communities.
Implicit in the UNP's position is the requirement
that the government should demonstrate the political
will to recommence peace talks with the LTTE on
mutually acceptable terms.
Therefore, the responsibility for deciding whether
to negotiate with the LTTE, and the basis on which
such talks takes place, lies with the government,
which has to make the political judgment as to what
is right or wrong. This responsibility is not one
that can, or should, be shifted onto the people.
The people do not understand what the LTTE's ISGA
proposals mean. Neither do they know what federalism
means. This is understandable because the people
have lived their lives in a highly centralised society
and do not have direct experience, or even intellectual
experience, of what life in a different type of
society entails.
It is the government that has to take the responsibility
for the terms on which such peace talks will start.
Government's responsibility
In this context it is important that the government
should not seek to link the discussions within the
National Advisory Council to the resumption of peace
talks. Such a move will likely end up in delaying
the resumption of peace talks.
Those who are invited to be members of the Council
represent political, religious and civil society,
and in particular those from the Sinhalese community.
Most Sinhalese people, at this point of time, view
the LTTE's ISGA proposals with deep suspicion. In
fact they are likely to view any LTTE proposal with
suspicion.
Therefore, it can be anticipated that the deliberations
at the National Advisory Council are unlikely to
reach any sort of consensus as to peace talks on
the basis of the ISGA proposals. The TNA, which
seeks to represent the LTTE's position in Parliament
and in national politics, is clearly apprehensive
about this possibility.
As a forum that is representative of the people
it is to be expected that the National Advisory
Council will contain within itself many of the doubts
and fears of the people. Therefore, the answer as
to the next step forward in the peace process cannot
be left to the Council.
It needs to be a decision that is taken at the political
level. President Chandrika Kumaratunga needs to
be supported and applauded for formally recognising
the importance of civil society and setting up a
broad-based National Advisory Council to dialogue
on the peace process.
But she has to take on herself and her government
the responsibility of deciding whether or not to
talk to the LTTE and the terms on which those negotiations
will take place.
The President would do well to look at the positive
and negatives examples of peacemaking in the recent
past. Former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe
lifted the ban on the LTTE and signed the Ceasefire
Agreement without obtaining a consensus with the
other political parties.
Most of the opposition parties, and also the people,
had serious reservations about what he was doing.
But the former Prime Minister's actions put a stop
to the war, and the people appreciated the new found
peace.
The mistake the former Prime Minister made came
later in the peace process. He failed to see the
need to build a wider political and civil consensus
after the peace process got under way.
If the lesson of the past is to be learnt, it is
that the President should use the advantages of
the present moment to restart the peace process
without delay. This would give a forward momentum
to the government, which has been lacking ever since
they came to power.