The Eelam Liberation Struggle is a misunderstood topic in political discourse, mired with malicious propaganda and deceit. The aftermath of this has resulted in the brutal oppression and subjugation of Eelam Tamils as they continue to fight for self-determination.
This guide will serve as a political and rhetorical tool that will debunk the misconceptions and arguments that the Sinhala state terrorists and their acolytes make.
1. Tamils are not “native” to Sri Lanka as they came from India.
This argument seeks to undermine Tamil sovereignty based on being an immigrant population and makes the false claim that the Sinhalese are the original people of the island.
While the larger Tamil ethnicity has its roots in the Indian subcontinent, it is disingenuous to deny “Eelam” Tamils their native status, as the group went through an ethnogenesis that divulged culturally from their Indian Tamil counterparts. This sub-ethnic identity originated in the North-Eastern part of the island and has existed for thousands of years, making them a native population [1].
Going by their own logic, the Sinhalese themselves are not an original population, as the racial mixing between North-East Indian migrants and Proto-Tamils is what lead to the creation of the Sinhala identity. Furthermore, several communities such as the Karawas are of South Indian origin and assimilated into Sinhala culture as late as the 18th century [2].
If you are to make the argument that Tamils are not native to the island based on their origin, then you will have to concede that the Sinhalese are not native either. If the latter is entitled to statehood and self-determination, then why aren’t Tamils allowed to have such aspirations?
2. The Tamil Tigers are “terrorists” because they killed civilians.
The concept of “terrorism” is a politized concept that has no universal definition. The lack of consensus stems from the diverse perspectives and interests of different nations, cultures, and political ideologies. Furthermore, the ambiguity surrounding the term is exacerbated by the fact that nearly every army in the world has at some point, been implicated in human rights violations or controversial military actions. During the Second World War, the Allied forces eviscerated Germany by fire-bombing its cities, resulting in over 45,000 civilian casualties. Additionally, the United States also dropped the twin nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, brutally killing over 100,000 civilians. These actions were justified morally under collective punishment or a political necessity to avoid further violence. This raises questions regarding the objectivity and impartiality of labeling specific acts as terrorism. Non-state actors, such as liberation groups or militias, are often held to different standards than state-sponsored entities, skewing our overall perception of what should be “considered” terrorism.
While this shouldn’t be a eulogy for unrestricted warfare and the killing of innocent civilians, one needs to refer to more objective measures to compare the actions of both state and non-state actors. We can use the following two metrics used in international law to determine this.
1. Proportionality: Was the actors use of force proportionate to the military advantage sought with a reasonable civilian casualty ratio?
2. Intention: Did the actor in question deliberately target civilians and whether this a systemic policy ordered from the top leadership?
Now regarding the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, let’s compare their actions to the SLA (Sri Lankan Army) and see where they stand. [3]
Civilian to Soldier Ratio :
LTTE:
Civilians: 14.28%
Combatants: 85.72%
GOSL:
Civilians: 90.4%
Combatants: 9.6%
Civilian to Civilian Ratio:
LTTE: 1.62%
SLA: 98.38%
As you can see, the civilian death ratio of the SLA is disproportionate higher, and nowhere close to the ratio of the LTTE. If the LTTE are brutal terrorists who attacked Sinhala civilians out of pure fanaticism and radicalism, they sure did a poor job at it. To equate both the GoSL and the LTTE as equivalent is an outright travesty.
Furthermore, Sri Lankan government is on the record for fabricating attacks and blaming the LTTE without any evidence. For example, in 1990, the GOSL claimed that the LTTE had mass murdered Muslims in Ninatuvur with precise descriptions of what allegedly took place, and these were reported in international outlets [4].
The story was completely retracted the next day by AP, due to false information. If the government can concoct such an elaborate lie to slander the LTTE, what’s to say they haven’t done so before? While we can’t claim that every single incident was false, the reality is that many of the attacks attributed to the LTTE have very limited evidence, and we do not know beyond a reasonable doubt whether the top leadership ordered them. Despite all this, the overall death toll is still significantly lower than the SLA’s, and this supports the notion that killing innocent civilians was never a systemic policy of the LTTE.
At the end of the day, one actor involved is internationally recognized and received support to carry out its genocide, while the other has had its entire self-determination criminalized. The glaring double standard is why we shouldn’t take such designations as Gospel. If the LTTE are terrorists, then so is every single military that has fought in a major war. Why is it that state actors can get away with killing far more civilians, but liberation groups responsible for a fraction of that are held to a higher standard? The truth is that it has nothing to do with morality, and everything to do with advancing the geo-political interests of countries.
Government of Sri Lanka
1983-2001: 78,363 civilians killed
2002- 2008: 4,867 civilians killed
2009: 169,796 civilians killed
Total: 253,026 civilians killed
1983-2001: 28,708 soldiers killed
LTTE
1983-2009: 3,700 -4,100 civilians killed
1983-2009: 27,000 cadres killed
3. The war was not against Tamils but against a brutal organization where Tamils civilians were killed as collateral damage
It’s clear beyond a doubt that the Sinhala state has waged a racial war against Eelam Tamils. The SLA has engaged in systemic violence, kidnapping and sexual violence of Tamils, and this has been present through their National ethos and the overall conduct of their armed forces.
Ideological Backing.
Anti-Tamil ideology is inherent to the founding principles of Sinhala-Buddhist ideology, and this is reaffirmed in their theological chronicle the ‘Mahavamsa”. This book provides the religious and ideological backing of Sinhala-Buddhist supremacy, as it proclaims that the Sinhalese were Buddha’s chosen people whom the island was promised to.
A key event mentioned in the Mahavamsa is the triumph war between the Sinhala king Dutugemunu and the Tamil king Elalan, with the former slaying the latter. It is said that while Dutugemunu was lamenting over the loss of life, he was consoled by Buddhist monks who justified the actions as the killing of non-believers and beasts.
“Nonbelievers [they have “wrong-views”, micchādiṭṭhi] and men of evil life were the rest, not more to be esteemed than beasts. But as for thee, thou wilt bring glory to the doctrine of the Buddha in manifold ways; therefore, cast away care from thy heart, O ruler of men! [5]
This served as the basis for a just war doctrine, which morally legitimizes a war that ought to be waged against Tamils who were a threat to the island. These moral underpinnings would later be amalgamated into the racist ideology spearheaded by the 20th century monk Angarika Dharmapala who was a father figure in modern day Sinhala-Buddhist Nationalism.
These principles are self-evidently seen through the actions of Sinhalese politicians and military personnel and the overall Sinhala population.
Politicians and Soldiers
“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” - Former Sri Lankan President J.R Jayawardene [6]
“When I look at it as an outsider I think they’re simply brutal beasts. Their hearts are like that of animals, with no sense of humanity. They shoot people at random, stab people, rape them, cut their tongues out, cut women’s breasts off. I have witnessed all this with my own eyes. I have seen small children laying dead,” [7]
- Soldier from the 58th Division (SLA)
Sri Lankan Army
A 2011 UN panel investigated the 2009 Mulivaikal Offensive and found the following [8]:
Large-scale Shelling: The Sri Lankan military used extensive shelling, resulting in numerous civilian deaths and constituting persecution of the Vanni population.
Intimidation and Silencing: The government intimidated and silenced media and critics through threats and actions, including abductions and disappearances using white vans.
Safe Zones Shelled: Despite declaring certain areas as Safe Zones for civilians, the military shelled these zones even after committing to cease the use of heavy weapons.
Targeting Humanitarian Efforts: The military shelled UN hubs, food distribution lines, and Red Cross ships, despite having intelligence and notifications from humanitarian organizations.
Civilian Casualties: The majority of civilian deaths were caused by military shelling.
Hospital Attacks: Hospitals on the frontlines were systematically shelled, with all hospitals in the Vanni hit by mortars and artillery, often repeatedly, despite the military knowing their locations.
Deprivation of Aid: The government systematically deprived civilians of humanitarian aid by underestimating the civilian population, thereby exacerbating their suffering.
It’s clear without a doubt that such actions were not mere collateral damage, but a targeted mass murder of the civilian populace.
Civilians
Most Sinhala civilians did not support a peaceful solution to the conflict and were in support of the government’s military actions. CPA Index polls from November 2007 and 2008 reveal the following opinions of the Sinhala populace [9].
As you can see here, most Sinhalese civilians were firmly in favor of a military solution and were even willing to endure economic hardship to achieve this. Such support among the populace is what enabled the Rajapaksa regime to carry out its genocidal actions without any internal political pressure.
This trope is designed to delegitimize the voice of those in the diaspora, because they reside in countries where citizens are entitled to freedom of speech and thought. Often, Sri Lankan apologists will cite the experience of Tamils who live in Columbo to push this narrative, and this leads to a misinterpretation of the issue, as most of these “Columbo Tamils” are far removed from the realities in the North-East part of the island. It is in this region where Eelam Tamils face systemic genocide through state-sponsored colonization and military rule where Tamils risk being charged under the draconian PTA law.
Despite these risks, Tamils continue to partake in Maveerar Naal and Muliavakial Remembrance days, reaffirming their political stance. In 2021, thousands of Tamils across the North-East took part in the P2P (Pottuvil to Polikandi) march where they demanded that the government address the violation of human rights that they continue to perpetrate. One of the biggest issues is in regard to land colonization by Sinhala settlers.
New Colonization Zones in Pulmoddai and Batticaloa
The Sri Lankan government has initiated planned colonization schemes in the newly Sinhalicized division in the Mullaiththeevu district, strategically positioned between the North and East. This region, previously known as Ma'nalaa'ru in Tamil, has been renamed Weli-Oya in Sinhala following the displacement of traditional Tamil villages [10].
Post-2007 Developments in the East
After the defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in the East in 2007, the Sri Lankan government accelerated colonization efforts. These settlements were intended to rapidly increase the population of Sinhalese and Moors, thereby undermining the concept of “Tamil Eelam.” During the conflict, the military seized Tamil lands through violent means, and now attempts to provide financial compensation, albeit under significant pressure for Tamil families to relocate. Demographic statistics reveal a decline in the Tamil population in the Eastern Province, contrasted with a growing Sinhala population. While Tamils remain the majority largely due to Batticaloa, significant shifts have occurred in Trincomalee and Amparai, where Tamils no longer constitute the majority.
Cultural and Demographic Concerns
The aggressive promotion of Sinhala culture by the Sri Lankan government poses a significant threat to Tamil heritage. Buddhist monks have established shrines and have reportedly assaulted and verbally abused Tamil residents. The issue is not the presence of Sinhalese or Moors per se, but the deliberate efforts to alter the region's ethno-demographic landscape and suppress Tamil culture.
In a notable incident, three Tamil cattle-herding farmers were assaulted by Sinhala Buddhist monks in the Maathava’nai pastureland in the Kiraan division of Batticaloa district. The monks, emerging from a nearby military camp, violently attacked the farmers while they were watering their cattle [11].
Ongoing Colonization in Vavuniya and Mullaiththeevu
With significant colonization efforts already implemented in the East, the government has now turned its attention to Vavuniya and Mullaiththeevu. Recently, plans for a new Moor settlement necessitating the clearance of forest land previously cultivated by the LTTE met with resistance from local Tamil residents.
Military Occupation and Land Grabbing
Despite the conclusion of the civil war, the Sri Lankan Army continues to occupy extensive tracts of land in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. The government's justification for this military presence—to prevent an LTTE resurgence—appears disproportionate given the current number of stationed soldiers exceeds those present during active conflict. In Vavuniya, the soldier-to-civilian ratio stands at an alarming 1:3. The ongoing military occupation includes over 1,000 acres of Tamil-owned land.
The Center for Policy Alternatives (CPA) reports significant land occupation in various districts:
Jaffna District: 73.95 acres of state land and over 6,400 acres of private land
Mullaitivu District: 1,551.09 acres of state land
Kilinochchi District: 515.53 acres of state land and 138.64 acres of private land
Mannar District: 1,717.75 acres of state land and 29.3 acres of private land
Vavuniya District: 2,115.77 acres of state land and 43.28 acres of private land
Overall, 12,751.24 acres (approximately 52 km²) remain occupied in the Northern Province, often without clear legal acquisition. [12]
Torture and Human Rights Abuses
Post-war, Tamils continue to face torture and humiliation by the Sri Lankan government. Former LTTE members are frequently subjected to torture, with no judicial oversight to address these violations of international law. The International Truth and Justice Project (ITJP) documented cases of extreme violence and gang rape of former Tamil Tiger fighters by police or military intelligence within the past year. The UN has called for international oversight in investigations, a suggestion resisted by the Sri Lankan government. Most Sinhalese continue to oppose any inquiry into wartime atrocities and ongoing human rights violations [13].
Sources:
1. Tamil Nationalism Today | Tamils and the Nation: India and Sri Lanka Compared | Oxford Academic (oup.com)
3. Check above*
Commentaires