Message-Id: Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 12:55:35 -0700 (PDT) To: Sri Lanka Net From: JHOOLE@THUBAN.AC.HMC.EDU Subject: A Statement from UTHR (JB) on the UTA Statement =========================================================== UTHR (JB)'s Response to The University Teachers' Association's Criticism =========================================================== The following is a response from UTHR (JB) to the statement of the University Teachers' Association of Jaffna University (UTA), contesting Bulletin 10 by UTHR (JB) detailing the conditions under which the Tamil people were coerced out of Jaffna in October/November/December, 1995, from Jaffna Town. The nature of the statements of the University Teachers' Association is best revealed by quoting directly from them. Writing to the English language press, their statement titled "UTHR (Jaffna) and its Activities," the UTA says "... the people living in the war torn area needed no encouragement or coercion from the LTTE or any other sources to [leave] the area and seek shelter elsewhere...." (The Island, 19 Feb. 1996). At the same time, however, writing in the Tamil press, read by the same Tamils who were coerced out of Jaffna, they write, "... it was only a few people who had stayed behind in Jaffna who had to be coerced out." ("Twisted News of the Exodus of the People of Jaffna Town, Virakesari, 21 Feb. 1996, my translation. The word they use for coercion is "Vatpuruththal" which may also be rendered "harshly stressed") Curiously, the Tamil version of the statement is signed by the UTA while the English version says "we THE [my emphasis] members of the teaching staff and is signed by only 27 members of the teaching staff, including the Vice Chancellor who have pretended to be ALL of the teaching staff, unless they need some lessons in English on the word THE. It is also not without significance that the Vice-Chancellor has sought a kind of anonymity in signing the above two statements merely as "Senior Professor." UTHR (JB)'s response from the Sunday Island, 25th Feb. 1996 is given below. Jeevan Hoole =========================================================== The Hypocrisy of the Uncommitted Mind- A response by UTHR(J) =========================================================== Sunday Island, 25th Feb. 1996 "Anybody who wanted to recognize the full extent of the terror had to keep his eyes open. One would think that the intellectual class of people would have seen this; but this was by no means true as whole. At that time I had to learn to revise my ideas about the role of education and intelligence in political matters. The fact is that the intelligent person has at his disposal enough arguments and associations to prove to himself that what he fears isn't true at all. He is also much smarter at assessing the opportunistic chances of getting ahead than naive spirits. Thus precisely in the intellectual class one could observe lamentable examples of character failure and delusion. In times which demand the utmost of men, intellectual enlightenment is of very little help. The uncommitted mind, though it has been highly trained and perhaps has even achieved the eminence of a renowned academic chair, all too easily succumbs to the law of least resistance. The person who insists upon maintaining his self-respect in the midst of the terror or refuses to become an object of contempt in the face of the hunger and dread of a concentration camp does not need to be an 'educated' man; " but he must have inner reserves and commitments. - Helmut Thielicke, Between Heaven & Earth "We have now been living under the long shadow of the gun for more than a decade and a half, holding hope against hope for the survival of our children who are dominated by violence from all directions without purpose or meaning. But, on the other hand, we also note the glazed faces of people accepting it all with a sense of resignation. Under these circumstances, to be objective or analytical seems to be a major effort, like trying to do something physical in the midst of a debilitating illness. Whenever we write we are dogged by this reality, fearing our losing the tread to sanity and the community submerging without resistance into this slime of terror and violence. The community is bereft of all its human potential. Every "sane" person is fleeing this burning country.... If our earlier account had appeared to be "plugging a line", as some would want to put it, it was because it was important for us to arrive at a synthesis in analysis, seek an understanding, find spaces to organise, and revitalise a community that was sinking into a state of resignation. Objectivity was not solely an academic exercise for us. Objectivity, the pursuit of truth and the propagation of critical and honest positions, was crucial for the community. But they could also cost many of us our lives. Any involvement with them was undertaken only as a survival task...." Dr. Rajani Thiranagama , Broken Palmyra The first of the two quotations above was taken from a response by the German theologian Helmut Thielicke to a question from an American audience on how Germany which produced men like Beethoven and made great contributions to civilisation, also produced Hitler and the Nazi regime? The second is from Dr.Rajani Thiranagama, who was killed in 1989 while she was an active member of the UTHR(J). The two bring out the present reality in Jaffna and the role of the intellectuals. It is in this context that we have the statement questioning the activities of the UTHR(J) which appeared in the press, signed by 27 members of the staff from the University of Jaffna. This is about the sixth in a series of statements over the last four years intended to discredit the University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna). The tone has now risen to a shrill cry of 'anger and resentment' along with claims about us phrased in severe adjectives. Despite the quantitative rise of excoriations there has been no specific criticism of our facts or analyses. The recent attack again is mainly personal. The facts presented in our recent report 'The Exodus from Jaffna; October - November 1995' are very specific. This is now available in print along with other bulletins and statements pertaining to military operations in Jaffna. We have tried to present a fairly comprehensive picture of the suffering and the evacuation of civilians caught between the LTTE and the government forces. We said very specifically that the people who had moved into refugee centres in and around Jaffna were forcibly evacuated causing them and their animals enormous pain and suffering. To this end the LTTE used rumours, terror, shelling, and the forced closure of Jaffna Teaching Hospital. This is not disputed in the statement in question. We have been very clear in our reports that people had been displaced from outlying areas by bombing and shelling that was callous and inexcusable. The point of the statement and of the 'anger and resentment' are not at all clear. It is quite apparent from the contents of the statement that none of the signatories had actually read our report, but are rather responding to the commentary based on it broadcast by BBC Tamil Osai, and the effect it was likely to have on people. The commentary was a translation of the original written by the BBC correspondent in Colombo. The LTTE for their part had been very clear about the reasons for the forced exodus. For one, they did not want to 'lose their grip on the future generation'. Refugees at St. John's were told that they must leave because once the army enters they would let loose poison gas all over the city area. They have always maintained that they would never allow a rival Tamil group to run the civil administration in Jaffna. Our assertions are based on wide- ranging testimony from those who went through the exodus experience, and also from facts collected by those in Jaffna who with all the odds against them value our work as a means to counter the politics of suicide imposed on them. They also include persons from the University. In doing this, they risk their life. Rationalisations of the LTTE's behaviour are invariably the work of 'intellectuals'. To the ordinary people, however, it was as though fate had decreed that they too should suffer the indignity and tragedy of this exodus, which was very similar to what had been inflicted by the LTTE on the Muslims, 5 years ago, on the identical date of the same month, while others remained silent. Spurious legality A questionable argument that has been trotted out repeatedly to assert the non-existence of the UTHR(J) is based on spurious legality. The reports are said to be the work of two staff members who ceased to be members of the university five years ago, who therefore use the name of the University of Jaffna in vain. They (the signatories to the statement) are understandably silent on why the two academics ceased to be on the staff of the University of Jaffna. Several of those who expressed their 'anger and resentment' in the statement under reference were members of the university council that made the decision to discontinue them. It is not an event that they could be proud of and they certainly did not do it because the LTTE pointed the gun at them. While the authorities in the University of Jaffna were going through the motions of discontinuing them, senior officials visiting Colombo kept on telling Prof. Aluvihare, who was then UGC Chairman, that owing to their association with human rights work, it was dangerous for them to report at the university. A former chairman of the Jaffna University Council was questioned about their dismissal in Colombo in the presence of Prof. Aluvihare. The chairman of the council in Jaffna maintained that the dismissal was wrong, and had indeed reminded the council that one of the two had to flee Jaffna(he had narrowly escaped arrest by the LTTE and had first to go underground). But he had failed to record his dissent on the final decision. When pressed further, he said, "A councillor said at the meeting that they (those openly active in the UTHR(J)) cannot come here because they will be killed. Another councillor shouted that they must be sacked. In the sequel the decision to dismiss was taken. As for me I go with the majority. I believe in consensus". He then asked Prof. Aluvihare to give him a letter requesting the Jaffna university council to reconsider the decision, and went away. After the next meeting the Council replied, "The former decision stands". The reasons were not given and remain as mysterious as those for the original dismissal. Prof. Aluvihare urged the two of us concerned to write appeals to the university council and in turn wanted the council to allow the UGC to handle the issue. The Council did no more than repeat, "The decision....stands". Such abuse of academic power in a supposedly 'autonomous' institution surely belongs to one of the darkest chapters. Legally, our case is still being contested by the Federation of University Teachers' Associations (FUTA) which agrees with our position. Although University Teachers Association (Jaffna) is also a constituent member of FUTA, it never contested the FUTA's stand. Without going into details, we would like to point out that a large number of teachers in schools and some staff members of the Eastern University had not been vacated when they were forced to leave. In comparison with the understanding shown to them, our treatment was extremely ungenerous and utterly anomalous. Like some of us were five years ago, the statement's signatories too are now in a position where their (forced) shift out of Jaffna has no legal standing and are effectively debarred by the LTTE from returning to the main university premises in Thinnavely. Even if the government were to be vindictive and deprive them of legal standing, they would still earn the right to call themselves the University of Jaffna, and the world would recognise them as such, if they determinedly remain a credible voice of academics in service of the community. That has little to do with spurious legality. It is in this very sense that we continue to remain the UTHR(Jaffna), by keeping to the original aims and principles which we adopted at our foundation nearly eight years ago. That was when Dr. Rajani Thiranagama, one of our moving spirits who was since assassinated, was with us. Again no one has accused us of being untrue to the aims and principles reflected in our early reports. So far we have published 13 reports, 6 special reports and 9 Bulletins. The first seven reports and 3 special reports were published when the two of us who continue to be openly identified with UTHR(J) were `legally' attached to the University. Credibility & academic integrity =============================== It is here that the question of credibility and the academic integrity of the signatories arises. What they have revealed about the UTHR(J) is more an exercise in concealment. The same could be said at best about their statement's allusions to the Exodus. A senior signatory proclaimed thus in an earlier statement faxed all around the world from a suburb of London: "We from the University left Jaffna on 30th October 1995 with hardly anything in our hands. Such was the fear and panic caused by the shelling of the approaching army... We have walked and cycled many miles in the pouring rains on that memorable night of 30th October 1995 and have taken refuge in Thenmaratchy..." He had actually left by car when the LTTE made the exodus order, and turned back when the roads were blocked by the large crowds. He continued to criticize the LTTE in Jaffna for several more days before again leaving by car. Another signatory and senior professor is a leading official of the university. At 10.00 in the morning he was very firm that he would remain defying the LTTE's exodus order. By about 3.00 p.m. the same day, he had been forced to leave for the Vanni. Privately he was cursing the LTTE, accusing them of a big let-down. But a few days later both these gentlemen were associated in pro-LTTE statements addressed to such persons as Boutros Ghali and John Major, often around the theme of genocide! Responsibility =============== While attacking the work of the UTHR(J) as one-sided we could safely assert that few, if any, of the signatories had read our reports, not even the recent one on the Exodus. The general attitude to our reports among our erstwhile academic colleagues is a fear that even touching them would be taken amiss by the LTTE. Our reports on the East have dealt mainly with the role of the State. We have had problems with getting these into the local press. Only one paper used our recent report on the Batticaloa District. Two earlier ones dealing with Jaffna were largely mutilated by the government censor. We have tried to offset these difficulties by going to sections of the foreign media and by posting several hundred printed copies. Several leading human rights organisations have valued our reports not because we are members of the University of Jaffna, but owing to their contents and analyses. We have a continual dialogue with such organisations that includes sympathetic criticism. One of our earlier reports on the East was, we think, rightly criticised for its handling of Muslim-Tamil relations, both by Muslims here as well as by others concerned with human rights. It is unfortunate that relatively a few people read our reports and the media had meanwhile made selective use of them. In this situation it is all too easy to slander our work. While we are being accused of discrediting the LTTE with some dark motives and acting contrary to the interests of the Tamils, the statements about us themselves offer no defence of the LTTE. There is no discussion of the LTTE beyond a reference to 'violations purported to have been committed by the LTTE'. Their silence on the all-important role of the LTTE says much that is readily understandable. It is the very reason for which their 'anger and resentment' of the UTHR(J) is all-the- more misplaced. We would readily sympathise with a young boy or girl led to join the LTTE because of alienation resulting from the conduct of the State and falling victim to the seemingly alluring alternative offered by the LTTE. But in the very defence of the Tamil community, the academics are duty-bound to ask questions on a broader level. If they cannot do this, their actions supposedly in the defence of the Tamil community are only a self-serving game. Their repeatedly accusing the government of bombing, shelling, genocide and harassment of Tamils in the South is not defending the Tamils. The problems of Tamils they mention are serious problems. But they do not happen in isolation of the broader context - that of paralysis of the political and intellectual life of Tamils. It is for example important to ask: Why did the LTTE continuously choose the course war without giving other options a chance? Why does the LTTE massacre Sinhalese peasants, including women and children? Why are we trapped in a political environment that drives the people through the same tragedy and trauma again and again? Is not the open discussion of such questions key to the survival of Tamils? Once more on the question of responsibility, those issuing the statements on behalf of the University of Jaffna pass them on immediately to LTTE agents. Within a short time these are splashed in the LTTE media and are faxed and E-mailed to their agents all over the world. The statements themselves stop short of the explicit - "It is not clear on whose behalf or for whose benefit the authors have been preparing these reports?". The LTTE media and propagandists extrapolate without restraint as is most often characteristic of the perverted minds of 'long distance nationalists.' The UTHR(J), these nationalists assert, are fakes and traitors in the pay of the Sri Lankan government. These statements and commentaries on them are further used to campaign against us among the Tamil people and among the youth - 'the future generation must decide the fate of these traitors'. Such is their sense of responsibility, that these academics have been happy to issue statements and let this go on. Some realities ================= There is a level at which the authors of the statement deserve understanding, if not sympathy. Hardly any of those who have signed are genuine sympathisers of the LTTE. The LTTE know that. Like with other institutions, the university too is run by influential individuals, several of whom used the LTTE for personal ends. We must understand the utter hopelessness and despair resulting to a person living in Jaffna if he is to look at the situation straight in the eye. Hence he has to avoid seeing it straight and has to repress the truth. Such has been the conditioning that people at a meeting would automatically perform the ritual of praising the LTTE and delivering a scathing attack on the government. Today they are all effectively trapped. The majority would be happy to get out if the whole family is given a pass to Colombo or to go back to their homes in Valikamam if there is a semblance of normalcy. If those who signed the statement believe that our work does not serve the cause of the Tamils, do they believe that the LTTE's politics serves the Tamil cause? If so would they take responsibility for the resumption of hostilities in April last year and its consequence? would they wholeheartedly support the present exodus? Would it not be more worthwhile for the Tamil `cause' for them to explore the ways and means out of the present predicament rather than issuing statements and venting their anger on scapegoats? Can they not help the people to go back to their homes by talking to the opposing parties and creating a climate conducive to that end? Why do we continue with the work of the UTHR(J)? =============================================== The tragedy is that many of us have avenues to send our children away to safe places, or have the influence to save them from LTTE recruitment through connivance with the organisation.But what options are there for the suffering masses who have no avenues, but get further trapped in to the politics of collective suicide? We may make the point here that our criticism has never been directed against ordinary LTTE cadre or their families, whom we have always regarded as victims. But much, if not most, of our criticism has been directed against intellectuals and religious leaders whose opportunism and failings of character did much to cast the entire Tamil community into the grip of a terrible fate. Again, Helmut Thielcke, reflecting on the Nazi regime that brought so much tragedy both within and outside his country, had this to say: "As bitter folk humour expressed it at that time, of the three qualities, namely, being a Nazi, being intelligent and having character, one can have only two. Either one can be a Nazi and be intelligent, in which case one has no character; or one can be a Nazi and have character, in which case one is not intelligent; or one can be intelligent and have character, in which case one is not a Nazi." We believe that by being true to ourselves, we could influence the international community and even the ordinary Sinhalese people. Only thus could we make the Government and the security forces accountable to the Tamil civilians and bring sanity into the drift. We in the UTHR(J), which includes those who share our ideals and help us, but cannot, and indeed need not, associate themselves with us publicly, felt that this was the minimum we could do. With this aim, and the change in our situation which followed the murder of our colleague Rajani Thiranagama, we have gone along as events carried us, with no lack of help from friends. We had no illusions of being popular. Obviously, we have stirred too many emotions, both favourably and unfavourably, for there to be an objective consensus about our work. That will come in retrospect.