End of Tamil Tigers

[Michael]

It looks like the Sri Lankan government has finally 'ended' the Tamil Tiger's long reign of terror in Sri Lanka.

I'm certainly no fan of separatist movements using terrorism as their weapon of choice, and as far as terrorist-supporting separatist movements go, this one is probably one of the ugliest anyone has ever seen. As far as I'm concerned, the Tamils forfeited all possibility of any non-Tamil sympathy when they assassinated Rajiv Ghandi. This is a movement that has celebrated violence and death. Glad to see some resolution here - and the elimination of this criminal group.

That being said, Sri Lanka has some very real political issues and the Tamil minority is hard done by the Sri Lankan government and much effort will be needed to address this long simmering 'minority rights' issue if peace is ever to come to this wartorn island.

If you're interested in reading up on this issue, here are a couple of pretty good news reports.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8055015.stm)

NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/world/asia/18lanka.html?_r=1)

Obviously there is more to the Tamil issue than just the criminal-terrorist movement known as the Tamil Tigers. Eliminating one problem merely makes it possible to address the next problem.

Either way, this looks like progress in the right direction.

[Dominick]

I wouldn't at all be surprised when the elimination of the Tamil Tigers will result in the elimination, either physically or culturally, of the Tamils altogether. At best they'll probably get stuck in refugee tent camps for decades to come as so many other people.
But that's been called resolution of the problem before.

[Michael]

I wouldn't at all be surprised when the elimination of the Tamil Tigers will result in the elimination, either physically or culturally, of the Tamils altogether. At best they'll probably get stuck in refugee tent camps for decades to come as so many other people.
But that's been called resolution of the problem before.
Hey... I thought Americano was the Resident Cynic here? :lol:

You do have a good point in the general sense. I agree the track record there isn't all that great.

However, I don't think that's precisely the case in Sri Lanka - at least about refugees. They are a minority that has been fighting a dirty war for national recognition - outright sovereign independence - over a majority using terrorism as their primary tactic. They are not a group of "displaced persons" as is the case in many places in Africa where mass displacements have occured.

I'm certainly not going to defend the Sri Lankan government for their tactics or their civil rights record. It is almost atrociously ugly as that of the Tamil Tigers.

And that's my bottom line. When it comes to 'foreign matters', my approach is one of pragmatic realism. 'Victory' for the Sri Lankan government here over the Tigers is a 'lesser of many evils' type situation.

I also believe (based on the historical record) that the only way a deep-seated and hate-filled civil war can end is with the outright military victory by one side or the other. That does not always produce a good follow-up result for the losing side, but it does sometimes certainly does do so (post-WW2 Germany & Japan are classic examples of success, where post-WW1 was a massive failure). Though of course, these were not civil wars which are tend to be much more nasty. Even on that account, I think the same rule is true (US South, for example).

[The Drunk Guy]

I also believe (based on the historical record) that the only way a deep-seated and hate-filled civil war can end is with the outright military victory by one side or the other. That does not always produce a good follow-up result for the losing side, but it does sometimes certainly does do so (post-WW2 Germany & Japan are classic examples of success, where post-WW1 was a massive failure). Though of course, these were not civil wars which are tend to be much more nasty. Even on that account, I think the same rule is true (US South, for example).
Do you know that many people really do believe in "Southern Independence?" And I don't mean the Confederate-flag-waving rednecks. People really still consider the American Civil War to be the War of Northern Aggression.

Feel free to open a separate thread about this, but I think that the Confederated States had a legitimate argument in their secession. Whether I agree with their principles or not, the law is the law.

[Michael]

Do you know that many people really do believe in "Southern Independence?" And I don't mean the Confederate-flag-waving rednecks. People really still consider the American Civil War to be the War of Northern Aggression.

Feel free to open a separate thread about this, but I think that the Confederated States had a legitimate argument in their secession. Whether I agree with their principles or not, the law is the law.
Yes the Confederated States had an "allegedly" legitimate argument in their seccession.

And I would argue that it was only the complete and total Northern victory that enabled this matter to be legally settled and for peace to reign.

There will always be sore losers who bitch about the result, but it is plainly obvious that the majority accepts the propriety of the Northern victory even if a vocal minority likes to still scream murder about it.

[Michael]

Here's a pretty good article that discusses the challenges for peace facing the Sri Lankan government now.

The article includes some background information about the long running civil war. Tamils make up 20% of the population and mostly ruled the island under the British Colonial authorities right up until independence. Since that time, the Tamils have pretty much been engaged in war and terrorism trying to impose their minority will over the majority at the point of a gun. As I've said before, I have ZERO sympathy for this kind of political terrorism for gain.

In fact, Sri Lanka's civil carnage has been most tragic precisely because of what the island nation is not. Rather than the sort of misruled colony destined for post-independence proxy-war misery--think Belgian Congo--it emerged from British rule with a decent infrastructure, a relatively efficient civil service, nearly full adult literacy, and a functioning parliamentary system in which defeated pols regularly left office. Voters swung leftward with the third world vogue, but swung back towards the market in the '80s, positioning the country for trade-based growth well before giant neighbor India did.

Source - sorry TNR (http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=01aebf3f-aa52-4b52-9310-ee584b4f67d4)

I think the Singalese majority will have a major test of faith here to NOT engage in genocide against the Tamils as the obvious solution to the peace here. How well they do address the issues will be the measure of the peace, if they fail, I'm sure we will see round two - the Tamils clearly have never been interested in peace before, so the Sri Lankan government has their work cut out for them now.

[Michael]

Btw, I will say that my extreme negative view of the Tamils comes from the (relatively large) Tamil community in Toronto engaging in terrorism and ignoring the law with their disruptive protest tactics. (The riot police were there to protect the Tamil demonstrators from the public).

Furthermore, the Tamils in Canada (I can't call such foreign trash "Canadian")
have engaged in terrorism against Singalese targets in Canada and have brought this conflict to Canada.

For this, I don't forgive and I don't forget.

Indeed, this Tamil-terrorism issue has caused me to seriously alter my view on immigration issues.

It really bugs me that people wanting to escape from some foreign shithole come to Canada and immediately want all the same crap that turned their homelands into a shithole to happen here.

I support the idea of 'good people' wanting to escape foreign shitholes to come to Canada. But when they work so hard to bring the same shit here, I get mad, I get angry and I want to do something about it.

(I sure hope some Tamils are reading this)

[andrewl]

It looks like the Sri Lankan government has finally 'ended' the Tamil Tiger's long reign of terror in Sri Lanka.

I'm certainly no fan of separatist movements using terrorism as their weapon of choice, and as far as terrorist-supporting separatist movements go, this one is probably one of the ugliest anyone has ever seen. As far as I'm concerned, the Tamils forfeited all possibility of any non-Tamil sympathy when they assassinated Rajiv Ghandi. This is a movement that has celebrated violence and death. Glad to see some resolution here - and the elimination of this criminal group.

That being said, Sri Lanka has some very real political issues and the Tamil minority is hard done by the Sri Lankan government and much effort will be needed to address this long simmering 'minority rights' issue if peace is ever to come to this wartorn island.

If you're interested in reading up on this issue, here are a couple of pretty good news reports.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8055015.stm)

NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/world/asia/18lanka.html?_r=1)

Obviously there is more to the Tamil issue than just the criminal-terrorist movement known as the Tamil Tigers. Eliminating one problem merely makes it possible to address the next problem.

Either way, this looks like progress in the right direction.

I certainly agree that the end of the tamil tigers would be a good thing... somehow i don't believe they have been defeated. Perhaps they have been marginalized for the time being, but i am extremely skeptical of the ability of a military force to really eliminate such problems. We will see what sort of non-military policies they follow up with in order to solidify any military gains they claim have been made.

Only time will tell.

Andrew

[Michael]

I certainly agree that the end of the tamil tigers would be a good thing... somehow i don't believe they have been defeated. Perhaps they have been marginalized for the time being, but i am extremely skeptical of the ability of a military force to really eliminate such problems. We will see what sort of non-military policies they follow up with in order to solidify any military gains they claim have been made.

Only time will tell.

Andrew
I think there is a good possibility - but only because I'm somewhat familiar with the relationship between Tamil Tigers and Tamil people. That is to say, the first is a terrorist movement that has no grassroots base. The leadership of the Tamil Tigers has never (officially) cared whether the Tamil people support them or not - and indeed, the leadership seems insanely suicidal and completely irrational.

I suspect the Tamil people have only 'adopted' the Tamil Tigers leadership out of perceived successes of the Tigers. There doesn't appear to be any intrinsic or doctrinal bond between the psychotic leadership of the Tamil Tigers and the Tamil people.

Indeed, the leadership of the Tamil Tigers does appear to be psychotic. Cutting free of that shouldn't be too difficult.

As for 'Tamil grievances', bitching that your ethinic group is not the dominant minority any more is a hollow claim that isn't going to get much sympathy anywhere.

As always, this looks like the all-too-common scenario of subsidized minorities bitching about insufficient status.

Indeed, how are the Tamils any different than Saddam's Sunnis? They are militant minorities that prospered under 'an old and corrupt regime' and just aren't willing to recognize that they aren't the dominant minority under a democracy (or pseudo-democracy).

Endless wars to reverse demographic trends just don't succeed. Demographics always wins in the end. The sooner the Tamils learn to count the better. Twenty percent is not a ruling majority - and all the wanton killing and suicidal terrorism in the world can't change that.