Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

15 August 2018

Gandhi is Indian Independence

Today is India’s Independence anniversary. To me it is Gandhi day. India also had its militants before Gandhi. Buddha of Indian origin is  reported to have said, "A man who conquers himself is greater than one who conquers a thousand men in battle".

That was how Gandhi, to my mind, facilitated Indians to redeem themselves from dependence on non-Indians.

The fact that Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa – apparently a Buddhist - did not conquer himself could be assessed and known through his wealth as reflected by Balance Sheets - before and after politics. Likewise many Indian leaders including Tamil chiefs sympathetic to Sri Lankan Tamil militancy. The Hon Kamraj who actually attained Nirvana on Gandhi’s birth anniversary, had the power to elevate individuals and groups to Royalty. The Hon Kamraj was Mahatma Gandhi’s senior-most  heir.

Intuitively, Independent Sri Lankan Tamils who are kingmakers, also know that the likes of Mr MG Ramachandran and Mr Muthuvel Karunanidhi were not kingmakers. There are reports that enough respect was not paid to Mr Muthuvel Karunanidhi who  passing away recently. Both are reported to have amassed wealth beyond reasonable levels. Hence their inability to share Independence Energy to elevate others to Royalty. True Royalty is confirmed by Independence. One who conquers her/himself is true Royalty.

In his Ceylon Today  article ‘Sri Lanka’s Transactional Approach’, Mr Sathiya Moorthi captures this in relation to the Sampur Power Project and other projects through which India is competing with China on Sri Lankan soil:

[It is this well-articulated approach followed or accompanied by well-tried-out tactics that is at the centre of finding a political solution to the ethnic issue, where the Tamil-centric TNA too seems to enjoy the status quo as much as their Sinhala counterparts, friends and political adversaries. The TNA would not accept a fresh look and a national discourse on the subject when the post-war Rajapaksa regime offered it, but readily conceded a new-look Constitution, proposed by the present-day rulers, pre-poll.

As was only to be anticipated, the new Constitution has not made substantive progress, and no one would have any serious complaint, now that the ‘elections are round the corner, and the inherent Sinhala political compulsions’ cannot be wished away. Better or worse still, the same argument will now be extended to cover the Indian offer, or the offer for India to take over the management of the Rajapaksa regime’s wasted Mattala Airport, the only one of its size in the world where no commercial aircraft lands, and the development and growth of the eastern Trincomalee port and town, and also the reconstruction of the northern Kankesanthurai port, a proposal that has been pending, since, before the conclusion of the war, close to a decade back.]

Mr Sahiya Moorthi highlights the Katchatheevu islet transaction of as follows:

[Through all this and more, India had shown its genuineness in strengthening bilateral relations even after the Sri Lankan ‘betrayal’ over ‘Bangladesh War’ by handing out a near one-sided solution on the issue of ‘International Maritime Boundary Line’ (IMBL) only three years later, in 1974. India agreed to the crooked drawing of the IMBL to ensure that Katchatheevu islet, geographically closer to the Indian shores and with legitimate Indian claims even otherwise, fell on the Sri Lankan side of the 1974 Agreement.]

That transaction happened two female leaders who ‘inherited’ their positions through family connections. There was no Independence value in that transaction. Many of the current deals between the political leaders of the two nations are lacking in the power of sovereignty. India’s weakness is confirmed also by the following:

[In between, India has also expanded the emergency relief of post-war temporary housing measures for Sri Lanka’s decades-long war-weary IDPs, beginning with those in the Eastern Province in 2007, through the construction of permanent structures. The scheme originally meant for the war victims, has since been expanded to cover Upcountry Tamils of recent Indian origin, or Indian-origin Tamils first and the Sinhala villagers, too, in stages]

Hill country Tamils living in Hill country were not affected directly by the war. To be eligible for compensation, the place / earth that suffered must be the home of the victims and any post-war housing needs to be limited to them and their heirs. To the extent India weakens others’ investment in Independence – it weakens its own.