27 August 2022

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

 

TRIBUTE TO APPAPILLAI AMIRTHALINGAM

 

Vaddukoddai Resolution 1976, to my mind, had the blessings of gods. The blessings were confirmed in the Parliamentary elections of 1977:

[TULF contested the 1977 Sri Lankan parliamentary election on its demand for Tamil Eelam and won an overwhelming mandate in the Tamil areas, becoming the main opposition party in Sri Lanka, the only time a minority party has done so. It gave impetus to Tamil Nationalists who claimed it was a democratic endorsement of a separate state.] Wikipedia

The Resolution was interpreted by us in different ways – each as per their own existing mind structure. Today, I explained this as follows to a fellow Tamil Diaspora leader:

[I access Wikipedia, as a start. But the interpretation is as per the inner voice that influences the mind to ‘search’. This to me, is as per the saying -  ‘seek and you shall find’. In yesterday’s article for example, even though I felt that Admiral by the name of Zheng He, who imprisoned the Kotte king was connected to the Silk Road, Wikipedia did not have information on this. But as I kept writing my discoveries as I interpreted them,  I came across :
The Ohio State University – MCLC (Modern Chinese Literature and Culture ) RESOURCE CENTER at https://u.osu.edu/mclc/2015/10/02/zheng-he-and-the-maritime-silk-road/

 

The seeking was mine. Given that it was genuine, I found the mind that had already made the connection. ]

To my mind, the above is the parallel of the media slogan ‘We report ; you decide’.

As per Wikipedia, it as interpreted as ‘separate state’. The Tamil Tigers also seem to have interpreted it as ‘separate country’. This is a problem with Equal Opportunity and Equality. The Tamil Tigers seem to have interpreted it as Separate country, instead of ‘Independent Nation.’

In his article ‘Appapillai Amirthalingam From Enfant Terrible to Elder Statesman’ D B S Jeyaraj states:

[In fariness to Amirthalingam and most leaders of the TULF they were not active promoters of political violence. None of the frontline leaders aided or abetted violence. Some of them however had ambivalent attitudes and approaches. Also the party itself did not view these acts of violence as terrorism but as the acts of freedom fighters.  
Some of the youths allegedly involved in violence were members of the TULF youth wing. This resulted in TULF leaders involving themselves  legally in these cases. But what must not be forgotten is that the overall Tamil political mood was sympathetic to the armed Tamil youths. The TULF too was too caught up in this process.  
Amirthalingam too realized this later and regretted a certain course of action followed earlier by the TULF. He felt that the Federal Party and the TULF could have possibly adopted other  strategies and tactics. He was somewhat remorseful of the ambivalent relationship the TULF had with the Tamil armed movements at a certain stage of their development]

The right interpretation was that Tamils would be Equal Opposition in Sri Lankan Parliament. Hence the indicator in the 1977 Elections.

At the physical level, the interpretation of ‘separate country’ would have included physically eliminating those who ‘expressly disagreed’ with the armed leadership. This included the Tamil Political leaders . In his write up headed ‘The murder of a moderate’ wise journalist Mr T Sabaratnam wrote :

‘Appapillai Amirthalingam …was murdered, first  politically, and then physically. The political slaying  was by Sinhala leadership and the physical by Tamil militants.

Both murders had a common effect – the elimination of Tamil moderates as a political factor.’

By remembering and appreciating, we keep the light of ‘moderates’ alive. When its strength is stronger than that of polarised extremists, we as a community would have paid our dues to those who died for commonness which was interpreted by the physically driven as a block to freedom to separate. The higher the mind structure, the less visible the separating physical border.