Latest

User Rating: / 0
PoorBest 

By Dr Jehan Perera

Government members and President Mahinda Rajapaksa no less, have seen a conspiracy in the anti Muslim riots that took place last month in Aluthgama.   The damaging view has gone abroad that Sinhalese have rioted against Muslims.  The short reports in the international media do not convey the full picture of what happened.

This has created an incorrect impression abroad of a Sinhalese-Muslim polarisation.  Aluthgama was the exception, not the norm.  Outside of Aluthgama, relations between Sinhalese and Muslims are largely amicable and peaceful coexistence is the norm.  It is not just these two communities, but also Tamils, Christians, Buddhists and Hindus who are all eager to be friends, and not permit communalism to enter between them.

Some months ago, I was passing through Darga Town, which borders Aluthgama, and where there has been a history of Sinhalese-Muslim tension.  There have been communal clashes there in the past.  We stopped at a grocery store to buy some bottles of water.  The Muslim shop owner was serving a Muslim customer. But when he saw us, a Sinhalese family, enter his shop, he excused himself and served us first. This action struck us then, but now in retrospect, I can surmise that he did this because he was conscious of the need to have good relations with the Sinhalese.  I see this same sentiment in the inter-religious groups I work with.   Those belonging to one religious persuasion go out of their way to please the other.   Their desire is for amity, not for confrontation.

After the Aluthgama riots, I was at a meeting where a Buddhist monk exclaimed in anguish, that an entirely wrong picture of the Buddhists has been given to the world.

He was not denying that the Aluthgama riots had taken place and that innocent Muslims had even been killed and their properties burnt.  He was merely trying to say that those who attacked the Muslims were not doing this with the consent of the Sinhalese masses.  These were small groups acting without the blessings of the larger society, although perhaps with the blessings of powerful elements in society, which is what has given them their vast power and immunity to attack as they will.  This is all the more tragic because the message that goes to the Muslims in Sri Lanka, and to the larger international community, is that the Sinhalese are attacking Muslims.

Violence of a few

Those who live outside of Sri Lanka, and those who are victims, are not so interested in the nuances of the situation.   Nor is the international media for the most part when they report what is happening. They tend to give only the broadest of outlines.  But in reality this is the violence of a few, to which the law enforcement authorities were being deferential.  It is the availability of impunity that drives the violent elements to more violence.

It is therefore surmised that the imperatives of electoral politics are what lie at the root of the failure of the government to check the violence.  The BBS is part of the government’s electoral alliance. If the Sinhalese voters feel insecure for any reason they will tend to vote for the present government which is seen as strong and pro-Sinhalese.
But the international costs are going to be high.  It is evident that the government is feeling the pressure on itself from both the affected Muslims and the larger international community.

The 57 members of the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation based in Saudi Arabia has expressed their serious concern and said that “the recent attacks appear to follow a rising trend of violence instigated by extremists which is spreading fear and mistrust among the population.”  There has been widespread condemnation of the police for failing to nip the riot in the bud, and for having permitted a public rally to be held by the BBS despite appeals by local community leaders not to permit it.

It is in this context of accusations directed against the government and the police that the Ministry of Defence has issued an unprecedented denial about having links with the BBS which stands accused of fomenting the riots.  This denial of any connection or involvement with the BBS is a welcome disassociation even if it comes late. In particular the Defence spokesperson has refuted the allegation that the Defense Secretary, who is counted as among the most powerful in the country, has any special relationship with the BBS.  He has also clarified that the Defense Secretary’s attendance at a public ceremony at which the BBS was also present, and which has generated much controversy, had nothing to do with any association with it.

Two requirements

The government’s affirmation of its commitment to peaceful relations between the communities and to ensure justice for all will be confirmed if two matters are addressed speedily.  The first is that an independent inquiry be held into what transpired in Aluthgama.  Such an inquiry panel may be selected with the participation of the Minister of Justice who is himself a Muslim and who has complained of misrepresentation of the causes of death of some of the victims of the riots.  The Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) who submitted the postmortem report on one of the victims killed during the Aluthgama violence has been summoned to court after his report was disputed. In these circumstances a credible fact finding body will be able to dispel the doubts as to what really happened at Aluthgama, and who paid the price.

The second requirement is that punitive action be taken against the instigators of the violence.  The police have now questioned the BBS leaders with regard to the speeches made prior to the riots.  They have also taken 117 persons into custody, with 85 of them being produced before courts and 25 being released on bail.  But these steps are unlikely to reassure the Muslims and other potential targets, so long as extremist groups are given a free hand to mobilise their members for action, at the time and place they choose. The violence in Aluthgama followed a sustained hate campaign against the Muslim community in the Aluthgama area and elsewhere in the country which has still to be countered by either legal or political means.

Small groups of extremists can create disturbances even though the ethos of the larger majority is to live in peace and harmony.  In these circumstances the fullest application of the law must be employed to quell any disturbance. It is the non-application of the law due to political interference that has made inter-ethnic and inter-religious relations within the country a potential point of conflict.  Inter community relations between Sinhalese and Muslims are currently not based on fear of each other, but this can change as it once did between the Tamils and others during the war.  The danger in permitting the situation to drift is that it can lead to radicalisation from which there will be no return.

http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2014/07/06/majority-must-not-be-blamed-for-aluthgama-violence/