Legitimizing LTTE's Self Rule

The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) is banned as a terrorist organisation in India. Its leader,Velu Pillai Prabakaran, is one of the principal accused in the case relating to the assassination of RajivGandhi, India's former Prime Minister, in 1991. The other accused in the case have already been convicted bythe Indian courts and some of them sentenced to death. Prabakaran is an absconding accused and a request fromthe Government of India for his arrest and extradition to face trial has been pending with the Government ofSri Lanka.

Prabakran figures in the red corner notices issued by the INTERPOL, the international police organisation,from time to time. These notices circulate the personal particulars of criminals wanted for trial and ask themember-countries to arrest them if found in their territory and deport or extradite them to the country wherethey are wanted.

Prabakaran was also responsible for the assassination of former President Premadasa of Sri Lanka and manyother terrorist incidents in Colombo in which innocent civilians were killed. His organisation had committedas many deadly suicide bombings as the Al Qaeda. In fact, it was the LTTE, emulating the West Asian terroristorganisations, which introduced suicide bombings into the South Asian region long before Osama bin Ladenintroduced them in 1999.

The LTTE owns a fleet of ships, registered abroad, which it uses for the smuggling of arms and ammunitionfor its own use. In 1993, the Indian Navy intercepted an LTTE ship, which was trying to smuggle arms andammunition given by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to the LTTE-controlled area in Sri Lanka. Itscadres manning the ship set fire to it and made it sink in order to prevent the Indian Navy from seizing theISI-given arms. Kittu, a senior leader of the LTTE, who was aboard, chose to commit suicide by going down withthe ship.But, the other LTTE cadres caught alive by the Navy told the Indian interrogators about the armsconsignment and how it was loaded in Karachi under the protection of the Pakistan Navy and the ISI.

In 1995, the LTTE helped the Abu Sayyaf group of southern Philippines by smuggling a consignment of armsand ammunition given by the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM) of Pakistan, which was training and arming the AbuSayyaf and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. The HUM was then known as the Harkat-ul-Ansar.In return, the HUMand the Abu Sayyaf presented to the LTTE a consignment of anti-aircraft weapons, which it badly needed.The HUMand the Abu Sayyaf are now members of bin Laden's International Islamic Front.

The LTTE was one of the first terrorist organisations to think of air-borne terrorist strikes. In the early1990s, the intelligence agencies of Sri Lanka, India and some Western countries came to know from theirsources independently of each other of the LTTE's attempts to have its cadres trained in flying in the flyingclubs of Switzerland and other West European countries and to acquire micro-lite planes. Immediate action wastaken by the intelligence agencies to prevent this. While they were able to prevent the LTTE from acquiring amicro-lite aircraft, it had already got some of its cadres trained in flying before they could act.

Even while maintaining profitable contacts with the ISI and foreign jihadi organisations, the LTTE had noqualms about driving out the Muslim residents of Jaffna.

Indian and Western intelligence agencies had long suspected that narcotics smuggling is an important sourceof revenue for the LTTE.

The LTTE was one of the first terrorist organisations to be designated by the US State Department as aForeign Terrorist Organisation under a 1996 law. Following this designation, it is illegal for any US citizenor resident to help it in any way.

Even though the LTTE has been observing its cease-fire agreement with the Government of Sri Lanka for overa year now and participating in talks with the Government (now under suspension since April last), it has notrenounced the use of terrorism as a weapon to achieve its political objective in spite of pressure from theUSA to do so.

Though it indicated that it might be willing to settle for a solution, which provided for a federal set-upin Sri Lanka provided the Tamils' rights in their traditional homeland were conceded and protected, it hasbeen insisting that its de facto control of large areas of the "Tamil homeland" be given dejure status through a special agreement outside the framework of the present Sri Lankan constitution. Itwants such a recognition as an interim measure before a final agreement could be negotiated.

It is not prepared to dismantle its army and navy and wants its navy to be given de jure status andits responsibility for patrolling the coast-line of the "Tamil homeland", including the Palk Straitsbetween India and Sri Lanka, to be recognised. Its counter-proposals on an interim administrative arrangementpending a final solution presented to the Sri Lankan Government last month indicate that its earlierwillingness to consider a federal formula was just an eye-wash. It is preparing the ground for an unilateraldeclaration of independence one day, if the peace talks with the Government do not make headway in a directionfavourable to its ambitions.

Against this background, one cannot but be concerned over the implications of the proposed visit of ChrisPatten, the European Union's External Relations Commissioner, to Killinochi in the LTTE-controlled area tomeet Prabakaran on November 26 during his visit to Sri Lanka for talks with the Sri Lankan leaders. Would itnot amount to legitimising the LTTE's de facto set-up? Would it not amount to undermining the effortsof the Sri Lankan Government to reach an agreement with the LTTE which would safeguard the unity and theterritorial integrity of Sri Lanka?

Ever since the LTTE agreed to the cease-fire and entered into negotiations with the Government, it has beentrying to conduct itself as a quasi-independent State by entering into contacts with foreign governments, byinsisting that foreign leaders visiting Colombo should also go to the LTTE-controlled area and make a courtesycall on Prabakaran etc.

It was reported earlier this year that Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary-General, cancelled a proposed visit toColombo following pressure from the LTTE that he should also call on Prabakaran.

Leaders and officials of Norway, which has been acting as the supposedly disinterested facilitator in thepeace talks, and officials of Japan, which is anxious that if the LTTE achieves quasi or total control overthe Tamil coastline, Norway should not edge it out in respect of the exploitation of the marine resources ofthe areas under the LTTE's control, have already been visiting the Tamil areas and meeting Prabakaran andother LTTE leaders and officials.

Norway, as the so-called facilitator, at least has some legitimate reason for doing so. Japan has no suchlegitimate reason, but it has been trying to project itself as a benign power whose only interest is peace andhelping both the Sinhalese and the Tamils in their economic development.

Some officials of the international financial organisations have also been visiting the LTTE-controlledarea and meeting Prabakaran.

The Sri Lankan Government and political leaders cannot escape a major share of responsibility for thegradual erosion of the ground from under their feet. While one could understand their decision to allow Norwayto have independent access to Prabakaran, it was unwise on their part to have allowed Japanese do-gooders andnow Chris Patten to pander to Prabakaran's ego.

One is seeing in Sri Lanka a repeat of what happened in respect of Palestine. In an unwise decision, theIsraeli authorities of the past allowed the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) headed by Yasser Arafat toset up a provisional authority in some of the occupied areas even before a final peace settlement could bereached with the PLO.

Over the years, this provisional authority has acquired all the trappings of an independent State and alegitimacy in the eyes of the international community and has been conniving at acts of terrorism from itsterritory at Israeli nationals.

B. Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, and, presently, Director,Institute for Topical Studies, Chennai, and Convenor, Advisory Committee, Observer Research Foundation (ORF),Chennai Chapter.