Born of the ethnic struggle in Sri Lanka, Anton Balasingham’s was a truly unique personality. His preferred religious philosophy was Buddhism. His favorite social philosophy was Marxism. His was a personality that swung between the Buddha’s path of emancipation and Marx’s path of socialist revolution. There was a time when Anton studied Buddhism in depth, wrote articles on it, and lectured in it. However, the ethnic issue was building up to a crisis in the 1970s, and it caused Anton to move away from his spiritual links to Buddhism.
By becoming the movement’s political theorist, Anton gave a vision to the violent struggle of Sri Lanka’s Tamil people. The concept of a separate Tamil state may not have been his, but he formulated that idea theoretically. His essays, “On the Tamil National Question,” and “Towards a Socialist Eelam Capital,” written between 1976 and 1978, were embraced by the LTTE. To them the writing substantiated the idea that Sri Lanka’s Tamil people had a right to self determination, and the right to secede.
According to Anton’s wife, Adele, it was the second of these essays that led to a close friendship between Anton Balasingham and LTTE Leader Velupillai Prabhakaran.
Prabhakaran invited Anton for a first meeting in 1979, in Chennai, South India. Soon they became confidantes. Certain other leaders of Tamil militant organizations, such as Uma Maheswaran, had a theoretical side to their natures. Vellupillai Prabhakaran, however, was wholly practical, with barely any theory in his psyche. From their first meeting in 1979, in Chennai, to the time of his death, in 2006 in London, Anton Balasingham was theoretician to Prabhakaran and the LTTE.
Today, Anton Balasingham’s death is fresh in the minds of the public. His life is discussed, his personality analyzed. The time, then, is opportune to evaluate the hypothesis that the Tamils of Sri Lanka must carve out a separate state for themselves, since that was a concept first formulated, by Anton Balsingham, to be accepted by the LTTE and other active Tamil movements..
The struggle of the Tamil people for their just rights has turned into an endless battle, with no prospect at all of victory. The lack of possible success is due to the goal of the struggle: – a separate state. It is unpractical, a utopian dream. In the existing geopolitical reality there is no room for a separate Tamil state. Such a state can come into existence only if India permits it.
The goal of a separate Tamil state has deprived the Tamil people of the realistic possibility of winning equal rights without bloodshed. It has not only darkened the lives of the Tamil people but has also pushed Sri Lanka up to the brink of an ever-widening chasm. The struggle for a separate state has only brought death, destitution, hunger and uncertainty, not only to the Tamil people, but to those of other ethnicities as well.
There is no question that the predominantly Sinhala governments of the South have done grievous wrong to the Tamil people. Yet, the path chosen by the Tamil militant movements to undo that wrong is also wrong. The militants have openly announced a separate state as being their goal, and that has contributed towards the hardening of the feelings of the Sinhala people.
It is possible that the militants could reach the goal of a separate Tamil state by means of armed struggle alone; but then, the Sinhala people become the enemies of the Tamil people; they in turn become victims of violence.
On the other hand, a territory with clear frontiers, is necessary for the viable existence of a state; and when a community that is comparatively small in numbers, claims a comparatively large area of land, the majority community will inevitably oppose it. Besides, armed attacks on the Sinhala people by the militants have only served to harden the attitude of the Sinhalese towards the Tamil struggle for rights.
The Tamil people may not have needed an armed struggle to win their rights, if the militants had not professed the formation of a separate state as the ultimate goal of their confrontational struggle. If there was no demand for a separate territory, the ethnic crisis would not have turned into a protracted one with no visible end in sight for either party.
I remember an experience in 1995, when, on a suggestion made by President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaranatunge, I visited Jaffna along with Ajith Samaranayake, Sivaram, and Nandana Weereratne.
By then, the LTTE had already decided to resume hostilities. The catalyst was to be the ban imposed on the transportation of fuel to the North. They told us, in the course of discussions, that they were prepared to proceed with Peace Talks provided the Pooneryn military camp was dismantled, and the ban on fuel and fertilizer to the North withdrawn by Colombo.
On the day prior to our return to Colombo, Anton Balasingham prepared to host our group to dinner. Privately, he requested me to arrive at the venue, alone, two hours before the others were due. I obliged, and Anton, along with his Australian wife Adele, held a long discussion with me, prior to the arrival of the others.
During the discussion, I told him that I had no authority to speak about the removal of the Pooneryn military camp. I also told him that I could pledge a concessionary response, if the LTTE could guarantee a delay to the resumption of war.
I then posed a question that I felt would not please Anton.
I asked him why a group fighting for a separate state had to depend on Colombo for oil and fertilizer. I asked him whether it did not mean that the LTTE could not survive on its own, without Colombo. My question astounded him. He gave no reply, except to stare at me in surprise.
I honestly believe that Anton Balasingham, who was the author of the concept of a separate state, had doubts about it towards the end of his life. That was why he began to talk openly about the feasibility of a federal system with internal self-rule as being a possible answer to the impasse.
Now, at a time when all Tamil militant organizations honor Anton Balasingham, I feel it is advisable for them to consider the practicality of the demand for a separate Tamil state. If the militant organizations could give up their Utopian dreams, and replace them with realistic and reasonable demands for equal rights, the ever-hardening attitude of the Sinhalese could change, leading to a just solution to this country’s crisis.