Christopher Hitchens,in Slate, 25 May 2009, where the title is “The End of the Tamil Tigers” … and where the chief by-line says “Insurgencies don’t always have history on their side” … See my brief NOTE at the end re the late Christopher Hitchens and note that the highlights are my imposition
In the late fall of 1978, I was approached by a Sri Lankan Tamil rights group, which visited the office of the socialist weekly in London where I was then working and entreated me to pay a visit to their country. I say “their” country, though they actually referred to it as “Ceylon”: the British colonial name that continued to be the country’s name after independence in 1948. It was only changed in 1972. The word Lanka is simply the name for island in Sanskrit, and the prefix Sri has a connotation of holiness, and the alteration generally reflected the aspirations and preferences of the Sinhalese-speaking and Buddhist majority. So the difference in emphasis there was pretty large to begin with.
On the face of it, though, all these Tamil comrades wanted was some humanitarian reportage. A bad cyclone had just hit the eastern coast of the island, around the town of Batticaloa, in areas of high Tamil population density. They feared that the government would not exert itself very much to bring relief to a Tamil area and asked me to act as an observer.
So I spent some time that December in the cyclone-ravaged towns and villages of the stricken district and discovered that, indeed, the aid effort was greatly inadequate (with material often diverted to the black market or appropriated by the army). I also discovered the strong sense of second-class citizenhood that many Tamils felt. Many of them were indigenous to the island, while others had been brought over on rafts in the 19th century by the British from the Tamil areas of south India, as indentured laborers to work the plantations that still produce the world’s most delicious tea. Since they tend to be slightly smaller and darker than the Sinhalese, and more proletarianized, and are less likely to be Buddhist and more likely to be Hindu, the Tamils had been looked down upon and subjected to numerous forms of discrimination. I became interested, wrote a few articles, made a few speeches at Tamil flood-relief dinners in London, lampooned the Buddhist-nationalist extremists who worshipped the Buddha’s tooth and had organized anti-Tamil pogroms, and began to make Tamil friends.
I also became vaguely aware that, behind the general litany of Tamil complaints and grievances, many of them justified, there was another force altogether. It was referred to in rather hushed tones as “the Tigers,” and its sympathizers could often be detected by their habit of referring not to Sri Lanka or even to Ceylon but to “Eelam”: the name of a future Tamils-only state. Unwittingly, I was present during the early stirrings of this organization—which had a good deal of support, as irredentist and ultra-nationalist movements so often do, among the diaspora. There are many high-earning communities of Tamils in other countries of the British Commonwealth as well as in Europe and North America, and their support was a major contributing factor to the duration of Asia’s longest insurgency or (if you prefer) civil war: one that may possibly just have ended.
Even if you add the two recognized Tamil populations of Sri Lanka together, they do not amount to even one-fifth of the overall population. But at the height of their desperado militancy, a decade or so ago, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, or LTTE, controlled perhaps one-third of the country’s territory, including the Batticaloa-Trincomalee coastline in the east and the Jaffna peninsula in the north. There was never any possibility that the Sinhala parties, or indeed many of the urban Tamils, would accept such a fait accompli. Nor was there any chance that China and Pakistan would allow such an obviously strategic island, with its former Royal Navy harbors and ports, to become partitioned in favor of a minority with such strong links to India.
Under the leadership of the late Velupillai Prabhakaran, the LTTE enormously overplayed its hand. It established a dictatorship in the areas it controlled and recruited both child-soldiers and suicide-bombers. One of the latter even assassinated Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1991: a truly suicidal thing to do, given the need of the Tamils for Indian sympathy. The hardening of Sinhala sentiment, the inevitable splits and defections that arose from the Jonestown style of Prabhakaran, and, perhaps above all, the acquisition of warplanes and other materiel from China and Pakistan eventually gave traction to the central government in Colombo. Deciding to fight as a conventional army that belonged to a separate state, the LTTE has now been defeated as a conventional army, and its state has ceased to exist. Not since the British defeated the Malayan Communists, who were too much restricted to the Malay Chinese population, in the 1940s and 1950s, has any major Asian rebellion been so utterly defeated.
There remains, as there always did, the question of the Tamil population itself. It doesn’t seem overwhelmingly likely that Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa‘s victorious regime, currently engaging in a spasm of triumphalism, is in the strongest position to offer a hand to the civilian Tamil leadership. But it would be a very agreeable surprise if it did.
It’s just not true, as some liberals tend to believe, that insurgencies, once under way, have history on their side. As well as by nations like Britain and Russia, they can be beaten by determined Third World states, such as Algeria in the 1990s and even Iraq in the present decade. Insurgent leaderships often make mistakes on the “hearts and minds” front, just as governments do, and governments are not always stupid to ban the press from the front line, tell the human rights agencies to stay the hell out of the way, and rely on the popular yearning for law and order. It can also be important to bear in mind, as in Sri Lanka became crucial, that majorities have rights, too. …END
A FEW THOUGHTS by Michael Roberts, 12 April 2017
From the distance of Britain he has pinpointed one of the major factors leading to the defeat of the LTTE in Eelam War IV, though his brief overview cannot conceivably present all the factors – for which I direct readers to a concise summary by Sergei de Silva Ranasinghe in the Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter of September 2009… (noting here in passing that Sergie’s reports on the ongoing war from Perth in the first five months of 2009 were far better informed than the pieces penned by such high-profile reporters as Ravi Nessman of AP in Colombo and Marie Colvin in London).
Hitchens makes an especially thoughtful point in stressing one of the major reasons for Pakistan and China to favour the Sri Lankan state in its battle for survival as state: viz., Indian Ocean geo-political balances. Here, I add that the Republic of India also had a geo-political consideration behind its thinking: an independent state of Thamilīlam would create an irredentist situation and would over the long-run inspire separatist claims from Tamilnadu. Hence the Delhi government carefully faced two ways and supported the Rajapaksa programme covertly behind the scenes.
In brief, Hitchens did not buy into the huge propaganda campaign mounted by the Tamil migrants and their British handmaidens in UK in 2008/09. A critical distance has been achieved.
But he is wrong on one count. Pirapāharan is still alive in many a Tamil mind … in spirit and inspiration as a punishing deity (note the cultural background depicted in Diane Mines 2002). One illustration is revealed in an image and scene from the Tamil heartlands discovered recently by Diannah Paramour (of Tasmania) and posted in Facebook. When a respectable middle-aged Tamil lady blessed with mobility can press forward with the talaivar Pirapāharan in the streets of Lanka (??)** today, he is working in dynamic fashion for the Sri Lankan Tamil cause – as I have recently argued.
** This scene was probably in Chennai.
Balachandran, PK 2015 “PK Balachandran on Overt and Covert Paths in Indian and American Policies towards the Sri Lankan War, 2008-09,” 16 December 2015, https://thuppahis.com/2015/09/16/pk-balachandran-on-overt-and-covert-faces-in-indian-and-american-policies-towards-the-sri-lankan-war-2008-09/
De Silva-Ranasinghe, Sergei 2009 “The Battle for the Vanni Pocket,” Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter, March 2009, Vol. 35/2, pp. 17-19. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/aulimp/citations/gsa/ 2009157395/156554.html
De Silva-Ranasinghe, Sergei 2016 “How Sri Lanka defeated the ‘Invincible’ LTTE: A Concise Summary from 2009,” 13 September 2016,https://thuppahis.com/2016/09/14/how-sri-lanka-defeated-the-invincible-ltte-a-concise-summary-from-2009/
Mines, Diane 2002 “The Hindu Gods in a south Indian village,’” in Diane Mines & Sarah Lamb (eds.) Everyday Life in South Asia, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 236-48.
Roberts, Michael 2006 “Pragmatic Action and Enchanted Worlds: A Black Tiger Rite of Commemoration,” Social Analysis 50: 73-102.
Roberts, Michael 2011 “Death and Eternal Life: Contrasting Sensibilities in the Face of Corpses,” 29 June 2011, https://thuppahis.com/2011/06/29/death-and-eternal-life-contrasting-sensibilities-in-the-face-of-corpses/
Roberts, Michael 2012 “Velupillai Pirapaharan: Veera Maranam,” 26 November 2012, https://thuppahis.com/2012/11/26/velupillai-pirapaharan-veera-maranam/
Roberts, Michael 2017 “Talaivar Pirapāharan embodied in Notebooks: One Mark of the LTTE’s Remarkable Propaganda Machinery, 9 February 2017, https://thuppahis.com/2017/02/09/talaivar-pirapaharan-embodied-in-notebooks-one-mark-of-the-lttes-remarkable-propaganda-machinery/
Roberts, Michael 2017 “Final Passage for McGuinness and Prabhākaran: Sharply Contrasting,” March 2017, https://wordpress.com/post/thuppahi.wordpress.com/24656
7 responses to “Christopher Hitchens in Perceptive Reading of the LTTE Defeat in May 2009”
A COMMENT from my pal EARDLEY received directly: “Christopher Hitchens. A brilliant mind. He called it as he saw it. I enjoyed God is not great. But the lefties didn’t like what he said about Islamism. Lefties live in denial.
Christopher Hitchens was a contemporary of mine at Oxford in the early 70’s. He went out briefly with my brilliant but not particularly beautiful Classicist neighbour on the corridor I shared with 3 other students at St Hilda’s College. He was something of a leftie philanderer…..in both political and romantic terms: he was for example a favourite of the arch-Conservative Warden of All Souls as well as a member of the Trots-cum-Anarchist groups that swarmed around Balliol and thus also a favourite of Thomas Balogh, the leftist Hungarian economist who was Master at Balliol. Then he seemed to have affairs with both male and female students of all political persuasions and none.
He was to say the least extremely good-looking.. a sort of Che Guevara without the beard……her had longish curly brown hair, a handsome profile and an extremely provocative way of talking and acting: he once stormed a stodgy Oxford Union debate, sat on the back of a cross-bench with his feet on the seat and harangued the chamber about its complete irrelevance, characterised by its inability to see that Third World Poverty was the only issue worth talking about. When the President and other Officers tried to shut him up, he sang snatches of the Internazionale and left, throwing a long Dr. Who-style woolen scarf over his left shoulder contemptuously. Needless to say, every fresher there, like me, was absolutely thrilled!
Chris, as we called him at Oxford, has a younger,right-wing, conformist brother who is a TV and print-media political pundit in the UK. He is nothing as good-looking, controversial or charismatic as Chris. The longer I live, the more I feel that sibling rivalry was at the bottom of much of Chris Hitchens’ general insouciance. He thumbed his nose at life but his political instincts were very sure-footed.
I wish I had met him again later in life….but he was wedded to the US and it is a place I never wish to visit: we could have had a rip-roaring row over politics and Oxford and life……next time maybe!
Great Note JANE.. I wish I could have enjoyed Oxford in this manner about ten years prior . I did however become a member of the Oxford Union and attend some public forums but to penetrate the floor .. !! Beyond my capacity. Michael Roberts
The essay about the Tigers and his brief association with them also appears in HITCH 22 an autobiography which also contains his repudiation of Catholicism for reasons which he enumerated there. Great reading.Very incisive thinker, and great points of views. Incidentally alumnus of Oxford,Cambridge, Harvard and Yale – an unmatched combination.
AGREED. Alas, I came across this essay late in the day. Thus I could not deploy it earlier during the “war”around the mish-mash and lies generated by the DARUSMAN Report. HITCHENS was an exception to hhe readings and sance taken by (1) the British intelligentsia inlusive of (2) the media personnel n general (with exceptions) and (#) the politicians
Incidentally Jane RUSSELL was at Oxford during his undergrad days and says he was an ebullient personality and cuta dash in Oxford Union debates
A NOTE: THE photograph of lady on scooter with PIC of hereo PIRAPAHARAN is from Tamilnadu not Sri Lanka. However there can be no doubt that he lives on as a hero in local Tamil minds while the support across the Palk sTrait marks another geo-political factor and points to the furtther fact that some Sinhala intellectuals and others feel threatened by this sittuation. So – we have wheels within wheels and a potential irredentist situation.
Pingback: Happy Heathen’s Insights on the Raging Debate on Eelam War IV in the Year 2012 | Thuppahi's Blog