Abstract

This study aims to identify the factors preventing the state from responding in a manner that will avoid future conflict in post-civil war Sri Lanka. After the government ended the separatist struggle of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) by bringing the civil war to an end in May 2009, the protracted and destructive 30-year war presented an opportunity for both state and society to learn many useful lessons from the long war. These lessons could have enabled the government to reconstitute the state as an inclusive institution, one in which minorities could also participate to ensure just and equitable development for all Sri Lankans. This study uses a qualitative research approach that involves analysis of critical categories. Findings of this study offer some crucial insights about Sri Lanka’s ethnic politics, particularly, the various factors have influenced the state to avoid inclusive policies. The key factor is the dilemma of post-independent political culture or traditions amongst ruling elites resulted in the avoidance of inclusive policies. This study also reveals some other factors that contestations between different social forces within society, within the state, and between the state and society still prevail in Sri Lanka, hampering the institution of inclusive policies. Further, the paper highlights the failure of India and the International Community to pressurize the state of Sri Lanka to introduce inclusive mechanisms due to international power balance (China factor).

Highlights

  • State versus society contestation began in Sri Lanka when a demand was made by Tamil minority political elites to reconstitute the unitary constitution of Sri Lanka to allow them to enjoy regional autonomy or federal administration in the North and East (Kearny, 1967; Wilson, 1988 & 2000; Orjuela, 2004; Manogran, 2008; Uyangoda, 2012; Fazil, 2019a)

  • This study investigated contemporary political challenges faced by Sri Lanka in accommodating minorities within the state system

  • Findings of this study offer some crucial insights about Sri Lanka’s ethnic politics, the various factors have influenced the state to avoid inclusive policies

Read more

Summary

Introduction

State versus society contestation began in Sri Lanka when a demand was made by Tamil minority political elites to reconstitute the unitary constitution of Sri Lanka to allow them to enjoy regional autonomy or federal administration in the North and East (Kearny, 1967; Wilson, 1988 & 2000; Orjuela, 2004; Manogran, 2008; Uyangoda, 2012; Fazil, 2019a). Fear of Tamil-speaking minorities were reinforced by Sinhalese nationalism during S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike’s 1956 election rhetoric and subsequent triumph. Bandaranaike’s 1956 election rhetoric and subsequent triumph His declaration that Sinhala would be the country’s official language was perceived by Tamils to be a condemnation of their own tongue; this was only the first in a series of measures taken in the following decades that appeared to be discriminatory towards Tamils. The decades following 1956 saw intermittent outbreaks of communal violence and growing radicalization among Tamil groups, especially youth

Objectives
Methods
Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call