India’s Betrayal of Eelam
Ruben Nagesparan Chandrakumar, BS
India’s betrayal of Eelam is an abysmal mark on the country’s reputation, moral standing, and values. The flip-flopping nature of India’s foreign policy on Eelam’s independence has left a stain on the foreign relations between the two countries, identifiable by the clear lack of trust. While India has continually espoused democratic values and attempted to cement itself as a beacon of such values in the region and the world, it has failed both morally and politically in handling the Eelam movement. Without acknowledging these botched and ill-conceived actions, the country will continue to lose the support and respect of Eelam. However, by choosing not to overlook misbehavior and hypocrisy, India can transform its relationship with Eelam, develop a strong ally with shared values and similar national security interests, increase its opportunities for international trade, and restore its moral stature.
The first sin of India’s handling of the situation comes from the dismissal and lack of support of SJV Chelvanayakam’s movement of satyagraha. Instead of providing the force of its political power to recognize the Vaddukoddai Resolution of 1976—the Declaration of Independence—and the following 1977 Election, India ignored the nonviolent, democratically elected vote for independence. Not only does this go against the spirit that led India to attain independence herself, but it also violates the rights of Eelam to opt for an independent state as described by the United Nations and the court decision of Reference Re Secession of Quebec.
The second sin of India was switching from supporting the LTTE through their Research and Analysis Wing to fomenting another war after involving the Indian Peace Keeping Force. Indira Gandhi, the former Prime Minister of India, was a vocal supporter of the LTTE and allowed RAW to train, arm, and fund the militant movement. However, her son, Rajiv Gandhi, did not share this view when he took office as Prime Minister. Instead, he viewed the LTTE as a threat to the territorial integrity of India, leading him to propose the Indo-Lanka Accord, which included the establishment of the 13th Amendment. Within these talks, the LTTE was not consulted; this is made evident by the lack of genuine discussion regarding the establishment of a separate, independent country—not a unitary state with devolution. This demonstrates a pattern of denying the Tamil political voice and aspirations that cannot be disregarded.
Following the Accord, the Indian Peace Keeping Force was brought to Eelam in 1987 to act within the “peace-keeping” operation outlined in the agreement. However, what the IPKF did will forever haunt Eelam and blemish the repute of India; the tremendous amount of war crimes that the IPKF committed—including the mass rape of Tamil women—are atrocities of the greatest evil and wickedness. This appalling behavior has still not been acknowledged by the government of India, despite it being widespread knowledge within Eelam. This wish to hide the evils for which India was responsible—and refuses to be accountable for—is disgusting and immoral to its core. The actions of the IPKF were so heinous and unacceptable that even the Sinhalese were finished with Indian intervention; while the interests of the Sinhalese were much more likely based in their fear of Indian domination over the island, it still provoked one of the most unusual moments of the conflict when President Ranasinghe Premadasa and his government gave support to the LTTE to fight against the IPKF. There’s perhaps no better event than this that shows the deep-seated anger over India’s handling of the conflict, with the two warring parties working in conjunction against the IPKF.
The betrayal of Eelam has been forgotten by many Indians, especially the younger generations that were not alive, or were very young, during the conflict. This lack of historical knowledge, acknowledgement, commitment to justice, and addressing the underlying issues that caused the conflict is characteristic of modern India’s position. The decision to view the insurgents—and to designate them—as a terrorist organization is hypocritical given the deplorable actions of state terrorism that India committed in Eelam. If India wishes to become a country that values democracy, human rights, and international law, it must change its position on Eelam.