Jump to content

The “Intermestic” Tamil issue in Indo-Lanka Relations


Recommended Posts

  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

The “Intermestic” Tamil issue in Indo-Lanka Relations

June 4th, 2010

by D.B.S. Jeyaraj

The term “Intermestic” was first used by Henry Kissinger to explain international issues having domestic economic implications like for instance the middle-eastern situation abroad impacting on the price of gas in the US. The term coined by Kissinger took the “inter” from International and “mestic” from Domestic.

It was however veteran Journalist Mervyn de Silva who popularised the term in Sri Lanka.Mervyn who was then editing the “Lanka Guardian” fortnightly and writing a weekly column for “Sunday Island”. Mervyn applied the term to all issues crossing the boundaries between the International and the domestic and belonged to both spheres thereby necessitating this sub-category.

According to Mervyn, Sri Lanka’s Tamil issue was for Sri Lanka a domestic issue with an international spillover and for India it was an international issue with a domestic spillover. Hence for both Colombo and New Delhi it should be regarded as INTERMESTIC, i.e. “at the interface of the international and the domestic”.

The term intermestic comes to mind against the backdrop of President Mahinda Rajapakse’s forthcoming visit to New Delhi on June 8th to meet Indian Prime minister Manmohan Singh. High on the Manmohan-Mahinda agenda would be the intermestic Tamil issue.

While Indo-Lanka relations will continue to remain cordial, observers of South Asian regional politics are able to detect some contradictions emerging between New Delhi and Colombo on certain matters. Chief among them is the prickly Sri Lankan Tamil issue.

Convergence

One year ago there was a convergence of interests between India and Sri Lanka about the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).Both sides were aligned in forcefully and successfully combating and destroying the tigers or LTTE.

It was the Sri Lankan armed forces under the military leadership of Sarath Fonseka, administrative leadership of Gotabhaya Rajapakse and political leadership of Mahinda Rajajapakse who fought the war and achieved victory.

However it is widely known that the covert input and overt support extended by India was largely responsible for the fruits of success. Colombo was in constant communication with New Delhi as the war progressed and there was collaboration between both countries on some aspects of the conflict.

The intermestic issue had a domestic spillover in India particularly the state of Tamil Nadu home to 60 million Tamils. Colombo and New Delhi co-operated in quelling and containing the resentment and hostility in Tamil Nadu towards the war in Sri Lanka where a large number of civilians were reportedly killed,injured and displaced.

Revealed

In a recent interview Defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse revealed how the Indian and Sri Lankan governments had “acted” in more ways than one to “manage” the potential political fall-out of Tamil Nadu chief minister Muttuvel Karunanidhi’s sudden decision to fast unto death at Marina beach in Chennai demanding an immediate end to the war.

As a result of this Indo-Lanka “co-operation” an announcement was made about ending offensive operations by Colombo. This in turn was utilised by New Delhi to persuade Karunanidhi to call off the fast in five hours. Thus Karunanidhi now holds the record for the world’s shortest “fast unto death”.

The conduct of the war against the LTTE and its result was a golden phase in New Delhi-Colombo relations. After the war ended , an international outcry arose about war crimes and crimes against humanity against Sri Lanka. India provided immense assistance to Sri Lanka in countering these demands.

India played a pivotal role in helping to blunt the “attack” on Sri Lanka at the Human Rights Council in Geneva last year. Though Cuba got much of the credit India was of immense help in mobilising support against the original resolution and enlisting support for the counter-resolution.

Perhaps the full extent of India’s role in Geneva would be known if and when our former ambassador to the UN in Geneva-Dr.Dayan Jayatilleka-writes his memoirs candidly.

Eliminated

A very important reason for India’s support to Sri Lanka was because the Indian establishment had concluded that the LTTE had to be eliminated at any cost. India itself was constrained from playing an open role in physically demolishing the LTTE because of the possible risk of revolt in Tamil Nadu ranks. (Intermestic impact again).

Thus India remained in the background and encouraged Sri Lanka to do the “dirty work of fighting” just as Junius Richard Jayewardena tried to get India to do the same dirty work of fighting the LTTE decades ago. In a remarkable reversal of roles the Sri Lankan forces became the cutting edge of India’s regional policy.

In that context there was and is a responsibility on the part of India to protect the Sri Lankan government from the slings and arrows “international opinion” seemingly outraged by the mass –scale human rights violations allegedly perpetrated by the Sri Lankan armed forces during the war.

This is why India has been quietly engaged in helping Sri Lanka withstand and possibly ward off the international clamour demanding “justice” for the victims of the war.

Protective

Human rights activists lobbying against Sri Lanka in Western capitals have been ruefully told that nothing “drastic” could be done against Colombo as long as India was protective of Sri Lanka.There is a Western consensus of sorts in abiding by Delhi’s concerns as far as the Sri Lankan Tamil issue is concerned.

Apart from being a “speed checker” on possible courses of action by individual western nations, the restraining hand of India can be felt strongly in the collective international sphere too.

A major reason for the perceived impotence of the UN in taking meaningful action against Sri Lanka is attributed to India, Pakistan, China and Russia. Here again the knitty-gritty stuff is handled by India.

While Russia and China could and would veto any adverse action contemplated by the UN security council, it is India that helps pre-empt such action evolving.

The powerful western nations do not want to irk India unnecessarily over the Sri Lankan issue. As such the human rights activists find themselves unable to breach the protective invisible glass barrier set around Sri Lanka at the UN by India.

Moreover despite frequent statements and trips to Sri Lanka by high-ranking UN officials the glass house too has been largely ineffective in getting results.. UN secretary-general Ban Ki Moon proposes several initiatives with gusto towards Sri Lanka. The latest being a UN panel of advisers.

Ban Ki Moon

Ban ki moon also sends his officials and special emissaries at regular intervals. But nothing tangible is yet to be achieved. Furthermore his chief of staff Vijay Nambiar’s name has been compromised in the alleged incident where tiger leaders surrendering with white flags were shot dead in cold blood.

While Ban ki Moon puts up a brave face and maintains the facade that he is acting without constraints,any seasoned analyst of UN affairs is able to discern that a hidden hand is constricting the UN secretary-general in this regard.

After helping Sri Lanka to meet the challenge posed at Geneva last year India was at the forefront in preventing further movement on that count. When UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Ms. Navanetham Pillay tried to initiate moves against Sri Lanka despite the Human rights council vote, she was vehemently criticised by India in Geneva . Pillay was reprimanded for trying to engage in further action despite what happened in the Human rights council.

Interestingly both the past and present Indian representatives to the UN at New York are old Sri Lanka hands with intricate knowledge of the Island’s politics.

The ebullient Hardeep Singh Puri who was political secretary in Colombo when the Indo-lanka accord was signed on July 29th 1987 is currently in New York. His predecessor was Nirupam Sen who had been both Deputy-high commissioner and High Commissioner in Colombo.

In addition to the specific reason for India extending its protective umbrella to Sri Lanka amidst the torrential rains of international pressure, there is also another compelling reason. India considers the South Asian region to be its exclusive backyard and does not welcome unnecessary international intrusion.

Let us also not forget that India’s hands are not very clean in the sphere of human rights be it in Kashmir, Assam, Mizoram, Nagaland or even against guerrilla groups in several states in Northern and Central India. If it allows a greater international role in probing alleged human rights violations and war crimes in Sri Lanka, the floodgates may be opened for similar probes against India too.

Congruence

Under these circumstances there prevails a congruence of interests between India and Sri Lanka on this matter. Besides an extensive international probe into Sri Lanka’s alleged infringements and conduct of war could also throw open a can of worms resulting in greater exposure of India’s role in Sri Lanka’s war against the LTTE.

The Indo-Lankan joint venture of defeating and destroying the LTTE was a success. But in the aftermath of victory some cracks and fissures are emerging.

At a local level the war victory euphoria brought about a cleavage in sharing the spoils of victory. The Army commander fought his erstwhile commander in chief at the presidential hustings. Today the General who claims that he alone deserves full credit for the war victory languishes in custody arraigned on three counts of courts martial against him.

In the case of India and Sri Lanka there is no question of quibbling about who gets the credit for victory over the tigers. India for reasons of its own is more than happy to let Sri Lanka hog all the limelight.

Actually New Delhi may even be grateful that Colombo is monopolising the fame and glory of victory. This helps New Delhi to withstand Tamil Nadu charges of culpability on the one hand and on the other absolves India of blame in the war against LTTE.

Contradictions

There are however other emerging contradictions amounting to irritants. One such irritant is the seeming reluctance on the part of President Rajapakse to sign the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with India. The decision to do so was revoked at the last minute in 2008.

It was expected that the CEPA would be signed in New Delhi during the President’s scheduled visit. But again there were protest demonstrations and the President met with representatives of those protesting. The whole exercise seemed to be orchestrated.

Now Media minister Keheliya Rambukwella says that the CEPA would very likely be signed only by the end of this year. Apparently the President is concerned about certain proposed clauses and would seek further clarification and amendment.

Another “unspoken” irritant is the growing power and expanding influence of China in Sri Lanka.China is going ahead at full speed with the full co-operation of the Colombo government in implementing several projects while some in the South block in India suspect there are subtle moves to stymie Indian efforts to implement plans and projects entrusted to it.

Irritants

While these and some other minor issues are proving to be irritants the evolving major contradiction relates to the intermestic Tamil issue. This intermestic issue would be the primary focus of this column.

The convergence of interests between New Delhi and Colombo in defeating and destroying the LTTE is now giving way to a divergence of interests in resolving the larger issue that is the Tamil national question.

There does not seem to be an identity of interests between Colombo and New Delhi in formulating a common approach towards the Tamil issue as was done in the case of the LTTE.

The problem is further compounded by the fact that certain assurances were given by the Rajapakse regime at various levels that a mutually satisfactory settlement would be on the cards after the war against the LTTE was concluded.

The hitch now is the hiatus in perspective between Colombo and New Delhi in bringing about a political solution. There is dissatisfaction in New Delhi that Colombo is procrastinating to subvert and resentment in Colombo that New Delhi is trying to impose its diktat.

Indian involvement in the affairs of its neighbours is described as benign intervention by Indian academics and analysts.

Intervention

The undermining of the Rana family and empowerment of the Shah dynasty in Nepal,the dismemberment of Pakistan and creation of Bangla Desh, the Indo-Lanka accord and induction of the Indian Army as a peace-keeping force in Sri Lanka and the quick action in Maldives to crush a coup d’etat aided by Sri Lankan Tamil militants of the PLOTE (Peoples Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam ) are some instances of Indian benign intervention.

Needless to say all these cases of benign intervention also served India’s interests in the region. But such is the nature of international relations. All countries have their own interests at heart and smaller entities identifying common interests with larger interests and harmonising accordingly have greater chances of bettering the prospects for themselves.

In the case of Sri Lanka the twin tenets of basic Indian policy was preserving the unity and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka on the one hand and ensuring the rights of the minorities particularly the Sri Lankan Tamils on the other. This framework in essence was conditioned by the intermestic factor.

The 1983 July anti-Tamil pogrom saw more than 100,000 Tamils fleeing to Tamil Nadu as refugees. The presence of Tamil refugees on Indian soil was the “locus standi” for India to seek a greater role in Sri Lanka.

Instead of reaching out to the affected victims of the July 1983 pogrom and alleviating their hardship the JR Jayewardena regime was hell bent on appeasing the majority. Blaming the victim syndrome was at its best.

Amirthalingam

The Govt introduced the sixth amendment to the Constitution disavowing separatism. All MP’s were required to take an oath to that effect to retain Parliamentary membership. The Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF) with sixteen MP’s in Parliament refused to take the oath on a matter of principle. As a result they forfeited their seats. The Sri Lankan Tamil voice was effectively driven away from Parliament.

Several ex-TULF MP’s including Opposition leader Appapillai Amirthalingam took up residence in Tamil Nadu. With more than a hundred thousand refugees on its soil providing a locus standi , New Delhi offered its good offices to mediate and bring about a negotiated political settlement.

There was an imperative need for India to intervene at that stage. The Sri Lankan Tamil issue was a crucial emotional issue for Tamil Nadu at that time. There was a fear that the mood may turn volatile and result in a law and order crisis.

Also there had been a flourishing secessionist movement in Tamil Nadu at one time. It had been checked and transformed democratically. The former Tamil separatists were well integrated into the Indian fabric.Now there was apprehension that the fabric may be torn and separatist tendencies revived because of the Sri Lankan Tamil crisis impacting on Tamil Nadu.

If secession was encouraged in Sri Lanka that could have a demonstration effect on other states including Tamil Nadu in India. If the Tamils were allowed to be continuously victimised in Sri Lanka that too could radicalise Tamil Nadu in the long term These parameters necessitated in India fashioning policy ensuring both the unity of Sri Lanka and Tamil rights.

Interests

The fundamental difference in New Delhi policy towards Pakistan in 1971 and Sri Lanka in 1987 was that in the case of the former it suited Indian interests to create Bangla Desh while in the case of the latter, Indian interests were better served by preventing dismemberment of Sri Lanka.

The intermestic nature of the issue had two additional aspects too. One was that New Delhi at that time feared an arc of encirclement by “hostile” forces. India feared a Washington-Tel Aviv-Islamabad axis. The Jayewardena govt was seen as a Western puppet and lackey.

It was necessary therefore to win over Colombo and bring Sri Lanka within Indian orbit. The Tamil issue provided an opportunity to de-stabilise Sri Lanka and pressure Jayawardena into submitting to Delhi diktat.

The other was the personality factor. It is a fact that basic policy is formulated by the bureaucracy in India and that the political executive is guided by it. Individual leaders by force of their personalty may effect a change in the style of implementation but cannot effectively change the substance of policy.

What happened here was that Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was not very fond of President Jayewardena or Prime Minister Premadasa. She enjoyed close rapport with TULF leaders particularly Amirthalingam. This personality factor also played a small part in the politics of that time.

Compelled

In such a situation the Indian state trained and armed Tamil militants into guerrilla organizations. The idea was to fight and de-stabilise the North-Eastern provinces to a great extent. Thereafter the Colombo govt would be compelled to turn to Delhi for assistance.That moment would be seized. Tamil Eelam was never on the cards.

Meanwhile Indira Gandhi was assassinated and her son Rajiv Gandhi succeeded her. Rajiv’s ascendancy saw the veteran Gopalaswamy Parthasarathy being ousted as India’s special envoy to Sri Lanka on the Tamil issue. Foreign secretary Romesh Bhandari functioned as emissary. Despite these changes the basic continuity in policy remained.

There were many twists and turns but India’s strategy worked to a great extent. But after the military operation in Vadamaratchy in May 1987 it appeared that Colombo was on the verge of wiping out the LTTE. At that point India demonstrated very clearly to Colombo that it would not be allowed to crush Tamil militancy . India violated Sri Lankan air space and dropped food parcels over the Jaffna peninsula on June 4th 1987.

To his credit Jayawardena saw the writing on the wall. He caved into Indian pressure and the Indo-lanka accord was signed on July 29th 1987. That treaty gave India a right to be involved in the affairs of Sri Lanka.

More importantly it bestowed India with the responsibility of ensuring and protecting Tamil interests in Sri Lanka. The Indo-Lanka treaty may be “forgotten” now but it remains valid still and can be resurrected if and when necessary.

Accord

The Accord provides India with a permanent “say” in the affairs of Sri Lanka. Until and unless both countries jointly repudiate it the Indo – Lanka agreement will be there. It cannot be unilaterally abrogated by one country.

The Indo-Lanka accord recognized Sri Lanka as a multi-ethnic,multi – religious nation. Thus both the mono-ethnic claims of Sinhala supremacists and the two nation theory of Tamil separatists were negated.

It recognized the Northern and Eastern provinces as historic areas of habitation of the Tamil and Muslim people where they lived with other ethnicities. Thus the Tamils and Muslim right of historic habitation was recognized but there was no exclusive rights. The North-Eastern region belonged to all ethnicities.

Moreover the opportunity to create a single Tamil linguistic province was available. Both provinces were temporarily merged with the proviso that a referendum should be held in the Eastern province to either approve or reject the merger.

A scheme providing devolution of powers on a provincial basis was brought in. Provincial councils with powers allocated on provincial, concurrent and reserved basis were set up. Tamil was elevated to Official language status.

All those convicted of “terrorist” offences were given official pardon. All militants who took to arms were given a general amnesty.

It appeared that the basic grievances and legitimate aspirations of the Sri Lankan Tamils could be redressed and accommodated if and when the Indo-Lanka accord was gradually implemented. Besides India was there to underwrite the accord and guarantee its implementation.

Reservations

The TULF, PLOTE, TELO, EPRLF and EROS accepted the accord with reservations. There were certain shortcomings requiring attention. These were categorised as residual matters needing to be resolved in due course.

All five Tamil organizations drafted together a document outlining their reservations and submitted it to New Delhi before endorsing the accord. India promised to rectify those issues.

Later on October 28th 1987 the TULF sent a letter to Rajiv Gandhi pinpointing several problems in the implementation of the accord. By this time the war between the Indian army and the LTTE had commenced.

The Indian officials discussed the issue with Jayewardena and obtained from him a written assurance on November 7th 1987 that he would rectify all shortcomings in the implementation of the accord.

But the war with the tigers was now on. The LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran had been taken to New Delhi and placed under virtual house arrest at Hotel Ashok.

Despite the pressure Prabhakaran refused to accept the accord but agreed to co-operate and not oppose it. In return the LTTE was promised pride of place on the proposed Interim administrative council. The LTTE was also promised 50 million Indian rupees per month.

Indian intentions at that time were to adopt the methodology applied to Mizoram rebels led by Lal Denga. The Mizoram rebels were given power first without having to face an election and were required to face polls after a period of time.

This was applied to the LTTE too.The LTTE was given power through control of the North – Eastern interim administration. Initially the LTTE seemed to be complying and Tamil eyes started smiling again.

Prabhakaran

LTTE leader Prabhakaran announced a farewell to arms at a public meeting in Suthumalai.The LTTE made an exhibition of surrendering arms. When I interviewed t Jyotindra Nath Dixit for the Indian magazine “Frontline” the Indian envoy said 65% of light weapons and 85% of heavy weapons had been surrendered by the LTTE.

But a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

Prabhakaran had “agreed” due to compulsion in Delhi. But it was only a matter of time for him to resume fighting again. The arrest of senior LTTE leaders including Kumarappa and Pulendiran at mid –sea by the Navy and their subsequent suicide by consuming cyanide gave Prabhakaran the pretext to start fighting again.

The war between the LTTE and India began on October 10th 1987. I was in Jaffna when it commenced. From that day onwards the “chasm” between India and the LTTE continued to widen and deepen. The Indian army left Sri Lankan shores in 1990 but the Indo-tiger estrangement grew.

The assassination of former Indian prime minister Rajiv Gandhi by the LTTE in Sriperumpudhoor on May 21st 1991 altered the situation dramatically. There was a crackdown on LTTE elements in India. The LTTE was formally proscribed in India as a terrorist organization.

26 persons of Indian and Sri Lankan origin were tried in the Indian courts for the Rajiv Gandhi assassination and condemned to death. These sentences were reduced after appeal. The LTTE leader Prabhakaran, Intelligence chief Pottu Amman and then womens brigade commander Akila were proclaimed as wanted offenders by India.

Problematic

As the years progressed the situation in Sri Lanka underwent slow but steady change. The gulf between India and the LTTE increased. India however did not take the lead openly in taking action against the LTTE.

After burning its fingers once India was wary of sending troops to Sri Lanka again. At the same time New Delhi was unable to provide full military support to Colombo openly and back the Sri Lankan armed forces against the LTTE because it feared a major backlash in Tamil Nadu.

After nearly thirty years of strife and turmoil Indian policy makers reached a difficult decision that the LTTE must be wiped out lock,stock and barrel. The manner in which the LTTE messed up the Oslo facilitated peace process proved that there was no hope whatsoever of the tiger changing its stripes or the leopard its spots. The LTTE was becoming an “inspiration” for anti-State militant groups in India.The ill-advised move to form the “Tamil Eelam Air Force” was perhaps the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back.

Once again the Intermestic nature of the issue was problematic.That problem however was tackled successfully by co-opting the DMK government and AIADMK chief opposition in Tamil Nadu.

The LTTE had by now become an International “pariah”. The tigers failed to realise that the world had changed after September 11th 2001. As a result the global climate was conducive for delivering the coup de grace to the tigers. Thus the conditions were created for the LTTE to be defeated and destroyed.

The convergence of interests between New Delhi and Colombo that led to the decimation of the LTTE is now undergoing strains. Contradictions are emerging in the Indo-lanka relationship.

With the LTTE gone and a wave of triumphalism engulfing substantial sections of the Sinhala polity the Rajapakse regime has little incentive in resolving the problem politically. Rajapakse himself is no ardent advocate of devolution. There is an absence of meaningful action to recognize Tamil rights.

India on the other hand wants a quantum of devolution granted to the Provincial councils. New Delhi is committed to the Provincial councils set up under the 13th amendment to the Constitution. It must be remembered that the 13th amendment is India’s child.

By enhancing China’s role in Sri Lanka, Rajapakse is adroitly counter -balancing India. With the war being over , India finds itself lacking the necessary leverage in Sri Lanka to pressure Mahinda. The 1987 scenario is not applicable in 2010.

India’s attempts to build up a strong Tamil political formation to fill the vacuum caused by the LTTE’s eclipse is also not having the desired results. On the one hand there is no overall Tamil unity in the Island. The Tamil National Alliance that is the most credible Tamil voice in Sri Lanka is not ready to be an Indian puppet. At least not yet.

Despite these strains and contradictions the Rajapakse regime is careful in not rocking the boat with India . Despite their dissastisfaction and resentment with India no Sinhala ruler is prepared to adopt a confrontational approach with India. This is the crucial difference between Sinhala sagacity and Tamil (LTTE and pro –LTTE) stupidity.

So Mahinda Rajapakse drags his feet with regard to Indian requests but does not show defiance openly. All the motions of close friendship with India are dutifully adhered to. Mahinda makes it a point of emphasising tat India is a relative of Sri Lanka and both countries belong to one family.

The reality is that there is a family squabble in the making and tensions are prevailing between the relatives. The plus point of Mahinda Rajapakse is the clever way in which he defies Delhi without creating a crisis.

It is against this backdrop that the President will embark on his passage to India.

Former Indian Prime Minister VP Singh was famous for saying that the art of political governance is skill in managing contradictions. When Mahinda meets Manmohan next week both leaders would seek to manage the emerging contradictions in Colombo-New Delhi relations.

How did the major contradiction relating to the intermestic Tamil issue arise? What are the underlying reasons for this contradiction becoming acute? How will India handle this situation? These are questions worthy of detailed analysis in a future article after Mahinda’s meeting with Manmohan.

D.B.S .Jeyaraj can be reached at djeyaraj2005@yahoo.com

http://dbsjeyaraj.com/dbsj/archives/1454

Link to comment
Share on other sites

India’s concerns in Sri Lanka: Update No 199

India expecting dividends from Sri Lanka for its support during war

by Col R Hariharan

Leadership challenge

When Sri Lanka President Mahinda Rajapaksa visits New Delhi from June 8 to June 11 he will be stronger than ever before. The three things he achieved in his first term of office – wiping out Prabhakaran and his Tamil Tigers, re-election for a second term with increased margin of votes and an unprecedented victory in parliamentary poll with 60% mandate from the voters - give him the confidence to talk from a position of strength to New Delhi.

Added to this Rajapaksa, in spite of his deceptive simplicity, has cleverly turned the Sinhala triumphalism in the wake of victory in the Eelam War to eliminate potential rivals. The popular hero of the Eelam War General Sarath Fonseka is facing court-martials. And the suave and articulate UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe is locked in a survival struggle to retain his position as leader of the United National Party.

With Sri Lanka under his sway for next seven years, New Delhi will be contending the rejuvenated Mahinda Rajapaksa - the most powerful head of state from Sri Lanka ever to visit the Indian capital.

Is New Delhi ready for the rejuvenated Rajapaksa? It should be because Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh has his own success story. He is stronger politically after an enlarged mandate from the people for his second term of office. The destructive coalition partners and opposition he faced in earlier term have been cut down to size. The Congress-led coalition’s economic management, despite complaints of absence of transparency, cronyism and corruption, has maintained the country on the growth path. Dr Manmohan Singh’s aspiration to take India-US relationship is getting a further lease of life. Of course this is largely due to the US coming to terms with the limitations in building a win-win relationship with China ignoring India.

In spite of all this, New Delhi continues to show a subsuming hesitancy in handling Sri Lanka. If we look at the silent support New Delhi had provided the President ever since he was elected in 2005 and all along thereafter, both sides appear to have worked out a flexible model of collaboration, co-ordination and at times mutual condescension.

The collaboration came with India providing Sri Lanka all facilities, short of modern weapons, to improve the capability of its armed forces. It provided real time intelligence to control, curb, and destroy the international logistic and support system of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). But Indian leadership could not trumpet its support as it had to tread the ground carefully at home as the ruling Congress-led coalition was weak and depended upon octogenarian leader Karunanidhi and the Dravida Munnetra Kazagham (DMK) party in Tamil Nadu.The shrewd Tamil Nadu chief minister milked the Eelam issue to gain maximum clout in New Delhi and divided the sympathy votes for Eelam Tamils at home in Chennai.

As the war is over logically India should be expecting dividends from Rajapaksa for its support. And the expectations are probably on three major fronts: equity for Tamil minority, closer economic bonds, and greater strategic convergence between the two nations with India remaining a favoured partner in Sri Lanka’s strategic horizon. President Rajapaksa’s style is to turn compulsions into favours to be dispensed at a time and situation of his choosing. So how will India handle him?

International discourses of Sri Lanka

As K Venkatramanan of the Times of India said in a recent seminar, the Eelam war and its aftermath in Sri Lanka has thrown up a few international discourses. India has to show a sustaining interest in handling these discourses to fulfil its responsibilities as a nation. What are these discourses?

Human rights and humanitarian issues

How to deal with Sri Lanka (or any other nation in a similar situation) that has chosen to ignore international calls for improving its accountability on human rights as it feels it infringes its sovereignty. The European Union and the UK will continue to pressurise Sri Lanka on this count in the coming months. What should be India’s attitude on this moral issue cloaked in politics? India cannot afford to be either wholly idealistic or coldly real politick when human rights skeletons are rattling in its own counter terrorist operations. Can India continue to depend only upon back room diplomacy to prevail upon Sri Lanka to produce results, particularly when it is dealing with an ever more powerful Rajapaksa?

Increased profile of the U.S. and China in Sri Lanka

In Sri Lanka’s war and its aftermath both the U.S. and China asserted their roles with greater visibility and gained a strong foothold. India facilitated this by playing a muted role due to self imposed restraints due to internal political considerations. After the war Sri Lanka is facing two major problems in resolving which it needs international help.

The first is the huge financial outlay required to rebuild north and east, and to speed up economic recovery to repair the crippling effect of war. The second is the growing pressure on Sri Lanka articulated by the UN Secretary General Ban ki Moon and in the UN human rights forums.

Though India can match either the U.S. or China in meeting Sri Lanka’s economic needs, only the U.S. and China, as UN Security Council members with veto powers, can influence the UN course of action against Sri Lanka. This is going be crucial as the international lobby against war crimes in Sri Lanka is gathering more momentum. So logically, President Rajapaksa will have to accommodate the U.S. and China more in the national strategic spectrum without treading upon India’s toes. Will he do it is a more difficult question than can he do it? And what is going to be New Delhi’s strategy?

Tamil issue

During the war, many Sri Lankan Tamils rightly or wrongly perceive India as the villain that helped Rajapaksa bury the Eelam dream. Of course, in their passionate denouement they conveniently forget that India had always been opposed to independent Tamil Eelam. But this disenchantment of India has not been countervailed by increase in favourable Sinhalese attitude towards India. Even half-hearted Indian efforts to bring ethnic amity in Sri Lanka are still looked upon by many of them with suspicion. So unlike in the past, India has a problem at hand in carrying its voice heard in Sri Lanka in the midst of cacophony of its detractors.

As the Tamil issue has an umbilical connection with Tamils in India and the Diaspora elsewhere its tugs and pulls go far and wide. This should not be understood merely in terms of electoral politics in which it continues as a peripheral issue. It has larger moral and social implications for Tamil society and its sensitivities. It should not be forgotten the Tamil society is only recently overcoming the sense of exclusivity and alienation that had bugged it since early days of India’s independence. A recent manifestation of this phenomenon was seen in the strident calls that came from Tamil movie industry for boycott of the non political International Indian Film Academy awards function in Colombo. Thus India’s actions and their impact on Sri Lanka continue to be relevant to Tamil people everywhere regardless of their attitude to India.

This sensitivity rules the minds of many among Sri Lanka Tamil Diaspora still recovering from the elimination of the Tamil Tigers as a powerful entity. They are smarting under the loss of face as many Sinhalese are trumpeting their triumphalism. And President Rajapaksa had shown no hurry to address Tamil sensitivities on the issue of autonomy, perhaps because there is no Prabhakaran to threaten Sri Lanka’s unity. He has largely chosen to ignore the need for animation of the 13th amendment that is serving only as a wall paper of the Tamil issue. India had been promoting its full implementation as a face saving device; but Rajapaksa had so far shown a marked reluctance even to save India’s face, let alone tackle the Tamil issue head on. So what is India’s strategy?

Economic discourse

For some years now India had been building its economic relations with Sri Lanka. By signing its first ever the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in 1998, India has shown Sri Lanka has a preferred status in its relations over other countries of South Asia. It is not merely Sri Lanka’s demonstrated capacity to remain with the highest human development index and highest GDP among South Asian countries that triggered India’s economic foray. Sri Lanka’s domination of the Indian Ocean also has a part to play in its economic strategy.

In the last nine years since the FTA came into play India-Sri Lanka trade has increased by four times to US $ 2719 million (2009). In fact, in the SAARC region Sri Lanka is now India’s second largest trading partner. The two countries set up a Joint Study Group in April 2003 to enlarge the scope and content of the FTA and work out a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). After 13 rounds of negotiations the CEPA has been given a final shape.

The CEPA when signed will take the mutual trade between the two countries to higher levels of cooperation and coordination. The proposed agreement addresses four areas: trade in goods; trade in services; economic cooperation (in mutually agreed areas like fisheries, energy, pharmaceuticals, textiles, financial, infrastructure, tourism etc) and investment issues. In real terms it provides for seamless customs procedures, consumer protection standards and procedures.

There had been some delay in signing this agreement due to opposition among sections of local business community in Sri Lanka. This is understandable as India is already a dominant trading partner with large economic clout. Both countries will have to convince them of the advantages in signing the CEPA. Of course, traditional India baiters among political parties now using the CEPA bogey will have to be tackled politically. President Rajapaksa who is supportive of the agreement will probably sign it at a time of his choosing - a politically opportune moment.

From India’s point of view signing of CEPA is important as it signifies the growth of relations between the two nations to a higher level. It could also signal the graduation of SAARC from a talk shop to a forum of solid achievement as the CEPA would set a precedence for other members to enhance economic cooperation. Thus it will have implications for the region and beyond. So how India is going to push it through?

Talks in News Delhi

Considering the complex issues cooking in India-Sri Lanka platter for sometime, President Rajapaksa’s visit assumes importance. However, according to media reports emanating from New Delhi, out of the 11 agreements under negotiation, only five have been finalised and are ready for signing. The five agreements do not include crunch issues. They relate to cooperation to fight terrorism, transfer of sentenced prisoners, mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, cultural cooperation, and Indian assistance for small development projects in Sri Lanka. So apparently there are not going to be any dramatic breakthroughs except for the usual diplomatic rhetoric. But President Rajapaksa is a man full of surprises, as Prabhakaran discovered to his detriment. So what is going to come out of his visit? We will have to wait and see.

(Col R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence specialist on South Asia, served with the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka as Head of Intelligence. He is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia Analysis Group. E-Mail: colhari@yahoo.com Blog: www.colhariharan.org)

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/notes6/note586.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



  • Tell a friend

    Love கருத்துக்களம்? Tell a friend!
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • சீமானை எதிர்ப்பவர்கள் தங்களை அதிபுத்திசாலிகளாகவும் சீமானை ஆதரிப்பவர்கள்  கண்மூடித்தனமாக உணர்ச்சிகரமான பேச்சுக்களுக்கு மயங்கி சீமானை ஆதரிப்பது போலவும் ஒரு மாயை நிலவுகிறது.நாங்கள் சீமானை ஆதரிப்பதற்கு காரணம் தமிழ்த்தேசியத்தின் இருப்பைத் தக்கவைத்துக் கொள்ள வேண்டும் .அதை அடுத்த சந்ததிக்கு கடத்த வேண்டும்.இல்லாவிட்டால் ஆரியத்தை விட திராவிடமே தற்போதைய நிலையில் தமிழ்த்தேசியத்தை அழிப்பதில் முன்நிற்கிறார்கள்.ஆரியம் வட இந்தியாவில் நிலை கொண்டிருப்பதால் அதன் ஆபத்து பெரிய அளவில் இருக்காது.ஆனால் தமிழ்நாட்டுக்குள் இருந்து கொண்டு தமிழ்ப்பற்றாளர்களாக காட்டிக்கொண்டு தமிழ்த்தேசியத்தை இல்லாதொழிப்பதற்கு திராவிடம் அயராது வேலை செய்கிறது.சீமானின் எழுச்சி அவர்களின் இருப்பை கேள்விக்குள்ளாக்குகிறது.முன்பும் ஆதித்தனார் சிலம்புச்செல்வர் கிபெவிசுவநாதம் பழ நெடுமாறன் போன்றோர் தமிழ்த்தேசியத்தை முன்னெடுத்திருந்தாலும் அவர்கள் இயக்கமாக இயங்கினார்களே ஒழிய தேர்தல் அரசியலில் கவனத்தை பெரிய அளவில் குவிக்க வில்லை.திராவிடத்திற்கும் தமிழ்த்தேசிய இயக்கங்கள் இருப்பதில் பிரச்சினை இல்லை.அவர்கள் தேர்தல் அரசியலில் ஈடுபடுவது தமது தேர்தல் அரசியலுக்கு பாதிப்பை ஏற்படுத்தும் என்ற காரணத்தினாலே தமிழ்த்தேசியத்தை மூர்க்கமாக எதிர்க்கிறார்கள்.
    • நல்ல கருத்து எனது  கேள்விக்கு உங்களிடமிருந்து  தான்  சரியான  பதில் வந்திருக்கிறது   ஆனால் நீங்கள்  குறிப்பிடும்  (ஊரில் சொந்தவீட்டில் கிணத்து தண்ணி அள்ளி குடிச்சு காணிக்க வாற மாங்கா தேங்காவித்து வீட்டுத்தேவைக்கு மரக்கறி தோட்டம்கூட வச்சு வாழும் மக்களை பார்த்து கேட்கிறார்கள்) இவர்கள்  எத்தனை  வீதம்?? இவர்கள் 50 க்கு  அதிகமான  வீதம்இருந்தால் மகிழ்ச்சியே...  
    • இதையே தான் நானும் சுட்டிக் காட்டியிருக்கிறேன்: தமிழ் நாட்டில் தமிழின் நிலை, யூ ரியூபில் சீமான் தம்பிகளின் பிரச்சார வீடியோக்கள் பார்ப்போரைப் பொறுத்த வரையில் கீழ் நிலை  என நினைக்க வைக்கும் பிரமை நிலை. உண்மை நிலை வேறு. இதை அறிய நான் சுட்டிக் காட்டியிருக்கும் செயல் திட்டங்களை ஒரு தடவை சென்று தேடிப் பார்த்து அறிந்த பின்னர் எழுதுங்கள். மறு பக்கம், நீங்கள் மௌனமாக சீமானின் பாசாங்கைக் கடக்க முயல்வதாகத் தெரிகிறது. மொழியை வளர்ப்பதென்பது ஆட்சியில் இருக்கும் அரசின் கடமை மட்டுமல்ல, ஆட்சிக்கு வர முனையும் எதிர்கட்சியின் கடமையும் தான். தமிழுக்கு மொளகாய்ப் பொடி லேபலில் இரண்டாம் இடம் கொடுத்தமைக்குக் கொதித்த செந்தமிழன் சீமான், தானே மகனுக்கு தமிழ் மூலம் கல்வி கொடுக்கத் தயங்குவதை "தனிப் பட்ட குடும்ப விவகாரம்" என பம்முவது வேடிக்கை😂!
    • அதைத்தானே ராசா  நானும் சொன்னேன் அதே கம்பி தான்...
    • இந்தியாவுக்கு சுத‌ந்திர‌ம்  கிடைச்சு 75ஆண்டு ஆக‌ போகுது இந்தியா இதுவ‌ரை என்ன‌ முன்னேற்ற‌த்தை க‌ண்டு இருக்கு சொல்லுங்கோ நாட்டான்மை அண்ணா 😁😜............................ அமெரிக்க‌ன் ஒலிம்பிக் போட்டியில் 100ப‌த‌க்க‌ங்க‌ள் வெல்லுகின‌ம் இந்தியா வெறும‌னே ஒரு ப‌த‌க்க‌ம்............இந்திய‌ர்க‌ள் எந்த‌ விளையாட்டில் திற‌மையான‌வ‌ர்க‌ள் சொல்ல‌ப் போனால் கிரிக்கேட் விளையாட்டை த‌விற‌ வேறு விளையாட்டில் இந்திய‌ர்க‌ள் பூச்சிய‌ம்.................ஹிந்தி தினிப்ப‌தில் காட்டும் ஆர்வ‌ம்  பிள்ளைக‌ளுக்கு விளையாட்டு அக்க‌டாமி திற‌ந்து அதில் திற‌மையை காட்டும் வீர‌ர்க‌ளை புக‌ழ் பெற்ற‌ ஒலிம்பிக் போட்டிக்கு அனுப்ப‌லாமே................28கோடி இந்திய‌ ம‌க்க‌ள் இர‌வு நேர‌ உண‌வு இல்லாம‌ தூங்கின‌மாம்................யூடுப்பில் ம‌த்திய‌ அர‌சு இந்தியாவை புக‌ழ் பாட‌ சில‌ர‌  அம‌த்தி இருக்கின‌ம்.....................பெரும்பாலான‌ ப‌ண‌த்தை போர் த‌ள‌பாட‌ங்க‌ளை வேண்ட‌ ம‌ற்றும் இராணுவ‌த்துக்கே ம‌த்திய‌ அர‌சு ப‌ண‌த்தை ஒதுக்குது................ இந்தியாவே நாறி போய் கிட‌க்கு..........இந்தியா வ‌ள‌ந்து வ‌ரும் நாட்டு ப‌ட்டிய‌லில் எத்த‌னையாவ‌து இட‌த்தில் இருக்குது..............இந்தியா என்றாலே பெண்க‌ளை க‌ற்ப‌ழிக்கும் நாடு என்று தான் ஜ‌ரோப்பிய‌ர்க‌ள் சொல்லுவார்க‌ள்.................   இந்தியாவை விட‌ சின்ன‌ நாடுக‌ள் எவ‌ள‌வோ முன்னேற்ற‌ம் அடைந்து விட்டார்க‌ள்..............இந்தியா அன்று தொட்டு இப்ப‌ வ‌ரை அதே நிலை தான்.............இந்தியா 2020இல் வ‌ல்ல‌ர‌சு நாடாக‌ ஆகிவிடும் என்று போலி விம்ப‌த்தை க‌ட்டு அவுட்டு விட்டார்க‌ளே இந்தியா வ‌ல்ல‌ர‌சு நாடா வ‌ந்திட்டா..............இந்திய‌ர்க‌ளுக்கு வ‌ல்ல‌ர‌சுசின் அர்த்த‌ம் தெரியாது.................இந்திய‌ர்க‌ள் ஒற்றுமை இல்லை அத‌னால் தான் சிறு முன்னேற்ற‌த்தையும் இதுவ‌ரை அடைய‌ வில்லை..............த‌மிழ் நாட்டு பிள்ளைக‌ள் டெல்லிக்கு போனால் டெல்லியில் அவைச்சு த‌மிழ் நாட்டு பிள்ளைக‌ளுக்கு ஊமை குத்து குத்தின‌ம் ..................இந்தியா ஏற்றும‌தி செய்வ‌தை விட‌ இற‌க்கு ம‌தி தான் அதிக‌ம்................டென்மார்க் சிறிய‌ நாடு டென்மார்க் காசின் பெரும‌திக்கு இந்தியாவின் ரூபாய் 11 அடி த‌ள்ளி நிக்க‌னும்   இந்தியா ஊழ‌ல் நாடு அன்டை நாடான‌ சீன‌னின் நாட்டு வ‌ள‌ர்சியை பார்த்தும் இந்திய‌ர்க‌ளுக்கு சூடு சுர‌ணை வ‌ர‌ வில்லை.............மொத்த‌த்தில் இந்தியா ஒரு குப்பை நாடு.............அர‌சாங்க‌ ம‌ருத்துவ‌ம‌னைக‌ளை நேரில் போய் பாருங்கோ எப்ப‌டி வைச்சு இருக்கிறாங்க‌ள் என்று..................   ஸ்க‌ன்ரினேவிய‌ன் நாட்டு அர‌சிய‌ல் வாதிக‌ள் ஊழ‌ல் செய்வ‌தில்லை அது தான் டென்மார் நோர்வே சுவிட‌ன் பின்லாந் ந‌ல்ல‌ முன்னேற்ற‌ம் அடைந்து இருக்கு...............இந்த‌ நாளு நாட்டிலும் டென்மார்க் சிட்டிச‌ன் வைத்து இருப்ப‌வ‌ர்க‌ள் லோன் எடுக்க‌லாம்..................அப்ப‌டி ப‌ல‌ விடைய‌ங்க‌ளில் ஸ்க‌ன்ரினேவிய‌ன் நாடுக‌ளுக்கு உல‌க‌ அள‌வில் ந‌ல்ல‌ பெய‌ர் இருக்கு............இந்தியா  வெறும‌ன‌ குப்பை தொட்டி நாடு..............த‌மிழ‌க‌ ம‌க்க‌ள் ஒரு விசிட் அடிக்க‌னும் ஜ‌ரோப்பாவுக்கு ம‌ற்ற‌ நாடுக‌ளுக்கு அப்ப‌ உண‌ருவின‌ம் இந்திய‌ம் திராவிட‌ம் என்ற‌ போர்வைக்குள் இருந்து நாம் ஏமாந்து விட்டோம் என்று இதை யாரும் மூடி ம‌றைக்க‌ முடியாது இது தான் உண்மையும் கூட‌......................இந்தியாவை த‌விர்த்து விட்டு உல‌க‌ம் இய‌ங்கும் சீன‌ன் இல்லாம‌ இந்த‌ உல‌க‌ம் இய‌ங்காது.............இதில் இருந்து தெரிவ‌து என்ன‌ சீன‌னின் முன்னேற்ற‌ம் இந்தியாவை விட‌ ப‌ல‌ ம‌ட‌ங்கு அதிக‌ம்...........நீங்க‌ள் பாவிக்கும் ஜ‌போனில் கூட‌ சீன‌னின் பொருல் இருக்கும்............இப்ப‌டி சொல்ல‌ நிறைய‌ இருக்கு..............................................................
  • Our picks

    • மனவலி யாத்திரை.....!

      (19.03.03 இக்கதை எழுதப்பட்டது.2001 பொங்கலின் மறுநாள் நிகழ்ந்த ஒரு சம்பவத்தின் நினைவாக பதிவிடப்பட்டது இன்று 7வருடங்கள் கழித்து பதிவிடுகிறேன்)

      அந்த 2001 பொங்கலின் மறுநாள் அவனது குரல்வழி வந்த அந்தச் செய்தி. என் உயிர் நாடிகளை இப்போதும் வலிக்கச் செய்கிறது. அது அவனுக்கும் அவனது அவர்களுக்கும் புதிதில்லைத்தான். அது அவர்களின் இலட்சியத்துக்கு இன்னும் வலுச்சேர்க்கும். ஆனால் என்னால் அழாமல் , அதைப்பற்றி எண்ணாமல் , இனிவரும் வருடங்களில் எந்தப் பொங்கலையும் கொண்டாட முடியாதபடி எனக்குள் அவனது குரலும் அவன் தந்த செய்திகளும் ஒலித்துக் கொண்டேயிருக்கும்.
      • 1 reply
    • பாலியல் சுதந்திரமின்றி பெண்விடுதலை சாத்தியமில்லை - செல்வன்


      Friday, 16 February 2007

      காதலர் தினத்தை வழக்கமான தமது அரசியல் நிலைபாடுகளை பொறுத்து அணுகும் செயலை பல்வேறு தரப்பினரும் உற்சாகமாக செய்து வருகின்றனர்.கிரீட்டிங் கார்டுகளையும், சாக்லடுகளையும் விற்க அமெரிக்க கம்பனிகள் சதி செய்வதாக கூறி காம்ரேடுகள் இதை எதிர்த்து வருகின்றனர்.அமெரிக்க கலாச்சாரத்தை திணிக்க முயற்சி நடப்பதாக கூறி சிவசேனாவினரும் இதை முழுமூச்சில் எதிர்க்கின்றனர். தமிழ்நாட்டில் பாமக ராமதாஸ் இதை கண்டித்து அறிக்கை விட்டுள்ளார். பாகிஸ்தானிலும், அரபுநாடுகளிலும் இதை எதிர்த்து பத்வாக்கள் பிறப்பிக்கப்பட்டு அதை மீறி இளைஞர்கள் இதை கொண்டாடியதாக செய்திகள் வந்துள்ளன.
      • 19 replies
    • எனக்குப் பிடித்த ஒரு சித்தர் பாடல் (எந்தச் சித்தர் என்று மறந்து விட்டேன். கட்டாயம் தேவை என்றால் சொல்லுங்கள் எனது ஓலைச் சுவடிகளை புரட்டிப்பார்த்து பின்னர் அறியத் தருகிறேன்)

      நட்ட கல்லைத் தெய்வம் என்று நாலுபுட்பம் சாத்தியே
      சுற்றி வந்து முணுமுணென்று கூறுமந்த்ரம் ஏனடா
      நட்ட கல்லும் பேசுமோ நாதன் உள்ளிருக்கையில்
      சுட்ட சட்டி தட்டுவம் கறிச்சுவை அறியுமோ?


      பொருள்:
      சூளையில் வைத்துச் சுட்டுச் செய்த மண் பாத்திரத்தில் வைக்கும் கறியின் சுவை எப்படியானது என்று அந்தப் பாத்திரத்துக்கு விளங்குமா? அது போல, எம்முள்ளே எருக்கும் இறைவனை நீ அறியாமல் ஒரு கல்லினுள் கடவுள் இருப்பதாக நம்பி வெறும் கல்லை அராதித்து வழிபடுகிறாய்.
      • 4 replies
    • களத்தில் தற்போது சமயம் சம்ம்பந்தமாக பெரியா கருத்து பரிமாற்றம் நடக்கிறது, அங்கே கருத்தாடு பெரியவர்களே, அறிஞோர்களே உங்களால் இறைவன் இருக்கார் என்று ஆதாரத்துடன் நிரூபிக்க முடியுமா...........? முடிந்தால் நிரூபியூங்கள், நிரூபித்து விட்டு உங்கள் கருத்து மோதலை தொடருங்கள்
      • 37 replies
    • சமூகத்துக்கு பயனுடைய கல்விநிலை எது?

      பேராசிரியர் சோ. சந்திரசேகரன்

      இன்று நாட்டில் உள்ள கல்விமுறையையும் அதற்கு அப்பால் உள்ள கல்வி ஏற்பாடுகளையும் நோக்குமிடத்து, பல்வேறு கல்வி நிலைகளை இனங்காண முடியும். அவையாவன: ஆரம்பக்கல்வி, இடைநிலைக் கல்வி, பல்கலைக்கழகக் கல்வி உள்ளடங்கிய உயர் கல்வி, பாடசாலையில் வழங்கப்படும் (1-11 ஆம் வகுப்பு வரை) பொதுக்கல்வி, தொழில்நுட்பக்கல்வி, வளர்ந்தோர் கல்வி என்பன, இவை தவிர கருத்தாக்க ரீதியாக முறைசாராக் கல்வி, வாழ்க்கை நீடித்த கல்வி, தொடர்கல்வி எனப் பலவற்றை இனங்காண முடியும். இவற்றில் ஆரம்பக்கல்வி, இடைநிலைக்கல்வி, உயர்கல்வி என்னும் கல்வி நிலைகளே முறைசார்ந்த (Formal) கல்வியின் பிரதான நிலைகள் அல்லது கூறுகளாகும்.
      • 5 replies
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.