TAMIL MINORITY PROBLEM
By Edmund Samarakkody
Prior to 1947 the peoples inhabiting India and Ceylon were by law British citizens, as these two countries were parts of the same British Empire. .In both India and Ceylon the political and economic control and exploitation commenced with the superimposition of capitalism in more or less semifeudal economies, The military bureaucratic method of capitalist development in semifeudal conditions meant that many aspects of feudal relations, economic and social were permitted to remain as before. Such relations of feudal oppression as caste, creed, communal and sex oppression often facilitated imperialist penetration and exploitation in these countries. In the case of India, even old semifeudal political territorial divisions (rule of Maharajahs) were fostered right up to 1947, when political independence was granted to India.
Thus the bourgeois democratic revolution which was ushered in these countries by military bureaucratic methods remained incomplete. When British imperialism relinquished political control of India and Ceylon, the socio-economic system in these countries, while remaining bourgeois in character, had many unaccomplished démocratic tasks, like the removal of the barriers of caste, creed, race, and sex discrimination; and also the tasks of the real unification of the separate territorial divisions which had received only a coloration of unification through a unified British administration, .
This situation was clearer in the east of India. Here, the failure to achieve the unification of the country was tragically shown in the open vivisection of the country into India and Pakistan -~- a Hindu state and a Muslim state. Even within these two large territorial divisions real unification has up to date not taken place. Minority groups -- religious, racial, and caste groups, continue to be in a state of virtual war. In other words the struggle for demo-= cratic rights exist in these so-called unified states in a real way. In both India and Pakistan feudal land relations also remain.
In the case of Ceylon, the socio-economic relations: were more bourgeois than in India. In land relations, only the remnants of feudalism remain, and that, too, in the remote parts of Ceylon. But the problem of unification of the country remained, The Kingdom of * the Tamils and the Kingdom of the Singhalese were artificially brought together through British rule and a semblance of unity prevailed, Caste and religious conflict of old was also camouflaged, and was evi-~ dent even during British rule.
The old divisions and oppressive relations came to the surface — from time to time as was revealed in the case of Singhalese-Muslim ~ communal riots in 1915, Also in the period of agitation for Constitutional Reform, the Tamil-speaking minority in the north and eastern provinces became’ articulate and revealed their claims for better and
~1l-
equitable representation. An early manifestation of the coming open conflict between the Singhalese and the Tamil minority was the anti- Indian movement started by Mr.A.E.Gunasinghe about 193233. ie
At this stage the movement was directed against only a ‘gmall:
section of the Tamil-speaking people -- the Malayalee and Cochin people of South Indian origin. The further development of this movement naturally extended to other persons of recent Indian origin. dnt the plantations and other parts in Ceylon. ~
Concretely, the first legal step to maintain Tamil minority oppression and the legalised subordination of a minority group to the Singhalese majority was taken through the Citizenship Acts_ of. 1948, ‘Through these Acts, the Singhalese bourgeoisie with the support ‘of a section of the Tamil bourgeoisie enforced discrimination against the Tamils of recent Indian origin, the large majority of them being workers in the plantations, and the rest in Colombo and certain urban areas: being workers or traders.
By these. Citizenship Acts nearly one million persons :in the. category of Indidn origin were déprived of citizenship. and: reduced to a position of a legally oppressed Tamil minority, .thereafter referred ~to.as "stateless" persons without franchise and without rights to social services like free education and poor relief and unemployment relief.
“These persons, workers and others” were up to 1948: considered and treated as citizens ‘of Ceylon and as equal before the law through British citizenship. Those presently in this category of so-called stateless persons are either those very persons who had citizenship rights up to 1948 or their children, pone ‘Since the passing of these Citizenship Acts, these persons (nearly»one million), who are legitimately in Ceylon and participating in the economic life of Ceylon and recognised as such, and who have opted to remain in Ceylon, have now been reduced’ to the state: of an oppressed minority. The case of these oppressed people is nothing less than the legalisation of semifeudal minority oppression that remained concealed during the direct rule of the British impertalism.
In other words the tasks of the unification of the country;
i.e,, the unification of the Singhalese majority with the Tamil minority and other groups remained unaccomplished. This task is the responsibility of the Ceylon bourgeoisie and the problem appearing as a citizenship question or a language question is only two aspects of the same problem of completing the bourgeois democratic revolution in Ceylon,
But in the era of the decline of capitalism the national bourgeoisie of Ceylon or other backward countries are incapable of performing tasks in their own interests, in this case the task of the
aloe
real unification of the country. In this situation the Ceylonese bourgeoisie (the United National party and the Sri Lanka Freedom party)have sought to throw the problem on the shoulders of the Indian bourgeoisie, It is of course a fact that the Indian bourgeoisie have themselves failed to complete their own democratic tasks, In their country racial, caste, and-religious oppression remain as before,.. both in India and Pakistan. But the problem of the so-called stateless persons of Indian origin is not a problem of the Indian bour-. geoisie and discussions with the Indian government on this question is irrelevant and only helps to draw a red herring across the trail.
“The problem is none other than to remove the barriers of - | caste, creed, sex and race within the population of Ceylon. . All the people of Ceylon are of Indian origin -- some are of very early ori-~ gin and others:of more recent origin. And this difference has no: bearing on the cause of the so-called stateless personse
The development of the question of ma jority-minority relations in Ceylon since 1948 is further proof that the question of the socalled stateless is part of the Tamil minority problem. The anti-~ Indian agitation movement appeared to be directed at persons of Indian origin only... That is the reason why the Tamil bourgeoisie of the northern and eastern provinces even supported discriminatory legislation against these people,
But when the movement soon extended into a general anti-Tamil movement, after 1950, and culminated in open violence and language riots:;in 1956 and later in 1958, the-Tamil bourgeoisie came to the. realisation that. the anti-Indian movement was only an | aspect of the anti-Tamil movement. be ;
Stated differently it is now clear that the language rights of the Tamils and their fight for equal status with the Singhalese, and the struggle of the people of recent Indian origin for citizen= ship rights: are one and the same strugete: for democratic rights of the people in. Ceylon. a
The struggle of the Tamil minority for language and oltizenship rights cannot be separated from the struggle of the Moors, Burghers. and other racial groups for equal status in relation to the Singhalese majority, nor can it be separated from the general democratic movement to eliminate oppression arising out of caste, creed and sex.
- However, in the context of the class struggle between: the bourgeoisie and wage earners, the democratic movement can be led only by the .working class. In its own struggle for emancipation from the oppression and-..exploitation of the bourgeoisie, the working class will harness the genernl movement of the oppressed in order to channelise «ll the exploited and the oppressed in the struyric against the bourgeoisie, Thus the working class will catogorically support. the rights of Tamils for equality with the majority; and, in. the:eoncrcte situation,.the rights of the Tamils to have /Tamil also declared a state language; and with no less determination
_ 713-
the working clasa. will. support the rights of the Tamils of recent. | Indian. origin -- the rights of the so-called stateless persons in Ceylon” for. full. citizenship. .