Why did Buddhism disappear from South Asia? A summary of Buddhist Hindu wars
Sri Lanks also falls in the lands of the Rupee. The world discusses the carnage in Pakistan, but not the fire in Lanka. Sri Lanka faces terror like no other country in the world. Brahmanism eliminated Buddhism in the land of its birth. Today it wants to eliminate it from Lanka also. Our coverage focuses on the origins of the Hindu-Buddhist conflict, and the Muslim plight. Let us traverse and look at the how the proponents of ahimsa and non-violence send sucide bombers across the broder to Sri Lanka and rain death on an innocent Buddhist population who refuse to surrender to Brahmin hegemony.
This fight for the integrity and independence for the island state is not just a struggle against the Tamil terrorrists, this is a struggle to preserve the last vistage of Buddhism in the Subcontinent. The brave Sinnhalese have come to Pakistnan’s help on many occasions. Most recently she supported Pakistan in the commonwealth.
Sri Lanka the island paradise?
The Hindu Tamils
The Sinnhalese Buddhists
Sri Lankans had achieved what many third world countries could not achieve. Her literacy rate was more than 80%, and she was providing good medical services in every nook and corner of the island. The island paradise of Sri Lanka is today embroiled in a civil war becuase of the Tamil on slought from India. It is said that the trouble began when Sril Lanka agreed to a Voice of America (VOA) Radio station station and an American base in Sri Lanka.
India reacted by arming the Hindu Tamils in Sri Lanka and sending them across the border to fight the Sinnhalese Buddhists in Colombo. ..the rest is history
Pakistan has been supported the Buddhist Sinhalese governemnt of Sril Lanka for decades. Arms and ammunition is exported, and Pakistan trains Sril Lankan officers in Paksitan’s training academies.
MUSLIMS OF SRI LANKA: A forgotten minority
MOHAMMED KHANY tries not to think of home, a small farm in Mullativu, northern Sri Lanka. In 1990 he was evicted by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, along with more than 75,000 other Muslims from the northern province. Like most, he fled to Puttalam. He has lived there ever since, on a sandy peninsula where he cannot farm, in a coconut-leaf hut affording little respite from the sun or the monsoon rains. “If I think of home I’ll get sick,” he says. He relies on the odd day of manual labour to feed his family.
The Tigers’ campaign against Muslims, some 8% of Sri Lanka’s 20m people, is a largely forgotten episode in the long war between Tamil separatists and the Sinhalese-dominated government. But it continues to do great damage, especially in the east, where in 1990 the rebels slaughtered up to 1,000 Muslims. One obvious effect has been worsening relations between Muslims and Tamils in eastern Sri Lanka.
Until the 1990 pogrom, these communities co-existed fairly harmoniously. A shared sense of discrimination at the hands of the Sinhalese majority led some young Muslims to join the Tigers. But most shunned the struggle for a “Tamil Eelam”—an independent “homeland” in the north and east of the island. The Tigers came to see Muslims as a barrier to their full control of the north-east. Today in the east, where Muslims lost large areas of land as they fled the killers, Tamils and Muslims live in uneasy segregation. Some Muslim groups have guns. But they are mostly used, if at all, for crime rather than political violence.
Potentially more dangerous in the east is the growth of Islamic fundamentalism, as the area’s Muslims strive to forge a sense of independent identity. More women in the east wear the long black abayaand ultra-orthodox Islamic groups have grown more popular. The conflict in Sri Lanka gives the global revival of Islam a particular flavour. Whereas the mostly-Hindu Tamils and mostly-Buddhist Sinhalese have language and history as well as their faith to unite them, the country’s Muslims are defined only by their religion.
Communal tension should not be exaggerated, however. In Puttalam Muslims speak affectionately of their old Tamil neighbours. The biggest tension is with the area’s original Muslim inhabitants, who have grown tired of the newcomers taking their jobs and, increasingly, buying their land. “Northern Muslims always think everyone can live together,” says Mujeeb Rahuman, who was 14 when his family was kicked out of its northern home and who has escaped the camps of Puttalam to run the Muslim Information Centre in Colombo, a human-rights group. The easterners, he goes on, want autonomous Muslim regions. He might add that southern Muslims seem mainly unbothered by the plight of their fellows in the west and east. Largely because they are dispersed geographically, there is little sense of a common Sri Lankan Muslim identity.
This is reflected in politics. The Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC), formed in response to the plight of Muslims in the east, has not done well in the south, where Muslims often align themselves with mainstream parties. At the last parliamentary elections, in 2004, the SLMC, damaged by infighting, won just 2% of the vote.
In Puttalam, meanwhile, the long-displaced continue to suffer as the war flickers and flares. In one camp, men describe the excitement caused by the ceasefire agreement signed in 2002. Many returned home, most to find their houses occupied by displaced Tamils, or rebels, or destroyed. Those who stuck it out were once again expelled by the Tigers when the ceasefire crumbled last year.
PAKISTAN: A PARTNERSHIP TO SUSTAIN BY IKRAM SEHGAL.
Pakistan and Sri Lanka have a shared history of crisis in parallel, there is also a shared history of cooperation during crisis. In the 50s and 60s Sri Lanka was very much an island of tranquillity. A beautiful paradise inhabited by a very peace-loving people, this island of approximately 25000 square miles has a population of 17 million, of which more than 12.5 million (74%) are Sinhalese, 2.21 million are Tamil (13%), 1.19 million are Muslims (7%), Indian Tamils are 850000 (5%) and others 170000 (1%).
At the start of 1983 mass attacks on the Tamil population by the Sinhalese forced quite a number to seek refuge abroad and the Tamil youth to join mainly four militant groups. Perceiving Sri Lanka’s economic progress as a very real threat to its own economic ambitions, India began to arm and train Tamils besides assisting them in other ways as an extension of the “Indira Doctrine” for hegemony in South Asia as well as the Indian Ocean. Of particular interest to them was the region’s largest deep-water harbour at Trincomalee.
In July 1987, India imposed the Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord and a strong Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) which landed in the Northern and Eastern Provinces to maintain peace came basically as a “protection force” for the Tamils, the love-fest soon soured. A ruthless policy of extermination of the others by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), nicknamed Tamil Tigers, had seen them emerge as the only Tamil military organization of any consequence.
The LTTE began a confrontation with the IPKF in October 1987 which went on till the IPKF were forced to withdraw from Sri Lanka in March 1990. This led to an armistice of sorts between Sri Lanka Armed Forces and the LTTE till in June 1990, the LTTE broke off from the peace talks by attacking and killing hundreds of policemen. This phase of the war continued till Jan 1995 when cessation of hostilities was again established. The LTTE was simply playing for time and the third phase of the hostilities (which continues till the present ceasefire of the last 2 years), started with the blasting of two naval ships by the LTTE in Trincomalee Harbour on 19 Apr 1995 and the shooting down of two AVRO passenger jets two days later by anti-aircraft missiles.
The Sri Lankan paradise that once was had by now become “Hell on Earth”, the fighting between the Sri Lanka Armed Forces and the Tamil Tigers went on without quarter given or taken. As the new millennium came and went, the Tamil Tigers were still trying to retake the Jaffna Peninsula and their suicide bombers were still blowing themselves and bystanders up all over the island, in Colombo. Only in the last two years a fragile Norwegian brokered ceasefire has taken effect, it is still holding.
Maybe the adversity caused by the Dec 26 Tsunami will bring the two sides closer. Relations with Pakistan warmed up in the early 60s, the first tangible sign of cooperation was the sending of three batches 14 cadets to the Pakistan Military academy (PMA). The first batch of 5 Sri Lanka cadets come to PMA in May 1963 to join 32nd PMA Long Course. Two of the original give served as Maj Gens in the Army, Lt Gen (Retd) Lal Weerasuriya is the present Sri Lankan High Commissioner to Pakistan.
One of my course-mates, (from the second batch that joined 34th PMA in May 1964) brilliant Maj Genl “Lucky” Vijayratna died when his jeep ran over a land-mine during operations. TD Rajapaksa from my Platoon retired as a Brigadier while Ananda Weerasekera and Siri Pieris served as major generals.
The Sri Lankans are really grateful to Pakistan for having trained so many from their officers in PMA, after the first 14 in the 60s, more than 450 graduated from PMA in the 80s and 90s in three more batches. Out of the 476 officers who passed out from the PMA into the Sri Lankan Army, 56 had died in action in operations against the Liberation Tiger of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) till 1997. In March 1971, Pakistan sent an Army Aviation contingent comprised of pilots, helicopters and ground crew when the Janatha Vimukthi Peranuma (JVP) attempted a bloody North Korean supported Marxist revolution.
At the height of the East Pakistan crisis in 1971, the then PM Mrs Srimavo Bandernaike, mother of the present President of Sri Lanka, Mrs Chandrika Kamaratunga, resisted Indian pressure to close down Bandernaike International Airport for flights to and from (then) East Pakistan. For Pakistan, desperately short of fuel in the embattled Province, this logistics support kept the central authority in Islamabad functional till actual war broke out in Dec 1971 and all flights ceased. The two countries have common vision and shared perceptions on many regional and international issues.
They are also confronted with common problems of terrorism and economic retardation. Pakistan’s excellent relations with Sri Lanka were aptly mirrored when Sri Lanka unwaveringly supported Pakistan during the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan and also played an important role in the restoration of Pakistan’s membership in the Commonwealth. Both Pakistan and Sri Lanka face threats to their security from within and to an extent, from the outside and both are committed to fighting these menaces. In essence a strategic relationship does not necessarily mean the undertaking or advancement of defence related or military partnerships alone. It is also the economic strength and status of a nation that equips it with strategic power of great stature; this power to be used for the emancipation of its own people and of the population of the region and not to pursue an agenda of adventurism or interference in the affairs of neighbours or other countries. The comprehensive improvement in relations can be assessed both in qualitative and quantitative terms.
The new regional environment has also provided the right condition for the improvement of relations. The main task of the leaders of both the countries is to maintain the same pattern of relations by providing a continuity in co-operation and strengthening their mutual understanding. Pakistan and Sri Lanka enjoy a convergence of strategic interests which could provide the basis for building and reinforcing strategic cooperation between the two countries. Military training facilities in Pakistan continue to provide education and training to Sri Lankan military personnel. With such a backdrop there should be no impediments for both Pakistan and Sri Lanka to seriously contemplate the building up of a strategic partnership in all fields – political, diplomatic, military and economic. Ours is a long under-nourished bilateral relationship with each other, because of various reasons, one concern being that this might be negatively perceived in the neighbourhood, particularly by India which may see this as gauging up against them.
Both Pakistan and Sri Lanka determine their priorities in regional cooperation in accordance with the situation on ground rather than on anything else. The potential to cooperate in a more meaningful manner has always been present, it only needs to be developed and finessed into a mechanism that will start generating positive results for the two countries and by extension, for the entire region. There is unanimity of views of both sides on many issues, especially those issues that continue to bedevil the sub-continent.
ELECTION 2008
Obama aide wants
talks with terrorists
Foreign adviser’s ‘anti-Israel policies,’
sympathy for Hamas, raise concerns
——————————————————————————–
Posted: January 29, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com
Robert Malley
JERUSALEM ? While officials here largely maintain a policy against interfering in U.S. election politics, some Israeli security officials quietly expressed “concern” about an adviser to Sen. Barack Obama who has advocated negotiations with Hamas and providing international assistance to the terrorist group.
The officials noted Robert Malley, a principal Obama foreign policy adviser, has penned numerous opinion articles, many of them co-written with a former adviser to the late Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat, petitioning for dialogue with Hamas and blasting Israel for numerous policies he says harm the Palestinian cause.
Malley also previously penned a well-circulated New York Review of Books piece largely blaming Israel for the collapse of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations at Camp David in 2000 when Arafat turned down a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and eastern sections of Jerusalem and instead returned to the Middle East to launch an intifada, or terrorist campaign, against the Jewish state.
Malley’s contentions have been strongly refuted by key participants at Camp David, including President Bill Clinton, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and primary U.S. envoy to the Middle East Dennis Ross, all of whom squarely blamed Arafat’s refusal to make peace for the talks’ failure.
(Story continues below)
“We are noting with concern some of Obama’s picks as advisers, particularly Robert Malley who has expressed sympathy to Hamas and Hezbollah and offered accounts of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that don’t jibe with the facts,” said one security official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The official stated he was not authorized to talk to the media about U.S. politics, noting Israeli officials are instructed to “stay out” of American political affairs.
In February 2006, after Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinian parliament and amid a U.S. and Israeli attempt to isolate the Hamas-run Palestinian Authority, Malley wrote an op-ed for the Baltimore Sun advocating international aid to the terror group’s newly formed government.
“The Islamists (Hamas) ran on a campaign of effective government and promised to improve Palestinians’ lives; they cannot do that if the international community turns its back,” wrote Malley in a piece entitled, “Making the Best of Hamas’ Victory.”
Malley contended the election of Hamas expressed Palestinian “anger at years of humiliation and loss of self-respect because of Israeli settlement expansion, Arafat’s imprisonment, Israel’s incursions, Western lecturing and, most recently and tellingly, the threat of an aid cut off in the event of an Islamist success.”
Malley said the U.S. should not “discourage third-party unofficial contacts with [Hamas] in an attempt to moderate it.”
Hamas is responsible for scores of deadly shootings, suicide bombings and rocket attacks aimed at Jewish civilian population centers. The past few weeks alone, Hamas militants took credit for firing more than 200 rockets into Israel.
Hamas’ official charter calls for the murder of Jews and destruction of Israel.
Hamas maintained a national unity government with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas until the Palestinian leader dissolved the agreement and deposed the Hamas prime minister last year.
In an op-ed in the Washington Post two weeks ago coauthored by Arafat adviser Hussein Agha, Malley ? using could be perceived as anti-Israel language ? urged Israel’s negotiating partner Abbas to reunite with Hamas.
“A renewed national compact and the return of Hamas to the political fold would upset Israel’s strategy of perpetuating Palestinian geographic and political division,” wrote Malley.
He further petitioned Israel to hold talks with Hamas.
“An arrangement between Israel and Hamas could advance both sides’ interests,” wrote Malley.
In numerous other op-eds, Malley advocates a policy of engagement with Hamas.
After the breakdown of the Camp David talks, Malley wrote a lengthy New York Times piece that mostly blamed Israel and the U.S. for the breakdown of the negotiations.
Malley was a special assistant to Clinton for Arab-Israeli affairs and was a member of the U.S. peace team during the Camp David negotiations. He currently serves as director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at the International Crisis Group, which is partially funded by billionaire and Obama campaign contributor George Soros, who also serves on the board of the Crisis Group.
Ed Lasky, a contributor to the American Thinker blog, calls Malley a “[Palestinian] propagandist” who, he charged, bends “the truth to serve an agenda that is marked by anti-Israel bias. … Malley’s writings strike me as being akin to propaganda.”
Lasky points out Malley’s father, Simon Malley, was a personal friend of Arafat and wrote in support of numerous struggles against Western countries. Simon Malley founded Afrique Asie, a French magazine that was known for its advocacy for “liberation” struggles throughout the world, including the Palestinian cause.
Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, called Simon Malley a “sympathizer” of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, which, headed by Arafat, carried out numerous terror attacks.
“[Robert] Malley has seemingly followed in his father’s footsteps: He represents the next generation of anti-Israel activism,” wrote Lasky.
Obama spiritual adviser also anti-Israel?
Obama the past few days has taken note of his growing negative image within the pro-Israel and Jewish activist community, reaching out yesterday to a coalition of Jewish and Israeli newspapers.
Obama told Israel’s Haaretz daily there is a “constant virulent campaign” being waged against him, aimed particularly at weakening support among Democrat voters within the Jewish community.
Obama said “false” e-mail campaigns calling him Muslim and accusing him of not pledging allegiance to the U.S. have been especially visible in the Jewish community.
The presidential hopeful urged Haaretz and U.S. Jewish newspapers to use their “megaphone” so people can hear “from the horse’s mouth” that anti-Israel accusations against him are “unfounded.”
Mass e-mail distributions have pointed out Obama’s spiritual adviser, Jeremiah Wright Jr. of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, recently presented Nation of Islam founder Louis Farrakhan with a “Lifetime Achievement” award. Farrakhan has expressed consistent anti-Israel views.
Wright, who reportedly married Obama and baptized his daughters, has called for divestment from Israel and refers to Israel as a “racist” state.”
Obama called Wright’s heralding of Farrahkan a “mistake” but has not spoken out against Wright’s views regarding Israel.
Jerusalem Post columnist Caroline Glick noted in a column last week, “Obama has taken no steps to moderate his church’s anti-Israel invective. Obama’s affiliation with Wright aligns with his choice of financial backers and foreign policy advisers. To varying degrees, all of them exhibit hostility towards Israel and support for appeasing jihadists.”