The Conflict in the Basque Region of Spain has been categorized as an ethnic conflict. The conflict in Sri Lanka is certainly more violent that that of the Basques but it too has been termed an ethnic conflict. The difference in violence is attributed by many to the existence of democratic institutions in Spain and the Spanish Government's willingness to explore a 'democratic solution' to the problem. Our hypothesis is that democracy has nothing to do with violence. In fact, no theory can explain why small groups of people are motivated to commit terrorist acts against others. For the lack of a better explanation, frames like 'ethnic conflict' or 'freedom struggle' may be superimposed on a particular phenomenon to explain the reasons for violence. The following comparison between LTTE and the Basques Separatist Movement (ETA) will demonstrate this disconnection between theory and practice.
The Basques is an autonomous region of Spain with wide regional powers delegated to it by the Spanish Government. In Sri Lanka, President Chandrika Kumaratunga offered a Ten Year Devolution Package to the LTTE in 1994, which was rejected by the organization. Nor was it a solution to end the violence. It is said that the ETA emerged as a response to suspicion, deep resentment and fear between the Spanish and the people of Basque. Economic and cultural marginalization and conquest of the indigenous Basques people is said to have exacerbated these fears and resentments. Economic and cultural suppressions were never that severe in Sri Lanka, Pongu Thamil and many successful Tamil businesses being a case in point. Some have understood the grievances of the Tamils as a discrimination against Tamil Language. However Tamil language is now an official language although certain sections of the state administration may still use only Sinhala. These grievances can easily be rectified without resorting to violence.
In both conflicts Nationalists managed to grab the opportunity to mobilize fears and suspicions. An imaginary homeland was created in the minds of the Basque people and the Tamils by their respective elites. In both cases the elites convinced the masses that the non-violent nationalistic struggle did not bear ‘fruit’. Small bands of disillusioned youth formed radical, potentially more violent outfits; the ETA of the Basques, and the LTTE of the Tamils first engaged in petty skirmishes with law enforcement. Later, these skirmishes were more organized and directed at perceived suppressors of the respective movement. Neither movement has achieved a piece of mind for its group todate!
The comparison between ETA and the LTTE leads to more revelations. For example, ETA established a base and recluse in France; the LTTE did the same in South India. The Basque Imaginary Homeland consisted of three regions now in French soil. The remaining four are in Spanish soil. The LTTE’s Tamil Eelam remains confined to the Northern and Eastern parts of Sri Lanka, although a large Tamil population lives in neighboring India.
The Spanish government used a small band of commandos to hunt and kill radical ETA elements and its leadership. They were able to neutralize the radical elements earlier on. In Sri Lanka, the armed Tamil groups were unleashed on the state in the 1980s. They were initially trained and funded by India. Since then the group has gained financial independence thanks to its mini-bases and support groups in western states. The initial crackdown on the LTTE by the Sri Lankan defence establishment failed due to inadequate training, politicization of the armed forces, intervention by a powerful regional government (India) and the inability to win over the Tamil community. The Armed Forces were unable to match the LTTE's capacity for violence until the assassination of Thamil Chelvan.
ETA did not tolerate or seriously pursue Political rapprochement to the conflict. It has no political wing. The LTTE has held talks with the government on a political solution and has a Political Wing. However no concrete proposals have been reached despite several approaches for devolution of power in 1994 onwards. The burden of achieving a political solution falls on both parties but what type of a solution? who should offer it? and what problem the solution may address? are questions that are unanswered. There is also no guarantee that the solution could address the violence, through it might address the so-called grievance.
Conclusion
Democracy is a western ideal. It is not a solution but a prerequisite to violence. The term ‘ethnic conflict’ is also an abstract that does not explain why certain groups may engage or continue to engage in violence even when many of the underlying root-causes have changed or disappeared. These frames can explain social, political and economic root-causes of conflict but they cannot explain violence as a phenomenon. Any solutions that use these frames may fall short of addressing the real issue, which is violence.
The RM-70 122mm Rocket-pod mounted on TATRA-813 ATV