Caution dictates that one should wait for the tabling of the Jain panel’s interim report in the coming session of the Parliament, as promised by the Home Minister, before any judgement is delivered on those ‘indicted’… But throwing caution to the winds would not also be altogether misplaced considering that the indictment only comes as confirmation of suspicions voiced in various quarters over the last several years and the leakage of the report has only preempted something that was inevitable. There is no reason to doubt the veracity of the report; the utmost one can say is that only certain portions of the report were highlighted to the detriment of certain individuals and parties. I, for one, do not blame the magazine and on the contrary wish to congratulate it for coming out with the exclusive. Now the government is left with no choice but to publicise the report which would have otherwise been swept under the carpet like the Verma Commission findings and several other reports that have met a similar fate for the simple reason that they embarrassed the powers that be.
Tamilnadu Chief Minister Karunanidhi’s description of the report as old wine in a new bottle, to put it bluntly, smacks of utter irresponsibility. After saying that he preferred to comment only after the tabling of the full report, he could have atleast refrained from making such a statement. But then our Chief Minister is not known for restraint and there was no way he could let pass an opportunity to shoot a clichéd comment.
His admission that the Jain panel report is old wine is in itself a self indictment. The people of the State are no strangers to his party’s affinity to the LTTE, which went beyond expression of sympathy with their cause. Instead of even attempting to deny the charges the CM has typically sought to point fingers at the other political parties like the Congress and the AIADMK crying, ‘they too’.
No doubt, if one were to chronicle the history of LITE from its inception, several leaders, cutting across party lines, could be held responsible for the rise of this monster. For decades and more so in the early eighties the Sri Lankan Tamils issue has been an emotive one and the political parties in TN vied with each other in expressing solidarity with their cause which was seen as the politically correct thing to do besides of course the genuine concern owing to the ethnic identity. It was with this intention that the Indian government and the State administration under MGR had earlier lent a helping hand to the militants fighting for their rights across the Palk Strait. But their help was certainly intended to be shared by the several militant groups which, though divided, were unified in their ideology. In due course the LTTE systematically maneuvered itself as the sole ‘representative’ of Tamil militancy by a process of physical elimination of all other Tamil groups which culminated in the murder of several EPRLF leaders in Chennai in 1990.
The Indo-Sri Lanka accord of 1987 was indeed a watershed and signified a clear shift in the stand of the Indian Government from pro-militant to pro-Sri Lankan government. This was primarily because the Indian government and MGR had got around to the conclusion that the interests of the Tamils could be better served by creating a framework of negotiations through the democratic process and not by mindless violence. Also they were disillusioned by the LTTE’s activism which were directed more towards establishing its hegemony and less for the cause of the Tamils. Otherwise why would they kill their own brethren?
It might a be matter of debate whether the Indian Government had acted wisely in sending the IPKF to help the Sri Lankan government in fighting the LTTE and political parties like the DMK might have entertained certain reservations on the issue. But was Karunanidhi, as Chief Minister, justified in refusing to welcome the IPKF when they landed on Indian soil? Was it reason enough for the DMK and its government to defy the sovereignty of the nation by helping the militants with arms , supplies and other forms of patronage to fight our own army? What does he have to say to the report’s reference to the allegation by no less than a person than the Prime Minister of the country on the floor of the Parliament that the secrets to which only the CM was privy were somehow finding their way to the LITE? Pray, which other party has committed such blatant acts of overt treason?
The CM’s argument that many parties at some point of time were eulogising LITE, rings hollow and is in fact the real old wine, for he had been dishing out the same stuff from time immemorial. In any case , the Jain panel’s report , it is learnt has also dwelt at length on that aspect. it does concede that the Tamils issue evoked sympathy and support from several quarters in the State. But it accuses only the DMK of going beyond mere sympathy and abetting, conniving and enabling the militants to carry on their activities on Indian soil which ultimately led to the killing of Rajiv Gandhi. And more damning is the fact that it was the same militants who liquidated Padmanabha and others, subsequently came back to get Rajiv. Pray, who allowed them to just walk out unhindered out of the country? We are sure it needs more than sympathy to achieve a great escape of that magnitude. It needs knowledge of movement, it needs active connivance, it needs downing of defences, and above all it needs sanction from the top. Now we know that these were all there, officially and unsolicited.
The contents of the Jain commission report, though old wine , is no doubt a very heady wine. The DMK regime and the Chief Minister, under the LTTE intoxication were undoubtedly in such a state of stupor that the militants had a virtual free run of the State. Of course, they have been punished in the form of dismissal and the subsequent bashing at the hustings, but, who can guarantee that the hangover is not still there?
e-mail the writer at [email protected]