By P Ramasamy
The argument by V Shuman in the FMT article “Tamil protest: Sign of warped priorities?” is a typical Hindraf argument that says that Tamils or Indians in the country should only be concerned about their fate and not worry what happens to others elsewhere.
While I certainly agree that Tamils in Malaysia should prioritise ways and means to get out of their political and economic entrapments, I disagree that we should not be concerned about what happens to Tamils in other countries or others who are victims of racism and economic and political marginalization.
I don’t think Tamils have got their priorities misplaced or wrong, but they have been misled and misguided over the years by the BN leadership, including the MIC and others.
There is nothing wrong for Tamils in the country to show their affinity for other Tamils. In the immediate aftermath of the Hindraf protest in 2007, I did not hear any of its leaders telling Tamils or Indians from other countries not to support their movement. Funds were openly solicited from Indians in the country and abroad to support their movement.
I would agree that some of the protesters should not have engaged in violence, such as assaulting the Buddhist chief monk in Sentul and Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner to Malaysia Ibrahim Sahib Ansar at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport.
Such acts have certainly impacted negatively on the otherwise peaceful and democratic protests engaged in by many Tamil groups in Kuala Lumpur.
Shuman, in his attempt to condemn the assault, misses the point about what really transpired between a small group of protesters in KLIA and Ibrahim. Had Ibrahim refrained from insulting the protesters, the assault would not have taken place.
Yes, the conflict in Sri Lanka started way back, even before the days of Mahinda Rajapaksa. Surely, Shuman cannot miss the point that it was during the end of the civil war that a virtual genocide took place against the Tamils in the north and east of the country?
It was the Sri Lankan armed forces under the leadership of Rajapaksa that inflicted the worst and most tragic form of collateral punishment against innocent Tamils, women, children and the aged.
The protesters against Rajapaksa coming to Malaysia were largely Malaysian Indian Tamils. There were hardly any Sri Lankan or Ceylonese Tamils. In fact, this group has always remained in the background because of their wealth and status in the country.
They have no love or friendship for the Tamil national movement.
Even though they are ethnically Tamils, they have always maintained their separate identity as “Ceylonese”, a kind of class category, so that they would not be identified with the underprivileged Indian Tamils.
Some of the leaders of the Hindraf movement have never supported the pan-Tamil nationalism or the work of its adherents from the beginning. Never mind.
Shuman can disagree with the protests or even try to say that the conflict in Sri Lanka was not started by Rajapaksa, but I would advise him against condemning the protests, and the incidents of assaults should not be overblown to minimize the tragic and inhumane situation in Sri Lanka.
P Ramasamy is Deputy Chief Minister II of Penang.
With a firm belief in freedom of expression and without prejudice, FMT tries its best to share reliable content from third parties. Such articles are strictly the writer’s personal opinion. FMT does not necessarily endorse the views or opinions given by any third party content provider.
Related article: