Tsunami 10 - A Missed Opportunity for Sri Lanka

Hypocrates once said that "healing is a matter of time, but it is sometimes also a matter of opportunity". Thus in tragedy there should be an opportunity to heal. In an ideal world a ten year reflection on the tsunami in Sri Lanka would wax lyrical about the developments of the country. Much would be written as to how the doors that were opened between faith and ethnic communities in the first few days after the tsunami would become opportunities to forge peace in a conflict affected land.

However like in many things in life, the aspirational is far removed from the functional. It is now 10 years since that fateful day of the 26th of December 2004 when the lives of many would be turned upside down forever by the Asian Tsunami. Sri Lanka was the second country next to Aceh in Indonesia to be severely destroyed by the tsunami and like Indonesia was in the midst of a floundering peace process. In the lead up to the 10 year anniversary there is much to reflect on. What worked; what didn't work; where could we have done better?

In the initial stages of the tsunami rehabilitation and reconstruction, Sri Lanka was well ahead of the game. Somehow though a mere 18 months later, the post tsunami reconstruction would grind to a halt as the machinery for conflict started to be ramped up which would end with the much publicised end of the conflict in 2009, whilst in Aceh, a peace process would ensure some political and security stability in a post tsunami reconstruction era.

In 2005, Bill Clinton coined the phrase 'Build Back Better' to describe what should happen in the aftermath of the tsunami. The tsunami was a turning point for Sri Lanka in terms of how it looked at itself and the rest of the world. However ten years on, the aftermath is perhaps not as rosy as we think it is. Despite the tremendous amounts of money that was generated for the victims, it is still disheartening to hear of tsunami survivors who ten years on are still waiting for help. In cases where entire villages were built by well-meaning NGOs, many of these have either been abandoned at worst or been neglected by local councils. There has to be greater local ownership and consultation so that $1000 apartments are not built for people accustomed to living in $20 tin shacks (only for the recipients to sell the apartments to property developers). There also has to be greater sensitivity to local contexts such that income streams are not inflated by NGOs providing jobs for the locals causing further problems later on, such as people being virtually unemployable because of the high salaries commanded, when the NGOs left. These are indeed pointers that the international humanitarian system has to think about. In the run up to the World Humanitarian Summit, it would do well to really commission a study of what worked and didn't work in terms of humanitarian work vis-à-vis the financing.

10 years on in Sri Lanka, we are once again gripped in a political upheaval in the middle of a presidential election that no one wants, facing an uncertain future that no one will dare speculate about. This is in spite of the end of the conflict in 2009 and numerous development achievements, all which took place despite the tsunami. Thus what should be a very sombre pause for reflection about the greatest natural disaster to strike Sri Lanka, has been relegated to the side lines of election campaigns and rhetoric in the midst of flooding caused by rains. Though there will be prayers held in various faith institutions around the country, along with safety drills, the value of really honouring those who perished (and subsequently survived) will not take place nor will some of the more truer lessons of the tsunami for Sri Lanka be understood or argued. This is sad because at this moment of time, what is needed is for Sri Lanka to rediscover that spirit and ethos that guided the initial post tsunami response as it still grapples with the post conflict transition amidst serious questions being asked about its governance and political future.

That spirit and ethos is represented by the outpouring of grief and support for the victims and survivors of the tsunami in the immediate aftermath of the tsunami before the government and international institutions started their response. For a brief moment, people forgot the divisions that separated them and concentrated more on what could unite them. For a brief period, regardless of what faith and ethnicity you were, what mattered most was that you were Sri Lankan. The post tsunami response before responsibility was abrogated to the government and the international community represents the single most opportune moment that Sri Lankans (of all ethnicities and faith) came together to help one another in the rebuilding. This for me represents the single most vital lesson of the tsunami. We were shown the value and vulnerability of life. Yet the tragedy of this lesson, is that we quickly forgot this and did not capitalise on it. We did not build the relationships that we once cultivated in those dark times, nor did we go out of the way to forge new ones. As quickly as we responded, we retreated into our silos. Consequently Sri Lankans remain as polarised as ever and in a post conflict setting with a new focus for peace, the minorities in particular feel disenfranchised and disempowered.

Whilst many will blame the political context and will of the day (which of course has a lot to answer for in setting the context), we can not shirk away from our personal responsibilities in allowing the state of affairs to arrive to the crunch that they are in Sri Lanka. Our personal relationships with and between different communities has much to say for how we value life as taught to us by the tsunami.

10 years on, there is a missed opportunity to reflect on from the tsunami which is the missed opportunity for people to build relationships with each other that could transcend political and religious biases. If anything, the election serves as an unwarranted distraction and the tsunami commemoration is relegated to a bystander at worst, unwilling participant in a race to gather votes.

10 years on, we should be reflecting on how we can once again build the relationships. This is vital for the country to move forward otherwise those that lost their lives in that terrible natural disaster and since then, would have lost it in vain

this originally appeared on Huffington Post

Rethnking International Development

As we near the 10 year anniversary of the tsunami, it is worth taking the time to reflect not only on what worked well but what has not worked well.  Over the last decade with the frequency of natural and manmade disasters increasing, the amount of money that has been fundraised and made available for organisations to respond has increased putting increased pressure for it to be spent effectively and efficiently.  The tsunami of 2004 was in fact the tipping point in terms of the money raised & spent (plus wasted) with the current Syrian crisis coming a quick second.

For a while many agencies that have been campaigning for greater transparency and accountability within the sector.  Calls for greater transparency have come in the wake of huge funding cycles being made available to agencies after the 2004 tsunami where agencies struggled to properly and efficiently utilise donated funds.  In the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake, it is still evident that many of the lessons that have been learnt from the South Asian tsunami and the Pakistan earthquake have not been taken on board.

However in scrutinising funds and fund allocations,  it shouldn’t constrain operations.  Additional levels of bureaucracy than already exists should not be brought.  Aid agencies already have enough hoops that they have to jump through in order to satisfy donor requirements and justifying the admin costs that are necessary.  This does mean that some of the smaller agencies who are doing great work on the ground miss out because they are unable ‘to meet such requirements’.

Thus a rethink of international humanitarian response and development should include methods of transparently accounting for funding.  It should also distinguish between emergency relief and long term aid.  Herein lies one of the fundamental problems with the current debate and dialogue on aid.  Long term aid and development is more needed and necessary but offers less tangible and visual results.  More importantly it survives the life cycle of standing governments.  Hence many governments are reluctant to follow up on verbal promises of aid packages. 

Witness the calls on G20 spending  by Oxfam, a call that is rapidly being repeated every couple of years when the G20 does meet, but which does not proceed farther than the rhetoric.  It seems that governments are just reluctant to move further on this or are content to regurgitate old rhetoric.

This in my mind is a problem.  The complacency of the government with regards this subject betrays not only the priority of international development and humanitarian assistance but also the importance of the work.

As we discuss a greater system of transparency and accountability, we should also measure not only efficiency but effectiveness.  More importantly, this discussion and dialogue needs to be set in place to change the paradigm of thinking on the issue as well as what is needed to change it.  The challenges of the globalised world along with climate change cannot and should not be addressed just from the west, but has to be done in consultation.  It should be realised that the current operational mandate with which International Development has operated in the last 60 years has some flaws which need to be revisited. 

Why it that at no point in time, has the world is contributed so much to alleviating poverty yet we seem to be in a losing battle.  Somewhere we have to stop and take a step back and examine our systems and processes.  We should be asking the question, ‘What is it that we are doing wrong with our International Development Strategy?’

Part of this reflection should also realise that there has been a birth of small charities and humanitarian organisations often set up by immigrants or the Diaspora.  They sometimes have a better reach into areas where the larger organisations do not as well as work on shoestring budgets with better energy and motivation.  Of course they will need to be guided in order to become more professional and to avoid pitfalls of bad governance.  This hand holding needs to take place at all levels...  Hence rather than giving to the UN, DFID should work with smaller organisations to mentor and lead them towards delivering on standards and many of the larger organisations need to come to terms with working with existing systems rather than trying to change them. 

Initially published in The News Hub

To remain complacent about the intricacies of the aid world and just continue giving aid and maintaining the status quo will be like putting a band aid on a deep cut.

Who do you think you are

Incidents that have unfortunately plagued the world for decades but become more pronounced over the last 8 years or so, show an increasing ‘emphasis’ for political violence flavoured by faith, culture and identity where the world is seen through a singular lens of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ and  an ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ attitude.  This unhealthy uni-polar view, congruent to a ‘Clash of Civilisation’ concept, has led to ambiguities and complexities with regards the perception of current global conflicts and the pivotal role played in the popular mobilisations against the West from sections of disaffected Third World Opinion.   In particular, one key source of trans-national conflict has stemmed from the rise of political Islam as a force in international relations, the end of the Cold War and the emergence of distinct tensions between Western countries with a Christian heritage and countries, around the world, with a distinct Muslim heritage. 

Often one of the key catalysts for these global conflicts  and the ethnic / faith identity violence that stems from them, is the issue of poverty  and  the process of allocation of resources, which perpetuates the view through this singular lens and ensures that  a vicious cycle of competition is generated and maintained.  Many will argue though that in the globalising world of today such rivalry, competition, conflict and ultimately violence are a necessary tool to preserve the ‘values of freedom’.   However the violence we have seen to date has been perpetuated from deeply delusive and divisive assumptions of single exclusive identities by sectarian activists, who want people to ignore all affiliation and loyalties in support of one specific identity.    Such exclusive identities are negative, stressing difference rather than belonging and ‘opposition to’ rather than ‘support for’ something. Unfortunately whilst faith may rarely be the original source, it often becomes the arena in which conflicts are played out.  The result is that conflicts manifest themselves into rumour, hearsay and generalization which are the first steps towards the stereotyping of people (their faith, their culture and identity) and the denial of a diverse, lived reality, the opposite of respect, understanding and acceptance. As a consequence, faiths (beliefs, culture and identity) become judged by the attitudes and actions of small and aberrant minorities. 

It is precisely in this scenario with the world experiencing such kind of  turmoil, that there are calls for new solutions.  With the collapse of socialism, and now with the global financial crisis, an apparent sign of the failure of capitalism, this search for the new solutions has intensified, to look for answers outside the box that will address the turmoil and their causes. 

Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen’s premise in his book ‘Identity and Violence’ is that the key to good citizenship and social cohesion is the encouragement and retention of multiple identities. People have several enriching identities: nationality, gender, age and parental background, religious or professional affiliation. They identify with different ethnic groups and races, towns or villages they call home, sometimes football teams; they speak different languages, which they hope their children will retain, and love different parts of their countries.   It is the recognition of this plurality and the searching for commonalities within this pluralism that will lead to greater respect and ultimately understanding and acceptance.

Thus these new solutions will have to challenge people to accept diversity and create equal opportunities for diverse communities, ethnicities, traditions, cultures and faiths.  The new solutions will also have to take into account  the existence of multiple identities which add a richness and variety to diversity and pluralism as part of a common wealth that needs to be celebrated in the global civil society and integrated into life as a positive force for development. 

The role of faith and spirituality in particular in the search for new solutions will be very important as it offers a simple and easy access to communities (strong in their spiritual and faith teachings) and a simple language to express the commonalities of existence and create the prerequisites for forgiveness, respect, understanding and acceptance.  Whilst dialogues are a beginning it is important that engagement goes beyond this, engaging practically with faith leaders and communities, to help resolve and avoid conflict and achieve gains that make a difference to people’s lives

In Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers, Kwame Anthony Appiah writes eloquently of the urgent need for ‘ideas and institutions that will allow us to live together as the global tribe we have become’ (2006: xiii).  The roots of all global crises can be found in human denial of the eternal principle of peace.   In order to fight this denial there needs to be self-critical reflection.  Sir Richard Burton once wrote that  ‘All Faith is false, all Faith is true: Truth is the shattered mirror strown In myriad bits; while each believes his little bit the whole to own’ (The Kasidah of Haji Abdu El-Yezdi), where he meant that you will find parts of the truth everywhere and the whole truth nowhere.  The shattered mirror concept enables us to see that ‘each shard reflects one part of a complex truth from its own particular angle’. Our mistake in the world today is to consider ‘our little shard can reflect the whole’ (Ibid: 8).

This is the current problem with all spiritual and religious teachings that everyone thinks that their little truth is the whole truth.  However if we think in the grander scheme of things (beyond theology and ideology) to unite humanity with peace, respect and understanding, then each of us (with our faith and spiritual teachings) have a bit of that shard of broken glass. This can be pieced together on issues of commonality, as opposed to focusing on our points of difference. Then we would have made the first step towards  spiritual reconciliation between communities. 

Thus all of the differences mentioned above represent small shards of glass which, in the analogy of Kwame Anthony Appiah, require careful positioning to create a compelling mosaic.  The initiatives described above then offers an antidote to sectarianism, the polarisation of different faiths in multi-cultural societies and the potentially divisive effects of selective aid flows to particular faith communities.   In particular, the partnership between Muslim Aid and UMCOR represents a template for a large cosmopolitan mosaic seeking to piece together the broken shards of a greater truth of serving humanity.  There is a need to remain committed to engineering the software needed to work effectively in a range of situation. This will never be easy, but remains vitally important for, as Kwame Anthony Appiah illustrates, it involves creating the very ‘ideas and institutions that will allow us to live together as the global tribe we have become’.

Initially published in The News Hub

Myanmar: The International Community's Dilemma

As international community focus centres on the events unfolding in Gaza, in Myanmar, the silent genocide of the Rohingyas is still continuing as it has been for decades previously. Like the Palestinians, the Rohingya are not only stateless or lack citizenship rights, they are officially in the eyes of the Government of Myanmar, identity less. Like the Palestinians with Israel and Zionism, the Rohingya are also dealing with a racist and xenophobic system & culture that links ethnicity to religion, a purist form that ironically saw an emergence in the early 20th century with Nazism.

The entire Myanmar nation is complicit, from the president down to the grassroots, in terms of how the Rohingyas are perceived, accepted and treated. The situation is so bleak that calls for the extermination of the race of the Rohingyas are not uncommon. This intolerance is not just reserved for the Rohingya community, but observers will testify that it exists towards Muslims (and even Christians) i.e. anyone non Buddhist. These anti minority sentiments especially against the Muslims are not as some claim an 'unfortunate social consequence of transition from authoritarianism to democracy'. They are part of a decade long persecution of the community in the country often led by the authorities who have manufactured, endorsed, committed and allowed to be committed such violence. Myanmar's military in particular have played a large part in manufacturing this Burman-Buddhist nationalist ideology and institutionalizing a culture of fear and distrust of minorities. In recent times, the Military have taken a back step largely due to Myanmar's chairmanship of ASEAN as well as planned elections of 2015 as reasons why there has been a restrained effort by the government whilst indirectly proxies have been allowed to perpetuate the violence and keep alive this xenophobic nationalistic rhetoric.

It is this fear of "the other" within Myanmar's society especially when it comes to the issue of the Rohingyas that are the "elephant in the room" for the international community much more adept at black-and-white depictions of Myanmar's history as a struggle between military and "democratic" civilian forces. So far the international community have failed to put pressure on the Government or indeed its famous opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi (who has famously remained reticent on this issue). It is also an issue that donors have been reluctant to chastise the government on. If anything, the international community has gone out of its way to avoid unnecessary criticism for the fear that it could jeopardise not only the transition of the country to democracy but more importantly the economic benefits that such a transition could bring.

This can only be the reason to explain the meekness behind certain actions of the international community this year itself. Take for example, the recent apology issued by UNICEF for using the term Rohingya in an official document, something that they tried to deny. Or the violence in March of this year that saw the destruction of millions of dollars of assets of the UN and other INGOs, which caused the agencies to withdraw for a few months from humanitarian operations in the affected areas of the Rakhine State. Despite such wanton destruction, unlike in other country there was hardly an international outcry.

The recent census which took place at the beginning of the year supported largely by the international community against the advice of activists and observers is yet another example of a confused position. Despite the government's undertakings to allow a self-identification of the Rohingya as well as an agreement on allowing Rohingya enumerators to conduct the census, both of these promises were broken. People were not allowed to self -identify while in some cases, officials had to be bribed in order for people to be allowed to participate in the census. The recent violence in Myanmar's second biggest city Mandalay against the Muslim community has sparked fears of a demographic redistribution in the preemption of a census not showing the desired ethnic distribution by the extreme elements of Myanmar.

This reluctance by the International Community to engage on the issue in the hope that democracy will wash away the problems is ideologically problematic. It doesn't fully comprehend the history of community relations; minority existence and ethnic tensions of the country. There are deep seated problems which cannot be solved merely through elections and a legal system. It needs a deeper engagement between faiths and a deeper social understanding of the concept of citizenship. This needs time and patience. It needs to undo the power of the military (and their vision of nationalism) and the influence that they have even within some of Myanmar's Buddhist monasteries.

Building trust and better relationships between ethnic groups from the grassroots level should be a priority for the Myanmar government supported by the International Community. A democratic system is not just about elections, but about citizenship and understanding basic notions of political rights. Much more effort and investment needs to be undertaken to ensure that these mechanisms and institutions are set right at the grassroots level before imposing a top-down electoral process. More must be done to hold the government accountable for the role it has played in supporting organizations and movements responsible for inciting hatred and violence. Its institutions need to understand the basis of the rule of law and ensuring safety and security for all.

Otherwise, there is a great danger of repeat violence prior to next year's elections. Myanmar and its people need to fundamentally understand the roles, rights and responsibilities of citizens in a multicultural, democratic country. This takes time, effort and investment and cannot and will not be solved by prematurely pushing for a census or elections. Programs at all levels of society need to be quickly developed to teach people how they can be part of a democratic process.

If Myanmar is to truly join the global community, the floor must be open to debate the issues of the Rohingya and other ethnicities. Approaching the problem both sensitively and directly, unlike even powerful figures in the pro-democracy movement, has to be part of the international community's much-needed road map for this country. If the foundations of democratic understanding at the grassroots level are not built, the 2015 elections will be a superficial showpiece and Myanmar runs the risk of retreating back into its shell.

this originally appeared on huffington post

The Buddhist-Muslim Fault Lines in Sri Lanka

Just more than a year ago, I wrote about a new conflict  that was threatening to overshadow Sri Lanka’s post conflict reconciliation journey.  The fear was that the constant organized provocation by extreme Sinhalese Buddhist groups particularly on the Muslims would necessitate a response, thereby culminating in communal clashes of a severe magnitude.  The fear for many was that a repeat of the infamous  1983 ‘Black July’ pogrom (then against the Tamil community) would once again be re-enacted.  The 1983 state sponsored pogrom is a stain on Sri Lanka’s conscience and history but in effect led to the 30 year old conflict which came to a bloody conclusion in 2009. Like then, there was a ramping up of provocative rhetoric against theTamils until an incident against the Sri Lankan army by the then relatively small LTTE group provoked the organized response. Whilst there was a pubic apology in 2004 by the then president, the underlying issues have never really been discussed and potential fault lines have been hidden.

On Sunday, those fears once again resurfaced after clashes erupted between Sinhalese protesting in a Muslim majority town in the South of Sri Lanka and Muslim inhabitants.  Like many of these incidents, it is hard to pinpoint who instigated what, but it is clear that there was enough of a provocation from the Sinhala Buddhist extremists to warrant a response from the Muslim community.  The rest is as they say history.  As riots, attacks and rumours started circulating, it was clear that the government was either caught off guard or as some people have alleged, was reluctant to properly intervene.  There is strong suspicion of a state complicity because clashes could have been avoided, had the planned protest through the Muslim town been prevented as many community leaders had requested.  In addition, the self censoring of state and national media to highlight the events taking place, the lack of an official statement on the issue and the general intransigence of the law enforcement agencies highlight a drop in confidence with regards the intentions of the government at least amongst the Muslim community.  Despite this social media outlets like Twitter and Facebook were able to keep an international spotlight on the incidents.  Of course, the events are evolving and there are reports of a snowball effect with clashes  taking place and tension in other parts of the south.  It is not necessarily clear whether  these are linked, or whether it is copy cat incidents.  However it does point to a wider malaise within society of a breakdown of understanding and trust between communities.  It is clear that there are deeper issues which are manifesting and being exploited into violence.

As things begin to calm down slowly, the effects of the weekend violence have long reaching ramifications.  There is an uneasy calm in Colombo as people are unsure of what the next couple of days hold.  Many Muslim children have not gone to school and businesses seem to be quieter than usual.  In other parts of the country, there have been protests.  There is a fear as to what the international community’s response would be especially the Muslim countries in particular the Middle East.  Sri Lanka has long dependent on the latter for support in international forums such as the UN Humani Rights Council sessions, whilst a large proportion of Sri Lankans are employed in the Middle East providing a huge contribution of GNP.

 It is also clear that the relationship between the communities has been affected.  Beruwala where some of the violence broke out is reputed to have the oldest mosque in Sri Lanka and is one of the first areas where Arab and Muslim traders came to Sri Lanka.  The Muslim communities in the south have traditionally prided itself on its close relationship with the Sinhalese and have always formed the Muslim political leadership that engaged within the political process and with the main political parties.  This familial trust has now been broken and will take a long time to be rebuilt.  It is not just about a political solution, now but it involves moral and astute religious and community leadership from all sides.  For the Sinhalese Buddhists in particular, it will need greater protection and confidence as they come under pressure from their extremist constituent’s for  ‘betraying’ their community.  There is hope though in terms of the monks and the lay people who have spoken out against the violence. 

There is no justification for the violence that ensued, but what is clear is that like in Myanmar, the Buddhist extremist groups are on a campaign to denigrate and eradicate the Muslims.  The Muslims of Sri Lanka can not fall into that trap of reacting as is expected nor can Sri Lanka go down the route of the Xenophobia exhibited by Myamar. They can take some comfort from the fact that with social media, there are more people speaking out and campaigning to stop such violence.

The international Islamophobia campaign that seeks to denigrate Muslims in the west has a ready audience in places like Sri Lanka and Myanmar where these extremist groups latch onto the hate rhetoric.  Unlike in the west though, whilst the campaigns are really steered around the issue of immigration and assimilation of migrants, in his part of the world, where the Muslim communities are indigenous and native, the rhetoric is spun around the very existence of the communities.

Sri Lanka’s  ethnic and religious fault lines are no closer to being healed or solved by this violence.  However what this has shown is that any part of the country (and not just the former war affected areas) are not only vulnerable but extremely fragile.  It is clear as the weekend violence has shown, that personal disagreements between people of different faith and ethnicities have a potential to flare up into communal clashes.  Thus community, religious and ultimately political leaders have to ensure that these differences are not hijacked by extremists.  This is now the challenges coming out of the recent spate of violence in Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lankan Muslim Diaspora Dilemma

This past week, incidents in Sri Lanka and abroad have illustrated the dilemmas facing the Sri Lankan Muslim community and its Diaspora constituents.  These incidents though isolated in occurrence have the hallmarks of being related to a wider malaise afflicting the community and the challenges they face

In London on the 5th of May, a bank holiday, a protest was held in front of the Sri Lankan High Commission and number 10 Downing Street by one of the many Sri Lankan Muslim Diaspora organisations.    However, don’t be fooled by the photos that are doing the rounds on social media or on some news sites.  It wasn’t the whole of the Sri Lankan Muslims in UK protesting as one article poorly intimated that it was.  It was one organisation out of 20 or so organisations that exist in the UK, coming from one specific part of the UK (and comprising of members largely from around the same geographical area in Sri Lanka) and around 650 out of a potential 25,000 + (exact figure is not known) Sri Lankan Muslims living in the UK.  Hence it was a minority out of a minority.  Why am I emphasising this?   Because poor journalism is creating much more problems than there exists.   It is also because it is necessary to show that there was not only no widespread support for this from within the UK and even actually from Sri Lanka.  In fact the majority of the Sri Lankan Muslim organisations and individuals in the UK did not support the protest.

I am one of those that was against the protest not because I dislike protesting.  Far from it, I was one of the active members and organisers of the Stop the War protests at the height of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and I have supported protests against the invasion of Gaza and so on.  Yet for me, this particular protest was ill timed, ill conceived, inopportune and simply inappropriate.  Frankly how does standing outside Number 10 Downing Street shouting largely in Tamil achieve anything apart from causing an annoyance to inhabitants, especially when they don’t understand what is being shouted out?  What help does it offer to the people on the ground, when we give more reason to those already critical of Sri Lanka to be more critical?

The organisers of the demonstration have been described as having ‘Political Myopia’, which I agree with especially when you take the term myopia to mean narrow-mindedness.  I would also add the description of ‘self-centred insensitivity’ to the list.  This is because despite all the opposition and counselling against it, both within the UK and from Sri Lanka, the organisation (and its supporters)  in question went ahead with the protest.  Hence there was an insensitivity to not understand the ramifications of this on the ground in Sri Lanka especially given opposition or a failure to actually understand its effect. As one person asked me ‘How is protesting in the UK going to help us in Sri Lanka?’  And that is precisely the point.  When much more is needed from a political and diplomatic side to put pressure on those elements inside and out of the government and the wider society to stop these types of hate filled incidents, how can we build the trust?  How can we engage with all those concerned and provide a common platform to challenge these bigots and their ideology?

Therefore if these people really wanted to protest or do something to vent out their frustration, then something more positive e should have been done as a coalition of all communities (including Sinhala Buddhists) upset by the way societal coexistence is slowly eroding in Sri Lanka and for me, we should have done something outside Buddhist temples in London.  My reasoning is that whilst the Government’s complicity is there, in its lax approach to enforcing the rule of law and bringing to justice those perpetrating hate speech and crimes, a large part of the responsibility has to be also laid on the shoulders of sections of the Sinhala Buddhist community who are culpable in this either through their silence in not speaking out when crimes are committed in the name of preserving Buddhism; or in their tacit and overt support. In particular, we have to hold a mirror to those who are living in the Diaspora.  After all it is notable  by their ‘silence’ how many in the Diaspora especially from the Sinhala Buddhist community have publicly spoken out against what is happening in the country to the Muslim and other minorities.  Despite many attempts just asking even through personal contacts, it has been disappointing not to get a response or that people skirt around this discussion.  One also has to look at comments on sites like the Colombo Telegraph, which is banned to the average reader in Sri Lanka, to ascertain the deep hate and antipathy felt towards the Muslim community (and other minorities).  Whether this is justified or not is another article that needs to be written.  However the mere fact is that one only needs to engage with the average Sinhala in the UK for example and you will find that there is deep seated prejudice which needs to be addressed. Hence if anything, the protest should have been to tell Sinhalese Buddhists to not allow their religion to be hijacked by extremists.  It should have been an opportunity to engage with sympathetic elements in the UK amongst the other communities in order to build a bigger alliance.   Ultimately it would have helped those who perceive diaspora protests as being linked to one extreme element of a community to change the lens with which they viewed this protest. This is what was learnt from the Stop the War coalition that planned all the Anti War protests.  It was not that we stopped anything but we were able to build networks and alliances of people concerned about a common cause so that they could champion together and no one could be labelled for belonging to one group or another.

Yet this is the big problem.  The diaspora amongst all communities in the UK are not united and are still very disparate.  There is still a reluctance to engage in meaningful discussion and any dialogue takes place under emotive circumstances.  This shows the increasing dilemma of the diaspora generations removed and time bound from the country of heritage.  Unfortunately it fits into the criticism levelled against us as the Diaspora.  We are generally not aware of the dynamics of the country or the evolving nature on the ground.  We are also largely oblivious of the repercussions of our actions in the UK in Sri Lanka.  We as the Diaspora have this intellectual arrogance that just because we live out of Sri Lanka, we know better.  Thus we only listen to what we want to listen to.  Hence whilst we largely remain untouched from the results on the ground we replicate differences in the UK.    We project our inherited differences from Sri Lanka onto internal political struggles and intra-community disputes in the UK which doesn’t help any matter related to Sri Lanka.

On analysis, the protest ultimately was not done primarily with the interest of the Muslim community in Sri Lanka at heart, but for some cheap attempt to score political brownie points.  This sounds very strong, but the question that has to be asked is if there was so much opposition from community leaders, representatives and organisations both in the UK and Sri Lanka, why did the organisation proceed with the protest?  It is either due to an arrogance that this group knows better or that there was some other reason not the interests.  Being intimately involved in the goings on of the Sri Lankan Muslim organisations, I am well aware that this particular organisation and some of its supporters has always been one to work by itself if it felt it was not on the leadership role.    Right from the word go, it has chosen not to be part of the umbrella body for the Sri Lankan Muslim organisations in UK, COSMOS, which has quietly been working in front and behind the scenes with all sorts of stakeholders to put pressure on the government and more importantly to support the quiet actions of the leadership back home who have reacted calmly and wisely, and been praised for this.   It has chosen to work not only in opposition but sometimes in parallel to COSMOS, criticising it for its ‘ineffectiveness’.  Criticism for COSMOS is also unfounded.  It has been working to build support from the community in order to come up with a dignified and unified response to the crisis and somehow avoid falling into the same trap of emotive responses that has affected other diaspora organisations.  It has chosen to consult with Sri Lanka in order to ensure that what is done in the UK has no repercussions for people in Sri Lanka.  The quiet diplomacy has meant that COSMOS has reached out to the High Commission, other community and faith organisations and others in order to ensure that the true ground reality is shared.   The High Commission in particular has always reciprocated this engagement policy by COSMOS by not only opening its doors to hear the concerns, but in its limited capacity to try and do something about it despite it not being able to really influence things back in Sri Lanka.   True at certain times COSMOS has appeared slow and lethargic and I have been one to criticise some of its actions and statements.  However the incentive by COSMOS to build coalitions to take this from an ethnic to a national problem that is felt by all sides is one that has to be supported.  This is ultimately where the discussion has to move towards.  The concern of the decline of religious freedoms and the overt radicalisation and extremist rhetoric spouted by one group is detrimental to the whole country.  It thus needs collective responses.

We should not forget that this is the need of the hour.  The recent incidents in Aluthgama shows the challenges facing the community and the country as a whole.  With perpetrators of hate speech and violence allowed to roam freely and the law seemingly unable or unwilling to rein them in, it is only a matter of time before frustrations reach a tipping point.  Once this is reached, the space becomes open for extremists to abuse and exploit.  In order for this to happen, collective pressure (from all communities) needs to be maintained.  This is how the new police force to look into religious crimes came into being and needs to be supported.

These are testing times for the country and the communities.  Our response as individuals and communities where we don’t learn from the past will determine how the future will look like.  As Diaspora whose lives and future are now in the countries where we live, our self-centeredness and naïve sincerity cannot ransom the future of the country of our heritage.

This originally appeared on Groundviews

Listening To Her Stories

This weekend will commemorate 5 years of the end of the bloody conflict in Sri Lanka.  As has become customary, the main protagonists and/or their supporters will be marking it in very different but usual manners.  There is still a lot of debate as to how Sri Lanka and Sri Lankans mark the conclusion of one of the most traumatic periods of their history.  The whole aspect of the war in its entirety remains a largely controversial subject and is often a subject that is not necessarily discussed in gatherings.  This perhaps alludes to how the subject needs to be approached and also what is the perception of those bold enough to approach the subject.  Thus Sri Lankans are not afforded and do not afford themselves of an opportunity for healing and to some extent, this responsibility seems to be abrogated to the powers that be.  The challenges of how the country as a whole understands and remembers this is still being debated, as the National Peace Council  aptly put it, ‘No wise country celebrates war victory after a civil war’.  This thus remains an obstacle that all communities and stakeholders with an interest for the benefit of Sri Lanka, need to understand and overcome.  Whilst the past can’t be a ball and chain for the future, we also need to understand it in order for us to move forward without.

In the deliberations and commemorations that will follow this weekend, one thing that will be conspicuous by its absence will be the voices from the ground.  Over the last 5 years, what has always struck me about the narrative that has been currently spun by all sides when discussing the war and commemorating it, is how far removed it is from the reality on the ground.  There is much to be reflected at the top end of the spectrum in terms of reconciliation and moving forward.  Equally though, it is not just at the top level that work needs to be done.  It is important that work is done at the grass roots level.  Unfortunately experience shows that it is hardly the case that grass roots are engaged with meaningfully.  They are talked at, talked to and talked with.  However rarely are they just allowed to talk and for the rest of us just to listen.  My experience in Sri Lanka especially during the end of the war in the camps in Manik Farm, allowed me to listen to many of the Tamil refugees.  Their message resonated with others I met with from other communities across the country, affected by the tsunami and the conflict.  While political and military solutions may bring an absence of war, however peace cannot come about or be sustained without significant engagements of all strata of society with tangible benefit being seen by everyone, in particular the  affected communities. In other words, ‘peace’ means nothing if parents still cannot feed their family or cannot afford to buy medicines for their sick children or people do not live in an atmosphere of respect and understanding with the rule of law.

The issue of conflict and the narratives spun around it at the macro level often means that that we forget these micro voices.  We do not see the broken families that have to pick up the pieces of lost childhood and parentless generations.  The narratives do not consider the societal breakdown in communities from all sides dealing with the stresses and trauma of post conflict be it alcoholism; drug abuse; domestic and sexual violence.  These lesser heard voices unfortunately do not grace the annals of heroism or martyrdom that make up the commemoration of the conflict and its end.

However it is in these lesser heard voices far away from the posturing and political platitudes that the real story of the conflict and its consequences for the country and its people are told and have to be understood. These stories explain the real sacrifice that has been made in the villages across Sri Lanka.  As in any conflict, it is the women and children who sacrifice and suffer the most but yet are seldom heard.  It is their stories that we need to commemorate and celebrate.

To my mind, there is none that does this well than the Her Stories LK project. I came across this at the opening of its exhibition in London in March.  It is simply a platform that allows the simple and sad stories of Sri Lankan women who have suffered from the conflict to be told. The stories are from all parts of Sri Lanka and comprises of stories from Tamils, Muslims and Sinhalese women that include soldiers’ wives and mothers as well as mothers and wives of Tiger cadres.  This means that the project aims to be as balanced as possible.  It doesn’t take any sides nor does it make any political statements.  Nor do they choose to criticise or lament larger political issues.

However in providing that opportunity for the lesser heard voices to be heard, it makes a statement.  Simply put, ‘war ultimately is about the people on the ground who suffer for the actions of their representatives and hence the post conflict should also be about the same people’.  By humanising the conflict through the individual stories that are exhibited, what we are reminded off is that whilst we may posture and pontificate our various positions, ultimately it is the people at the ground that will suffer the consequences with generational ramifications and it is these people who should be the first priority in any post conflict work.   This is the challenge facing Sri Lanka now.

Remarkably though, looking at the stories, you are struck by the humanity that is shown in the desire for a just and peaceful future.  The views show a shared history and a shared hope for the future.  There is no sense of recrimination or revenge, but just a quiet noble desire to move ahead and provide a better future for their children.  In these stories are lessons that many of us working on these issues need to be taught or at least reminded of.

The narrative of women is often lost in conflict and is virtually nonexistent for mothers.  Yet as guardians of memory through stories and pictures and gatekeepers to the next generations, Her Stories LK provide a vital glimpse into what Sri Lanka could look like.  When you hear this phrase “We are Brothers and Sisters from one mother” repeated across the country, you understand, that if these people who have every reason to be hateful and vindictive having lived through the conflict, can be hopeful, then the rest of us perhaps need to listen more.

Her Voices LK offers a space for many of us living comfortably outside Sri Lanka, untouched by the harsh realities on the ground and unscathed by the conflicts that were fought, to actually come to some platform of commonality.  Many of us living outside Sri Lanka,  have taken our own positions in this debate against the ‘other’, yet very few of us understand who the ‘other’ is and what their expectations are.  We are quick to judge and dismiss. This space shows us the true expectations for the country and its next generations as told to us in the stories of our mothers and it is vital that we who live abroad are able to take some time to listen to these stories.  Yes the stories are sad, but they are also full of strength, resilience and hope.  Ultimately it is about just wanting to live their lives and make it better for their children.  This is something that we need to think about.

Her Stories LK will be exhibiting their work at the Oval from the 17th – 19th May, in the run up to the T20 match between Sri Lanka and England.  Given the significance of the 18th of May which is the official end of the conflict in Sri Lanka when normally emotions run high especially in the wake of a visiting Sri Lankan cricket team, the exhibition offers an opportunity to pause and reflect.  For those intending to protest against the team or against the protesters, it also offers an opportunity to hear first hand of the conflict and the struggle to record eye witness accounts.  It is serendipitous that a week after Mother’s day, we are hearing the real voices of mothers affected by the conflict in Sri Lanka.  To be true to the concept of peace, equality and justice in Sri Lanka, the least we can do is at least pause and use the opportunity to listen to ‘Her Stories’.  Ultimately it might help us to reflect on what the greater good is for the country.

this orignially appeared here

The Sri Lankan Muslim Diaspora Dilemma

This past week, incidents in Sri Lanka and abroad have illustrated the dilemmas facing the Sri Lankan Muslim community and its Diaspora constituents.  These incidents though isolated in occurrence have the hallmarks of being related to a wider malaise afflicting the community and the challenges they face.

In London on the 5^th of May, a bank holiday, a protest was held in front of the Sri Lankan High Commission and number 10 Downing Street by one of the many Sri Lankan Muslim Diaspora organisations.    However, don’t be fooled by the photos that are doing the rounds on social media or on some news sites.  It wasn’t the whole of the Sri Lankan Muslims in UK protesting as one article poorly intimated that it was.  It was one organisation out of 20 or so organisations that exist in the UK, coming from one specific part of the UK (and comprising of members largely from around the same geographical area in Sri Lanka) and around 650 out of a potential 25,000 + (exact figure is not known) Sri Lankan Muslims living in the UK.  Hence it was a minority out of a minority.  Why am I emphasising this?   Because poor journalism is creating much more problems than there exists.   It is also because it is necessary to show that there was not only no widespread support for this from within the UK and even actually from Sri Lanka.  In fact the majority of the Sri Lankan Muslim organisations and individuals in the UK did not support the protest.

I am one of those that was against the protest not because I dislike protesting.  Far from it, I was one of the active members and organisers of the Stop the War protests at the height of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and I have supported protests against the invasion of Gaza and so on.  Yet for me, this particular protest was ill timed, ill conceived, inopportune and simply inappropriate.  Frankly how does standing outside Number 10 Downing Street shouting largely in Tamil achieve anything apart from causing an annoyance to inhabitants, especially when they don’t understand what is being shouted out?  What help does it offer to the people on the ground, when we give more reason to those already critical of Sri Lanka to be more critical?

The organisers of the demonstration have been described as having ‘Political Myopia’, which I agree with especially when you take the term myopia to mean narrow-mindedness.  I would also add the description of ‘self-centred insensitivity’ to the list.  This is because despite all the opposition and counselling against it, both within the UK and from Sri Lanka, the organisation (and its supporters)  in question went ahead with the protest.  Hence there was an insensitivity to not understand the ramifications of this on the ground in Sri Lanka especially given opposition or a failure to actually understand its effect. As one person asked me ‘How is protesting in the UK going to help us in Sri Lanka?’  And that is precisely the point.  When much more is needed from a political and diplomatic side to put pressure on those elements inside and out of the government and the wider society to stop these types of hate filled incidents, how can we build the trust?  How can we engage with all those concerned and provide a common platform to challenge these bigots and their ideology?

Therefore if these people really wanted to protest or do something to vent out their frustration, then something more positive e should have been done as a coalition of all communities (including Sinhala Buddhists) upset by the way societal coexistence is slowly eroding in Sri Lanka and for me, we should have done something outside Buddhist temples in London.  My reasoning is that whilst the Government’s complicity is there, in its lax approach to enforcing the rule of law and bringing to justice those perpetrating hate speech and crimes, a large part of the responsibility has to be also laid on the shoulders of sections of the Sinhala Buddhist community who are culpable in this either through their silence in not speaking out when crimes are committed in the name of preserving Buddhism; or in their tacit and overt support. In particular, we have to hold a mirror to those who are living in the Diaspora.  After all it is notable  by their ‘silence’ how many in the Diaspora especially from the Sinhala Buddhist community have publicly spoken out against what is happening in the country to the Muslim and other minorities.  Despite many attempts just asking even through personal contacts, it has been disappointing not to get a response or that people skirt around this discussion.  One also has to look at comments on sites like the Colombo Telegraph, which is banned to the average reader in Sri Lanka, to ascertain the deep hate and antipathy felt towards the Muslim community (and other minorities).  Whether this is justified or not is another article that needs to be written.  However the mere fact is that one only needs to engage with the average Sinhala in the UK for example and you will find that there is deep seated prejudice which needs to be addressed. Hence if anything, the protest should have been to tell Sinhalese Buddhists to not allow their religion to be hijacked by extremists.  It should have been an opportunity to engage with sympathetic elements in the UK amongst the other communities in order to build a bigger alliance.   Ultimately it would have helped those who perceive diaspora protests as being linked to one extreme element of a community to change the lens with which they viewed this protest. This is what was learnt from the Stop the War coalition that planned all the Anti War protests.  It was not that we stopped anything but we were able to build networks and alliances of people concerned about a common cause so that they could champion together and no one could be labelled for belonging to one group or another. 

Yet this is the big problem.  The diaspora amongst all communities in the UK are not united and are still very disparate.  There is still a reluctance to engage in meaningful discussion and any dialogue takes place under emotive circumstances.  This shows the increasing dilemma of the diaspora generations removed and time bound from the country of heritage.  Unfortunately it fits into the criticism levelled against us as the Diaspora.  We are generally not aware of the dynamics of the country or the evolving nature on the ground.  We are also largely oblivious of the repercussions of our actions in the UK in Sri Lanka.  We as the Diaspora have this intellectual arrogance that just because we live out of Sri Lanka, we know better.  Thus we only listen to what we want to listen to.  Hence whilst we largely remain untouched from the results on the ground we replicate differences in the UK.    We project our inherited differences from Sri Lanka onto internal political struggles and intra-community disputes in the UK which doesn’t help any matter related to Sri Lanka.

On analysis, the protest ultimately was not done primarily with the interest of the Muslim community in Sri Lanka at heart, but for some cheap attempt to score political brownie points.  This sounds very strong, but the question that has to be asked is if there was so much opposition from community leaders, representatives and organisations both in the UK and Sri Lanka, why did the organisation proceed with the protest?  It is either due to an arrogance that this group knows better or that there was some other reason not the interests.  Being intimately involved in the goings on of the Sri Lankan Muslim organisations, I am well aware that this particular organisation and some of its supporters has always been one to work by itself if it felt it was not on the leadership role.    Right from the word go, it has chosen not to be part of the umbrella body for the Sri Lankan Muslim organisations in UK, COSMOS, which has quietly been working in front and behind the scenes with all sorts of stakeholders to put pressure on the government and more importantly to support the quiet actions of the leadership back home who have reacted calmly and wisely, and been praised for this.   It has chosen to work not only in opposition but sometimes in parallel to COSMOS, criticising it for its ‘ineffectiveness’.  Criticism for COSMOS is also unfounded.  It has been working to build support from the community in order to come up with a dignified and unified response to the crisis and somehow avoid falling into the same trap of emotive responses that has affected other diaspora organisations.  It has chosen to consult with Sri Lanka in order to ensure that what is done in the UK has no repercussions for people in Sri Lanka.  The quiet diplomacy has meant that COSMOS has reached out to the High Commission, other community and faith organisations and others in order to ensure that the true ground reality is shared.   The High Commission in particular has always reciprocated this engagement policy by COSMOS by not only opening its doors to hear the concerns, but in its limited capacity to try and do something about it despite it not being able to really influence things back in Sri Lanka.   True at certain times COSMOS has appeared slow and lethargic and I have been one to criticise some of its actions and statements.  However the incentive by COSMOS to build coalitions to take this from an ethnic to a national problem that is felt by all sides is one that has to be supported.  This is ultimately where the discussion has to move towards.  The concern of the decline of religious freedoms and the overt radicalisation and extremist rhetoric spouted by one group is detrimental to the whole country.  It thus needs collective responses.

We should not forget that this is the need of the hour.  The recent incidents in Aluthgama shows the challenges facing the community and the country as a whole.  With perpetrators of hate speech and violence allowed to roam freely and the law seemingly unable or unwilling to rein them in, it is only a matter of time before frustrations reach a tipping point.  Once this is reached, the space becomes open for extremists to abuse and exploit.  In order for this to happen, collective pressure (from all communities) needs to be maintained.  This is how the new police force to look into religious crimes came into being and needs to be supported.

These are testing times for the country and the communities.  Our response as individuals and communities where we don’t learn from the past will determine how the future will look like.  As Diaspora whose lives and future are now in the countries where we live, our self-centeredness and naïve sincerity cannot ransom the future of the country of our heritage.

Understanding the role of ‘Zakat’ in humanitarian response

Zakat’ is the Muslim practice of charitable giving based on accumulated wealth. It is one of the five pillars of Islam and is obligatory for all Muslims who are able to do so. The past 30 years has seen a growing interest in humanitarian activity among Muslims as part of expressing their spiritual obligations of Zakat.

There is little to no information available on the use of Zakat in humanitarian response. However, estimates suggest that it could be significant in terms of both volume and potential impact upon humanitarian response.

The GHA Programme’s recent report Humanitarian assistance from non-state actors: What is it worth? briefly refers to Zakat as a potentially significant yet largely untapped source of funding for humanitarian assistance. Dr Jemilah Mahmood and Amjad Mohamed Saleem explore this issue further.

UNDERSTANDING CHARITY AND ZAKAT IN ISLAM

The recent report by the Global Humanitarian Assistance (GHA) Programme: Humanitarian Assistance from Non-State Actors: What is it Worth? makes interesting and pertinent reading, pointing to a paradigm shift in thinking around both humanitarian funding and programme delivery as new non-state actors have emerged as key players alongside traditional institutional actors. Here we explore the potential role of ‘Zakat’ in humanitarian assistance as a significant form of non-state humanitarian funding.

The concept of charity is central to social justice, which is a sacred value in Islam and a tenet of the faith. Indeed the Qur’an considers an act of charity as more than just a good deed because of its function in balancing social inequalities. The Qur’an also has numerous references to the importance of creating a just society and provides a framework for justice in inter-personal relationships toward the poor and needy, and connections between communities and nations.

Muslim non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and other Islamic charitable institutions are therefore seen as instruments of social justice, and are part of the theological, intellectual and cultural heritage of the Muslim society. The instruments are divinely entrenched in the teachings of Islam, as illustrated in the following verse from the Qur’an: “If anyone saved a life it would be as if he had saved the life of the whole of mankind…’ (5:32). It is these types of teachings that have inspired acts of charity, concern for others and the provision of social welfare to be an integral role in Muslim societies for the last 1400 years, as without them faith is incomplete.

Charity in Islam, in the traditional sense of a transfer of material resources from the rich to the poor, falls into two categories in Islam: voluntary (Sadaqah) and obligatory (Zakat). These practises are supposed to empower communities and address their needs sufficiently enough to lift them out of their vicious cycle of poverty.

CHALLENGES FACED IN USE OF FUNDS COLLECTED THROUGH THE ZAKAT PROCESS

There is no shortage of funds for charitable causes coming from the Muslim world. The issue is not about the amount to be collected but what is done with it. A study in 2012 has estimated that every year, somewhere between US$200 billion and US$1 trillion are spent in “mandatory” alms and voluntary charity across the Muslim world. In fact, Islamic financial analysts estimate that “At the low end of the estimate, this is 15 times more than global humanitarian aid contributions in 2011 of $13 billion (UN Financial Tracking System)”. However, as economist Habib Ahmed calculated in 2004 – Muslim countries could lift all of their poor people out of poverty with only a third to a half of all potential Zakat collections.

These numbers speak not only to the duality of increasing religiosity and wealth in the Muslim world, but also to the globalisation of increasing poverty. It is estimated that one-quarter of the Muslim world is living on less than $1.25 a day (calculated by IRIN based on 2011 Human Development Index) with increasing needs for humanitarian response, recovery and peace-building in the Muslim world from Somalia, Syria, Mali among many other countries.

However in recent times, there has been a lack of understanding (and spirit) with regards Zakat (and Sadaqah). Zakat is largely regarded as charitable giving and its potential to go one step further and empower communities has not been adequately realised. As a result, the wide breadth of possibilities, which includes supporting non-Muslims; the levying of administration costs for the collection of Zakat; vital infrastructure projects; peace building and human trafficking initiatives remain grossly under funded and unexplored with Zakat. Herein lies the major challenge of balancing the role of Zakat in its conventional understanding with the contemporary demands of society today.

THE WAY FORWARD

If we are to move forward in terms of really contributing to humanitarian and development initiatives, we need to evaluate and understand the empowering concepts of Zakat in order to develop new models for implementation that are not only congruent with the times but address the empowering aspects of Zakat. At the end of the day, charity in Islam is about redistributive justice as the hoarding of wealth is not permissible and carries penalties if found guilty of such practice.

Private donors – including Muslim NGOs and other Islamic charitable institutions involved in the allocation of funds collected through Zakat – need to move away from the idea that humanitarian response is merely an act of charity and philanthropy, but a tool for empowering communities to build resilience to poverty and humanitarian assistance.

this originally appeared here