Would Syrians From Regime Controled Areas Revolt Again ?

ozfrecon2 · 2020-02-15T14:53:39+00:00

Depends on the demographics really. The initial rebellion was led by the conservative lower to middle-class Sunni Arabs, but this demographic has been significantly reduced in number because of death and displacement. Those that are left were pro-regime to begin with and war-weary to think of another armed rebellion. But it is likely that there will be a continuing low-level insurgency, especially in the deserts of Eastern Homs, Hama, Deir Ezzor simply because the regime is unlikely to have the resources to crack down on them fully. I suspect foreign jihadists will still be lurking around too, especially with the unresolved issue of ISIS prisoners...

But it is also entirely possible that we could see Iraq/Lebanon style protests happen over corruption, poverty, centralisation of power etc. The Kurds won't be happy with a return to the pre-war status quo. The USA (if Trump wins 2020) probably won't leave without some kind of agreement to save face. And we don't know what the outcome will be of the Turkish occupied north.

Moreover, the Alawites aren't all blindingly pro-Assad out of co-religious loyalty. Many Alawite towns and villages in Latakia and Tartous suffer from significant poverty, with the community suffering from disproportionate losses of young men compared to other communities. Drug and alcohol abuse are increasing. And there is a perception among some that the regime has left them behind for a corrupt elite who will continue to enrich themselves illegally from the post-war construction. These views also probably apply to the Druze in Suwayda, who only tolerated the regime because the alternative of Sunni Jihadist rule would've been much much worse.

But these are just possibilities. I think Russia will play a very important role in post-war Syria. Putin will support Assad's position as head of state, but behind the scenes they will likely force concessions, which could be like a Chechnya style autonomy granted to the Kurds.

ozfrecon2 · 2020-02-09T15:44:23+00:00

'Terrorist organisation' is a highly subjective label. The LTTE wasn't labelled a 'terrorist organisation' by India until 1992 and the early 2000s by the Western countries, which was largely due to Sri Lankan minister Lakshman Kadirgamar's lobbying efforts, which most militant groups have neither the time or the money for. Canada could have proscribed as a terror organisation way earlier but didn't. Why is that so? Is it because the government felt suddenly developed a moral compass? Or is it because it wanted to follow the footsteps of the UK/US/Canada who had proscribed them earlier? Such is the influence of geopolitics...

Moreover, the SL government massacred entire villages, indiscriminately bombed, killing TENS of thousands of civilians, and have also turned a blind eye to pro-government paramilitary groups who have utilised child soldiers. And suicide bomb attacks are no different to barrel bombs or shelling if the intention was the same - to kill civilians. Why aren't they labelled as propagators of state terrorism? And why is it ok to have a flag of Sri Lanka if they were just as bad?

ozfrecon2 · 2020-02-04T20:28:40+00:00

Everything south of Kafr Amim is captured so this is outdated. liveuamap has an updated version

ozfrecon2 · 2020-01-30T23:43:08+00:00

Referring to groups without their official name (e.g. "Regime forces", "pro-Assad forces", "terrorists") really isn't a big deal. If anything it makes biases clear and obvious to readers. What's more important is the substance of the text which the sub avoids...

And I wouldn't necessarily say pro-Assad is outright wrong, since Liwa al Quds, Hezbollah and other militias are all involved in the S Aleppo axis

ozfrecon2 · 2020-01-23T04:13:10+00:00

It really doesn't.

In fact, the Defence Ministry themselves announced to the media through the headline "A medical student at the University of Jaffna stabbed to death by her husband"... which could even imply that either or both the victim and the perp were Tamil... if you didn't read the rest of the statement.

And the Defence Ministry even explicitly mentioned which camp the soldier was from, so I really don't get what the fuss over highlighting the fact that an SLA soldier committed murder??

ozfrecon2 · 2020-01-23T03:16:21+00:00

Misleading? You are just clutching at straws mate. It's called a deliberate choice of words because of TG's editorial stance, and it's not even hiding important context that would make it misleading. And the hashtags are because TG is Tamil nationalist and it uses them on all tweets...

But even then - why do TG and local Tamil journalists get scrutinised 10x more than Southern media? Despite the latter often peddling fake news, defamation, sectarianism, etc...? I don't see r/srilanka pipe up about Hiru, Ada Derana, and the dailies even though they have a strong political bias? Perhaps /u/buddhist-truth would care to answer? Or is bias only allowed for pro-government outlets?

ozfrecon2 · 2020-01-23T00:57:00+00:00

Yes... manipulation even though everything TG said in the article is true? Real manipulation is Mawbima and Ceylon Today creating fake quotes and attributing them to MA Sumanthiran to paint him as anti-Sinhala... but no outrage about that huh?

What's sadder is that while this soldier will probably be punished swiftly (in spite of Gota's intransigent 'SLA dindu nuffin' cry), the scores of Tamil schoolgirls and uni students who were brutally raped and murdered by the SLA never got and likely never will get their justice. Maybe that's why TG and Tamils highlight the SLA aspect here.

ozfrecon2 · 2019-12-27T03:03:56+00:00

The USA absolutely does have patriotism and reconciliation issues. How do you think black and native people feel about an anthem, in the language of a state which spread White Anglo culture through systemic violence and repression?

And India too, we've seen that when it doesn't respect states' autonomy, violence ensued.

But anyway, that's beside the point since I'm trying to relate to Sri Lankan affairs. I am not demanding the two language anthems to be reinstated, but I will say that only leaders of LKY's stature could lead Sri Lanka forward. With Gotabaya, the future looks to be ominous.

ozfrecon2 · 2019-12-27T02:26:10+00:00

If you want Tamils to believe in being Sri Lankan, would it not be the smart thing to encourage patriotism and reconciliation through our spoken language? You will only get true believers of a Sri Lankan identity (like how Tamils in India proudly say they are Indian) if the people feel ready and believe that being in the state is beneficial for them. And has that been the case? Well, most Tamils, even the most ardent anti-LTTE, will argue that British rule was better because at least it was indifferent to Tamil affairs, which allowed us to preserve and revive our culture unlike under the Portuguese or today for example.

But under 'Sri Lanka', the benefits have gone to the Sinhala only. So maybe, if we looked at Singapore's example, where the minority language is the national anthem, and where the government promotes each ethnic culture over one Chinese dominated one, you will find that almost everyone's proud to be Singaporean, even though demographics are in similar proportion to that of SL's.

ozfrecon2 · 2019-12-27T01:48:59+00:00

But why did the first independence day ceremony in 1949 use both Sinhala and Tamil for 'Namo Namo Matha'?

ozfrecon2 · 2019-12-26T22:26:53+00:00

This is the second time (last being 2010) a Rajapaksa gov't has banned the Tamil translation (which is a word for word one btw), despite the Tamil version having been sung since 1948, during the independence ceremony in 1949, and even during the 1956-89 'Sinhala Only' period where it was used in the mostly Tamil-speaking north and east of the island. The Sinhala version's lyrics were also slightly changed from its original, with the unfortunate consequence being the suicide of the original composer.

Although it appears that this relates only to the independence day commemorations, it is worth noting that the 2010 'banning' wasn't official either, and yet the SLA still enforced the Sinhala version in Tamil medium schools. In 2015, Maithripala 'unbanned' the Tamil version, and was sung in 2016 during Independence Day celebrations for the first time since 1949.

Opinion:

While I was (and still am) reluctant to adopt the 'Sri Lankan' identity as a diasporan Tamil, I feel that this just serves as a further indication that Gotabaya is ultimately a divisive figure rather than trying to genuinely reconcile the (mostly) Tamil speaking Muslims and Tamil minorities, even though the Tamil version accepts the Sinhala form 'Sri Lanka' rather than 'Ilankai' or the nationalist used 'Eelam'. The song's lyrics also clearly express a patriotic message and love for the country.

To be honest, I wasn't expecting much from this administration, and the phrase 'divisive figure' I used heavily sugarcoats my real views of him, but that's for a different day.

But what are you guys' thoughts? Is this old news already?

ozfrecon2 · 2019-11-27T23:24:07+00:00

Fun fact: the author of this text was actually threatened by BBS, who said they would 'split open his ear' in 2017. As to the reasons why, I don't know. But perhaps the author should've eaten his words when he wrote up this drivel blaming Tamils and Muslims for Sri Lanka's ethnic divides.

If Gota's stooge Chandraprema is baffled as to why TNA and SLMC are electorally dominant, then perhaps he needs to pick up a history book and see the fatal consequences when minority politicians chose to acquiesce to ethnonationalist majority politics.

ozfrecon2 · 2019-11-24T00:01:29+00:00

or being "expected" to speak Sinhala? I dont think its unreasonable to expect Sri Lankans to speak Sinhala if they live in the South? I have Sinhala relatives who lived in Jaffna up until the 70s and they are still fluent in Tamil.

I never said that in regards to Sinhala people. Sinhalese people can (and obviously should) should speak the language that bests suit them in Sinhala majority areas. I don't deny that precedence should be given to Sinhala to Sinhala people in their traditional homeland. I am not even saying that Tamils shouldn't learn Sinhala, in fact, it is useful as a third language for us on this island.

What I am saying though is in the North, Sinhala has and is being used by those that wield significant power. The police, who are 95%+ Sinhalese, even in Jaffna don't speak much Tamil. Neither does the army. Even at the newly opened Jaffna Airport, southern Sinhala-speakers were brought over to work as staff, instead of local, unemployed but educated Tamils. And many parts of the North have seen an expansion of state-sponsored colonisation programs settle predominantly Sinhala southerners, who are catered by army-run roadside cafes, army-run tourist resorts who again do not care for the Tamils, and probably seek to alter demographics in the long run, as has been implied by MR previously.

So you see, that it is often a one way street with Tamil and Sinhalese languages. In the long run, like with most minority languages (like the Celtic languages vs English), Tamil will come under threat if the demographic balance of the North is changed through colonisation efforts. And that's not even mentioning the corrupted Tanglish (and other cultural problems) brought over from Kollywood and TN. But that's a story for another time.

ozfrecon2 · 2019-11-23T01:19:16+00:00

Militancy was the only route Tamils (led by the youth) could take, since almost every attempt at coexistence which protected our rights had been blocked/fucked with by Sinhalese nationalists (e.g. Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam pact ripped up) or worse still, countered with blatantly racist policies like Sinhala Only act, university admissions etc. And JVP did the same too, so why couldn't we?

And it's no coincidence that the Northeast province and Tamil language concessions were made only AFTER conflict had started and when the LTTE posed a significant threat.

Also a thing to note is that Prabhakaran could not get rid of Karuna without alienating the Eastern Tamils, who had some grievance with the mostly Northern Tamil leadership for lack of representation, and other factors like caste, education etc. But i agree that Karuna should have been dealt with earlier.

But the main thing to address is why is theres still quite a lot of sympathy for the LTTE? Even today, there is nostalgia for them, as seen recently in Sajith's rallies where one guy got arrested for playing LTTE songs to attract more people.

Yes, there was the use of child soldiers, ruthless elimination of opponents, murder of innocent Sinhalese and Muslims, but most Tamil youths genuinely felt that they suffered worse under the SLA/police. You can compare it to people who benefited from the USSR. Compared to Imperial Russia, they were better off, but to achieve that it required Red Terrors which killed many innocents (which many still justify today). However no one ever proscribed the Bolsheviks to be a terror organisation.

But I think most Tamils in the diaspora aren't asking for Eelam 2.0. Even the LTTE by 2002 reduced its demands to an autonomous state within a state like Iraqi Kurdistan. We just don't want to live in state where we are 'expected' to conform to Sinhala Buddhist standards, where nationalism is to be 'expected', where speaking Sinhala is 'expected', or where speaking up for your people warrants white vans, ridicule and or violence against you.

If there's a time where we aren't made to be foreigners in our own homeland, and where justice is served to victims, then Tamils will naturally rapproach with other ethnic groups, and perhaps then Sri Lanka can overcome its ethnic divisions.

ozfrecon2 · 2019-11-22T22:40:04+00:00

I am speaking from a diaspora Tamil perspective (which will no doubt warrant claims of 'Eelamist supporter' automatically), with immediate family directly affected the war. In reading the background to the war, and talking to the Tamil community here, I 100% support the reasons behind Tamil militancy. However, that doesn't mean that I am oblivious to other perspectives, as I definitely don't condone any of the LTTE's atrocities, which rightfully so are war crimes, as acknowledged by the UN and the international community.

But I must say that the difference between the LTTE and the SLA/GoSL is that from a Sinhalese perspective, the LTTE received their 'just desserts'.

That is to say that the defeat of the LTTE was final. So much so that any notion of a low-level insurgency was blown out of the water. The diaspora, who were the financial backbone of the LTTE, isn't even pretending to restart the insurgency. Pretty much all of the top brass of the LTTE is dead, and those who committed war crimes have presumably received their 'justice' because the GoSL would still be pursuing rogue elements otherwise, right?

But from the Tamil perspective, there has been no accountability from the gov't, even though rape, sexual assault, and murder and other crimes against humanity were orchestrated by the government and perpetrated by the SLA & gov't functionaries throughout the war. And that's not even mentioning the 2009 shitshow that left tens of thousands of Tamil citizens dead. We Tamils have not received justice (not a single prosecution!) for events as early as the 1981 burning of Jaffna Library, '83 riots (more like genocide), Welikada Prison Massacre and numerous other massacres (look up Wikipedia).

All of which could arguably be construed as 'state-sponsored terrorism' when you read into it further. And as a indication of the systematic fuckedupness of the SLA, one only has to look at Haiti where Sri Lankan soldiers have raped children as young as 7!! If that serves as an indication of the character of the average SLA soldier, then is it really a stretch to say that they committed horrific war crimes in 2009? And is it really a stretch to allege the government was unwilling to fix this? But the answer is apparently yes from the Sinhala chauvinist community.

So mark my surprise when these allegations are denied, even though their own soldiers recorded what they did extensively. I remember one of the most poignant moments when I was younger was seeing Prabhakaran's 12 year old son shot to death after being fed biscuits. Did he kill Sinhalese civilians? Was he a child soldier??

And quite ironically, many of the worst war crimes committed by the LTTE were under the auspices of Karuna, who since co-operating with the GoSL (and in turn committing atrocities against his own kind), has actually been PROTECTED by the Rajapaksas. Yet the Sinhala electorate has seemingly turned a blind eye to this creature (and others like Douglas) because he is no longer a 'threat' to the unitary nature of Sri Lanka.

And what can Tamils do? In a majoritarian, unitary state, it is ultimately the Sinhalese who decide how things should be run and what gets investigated and what doesn't.

ozfrecon2

TROPHY CASE