Kadirgamar Identified

--Nandaka Maduranga Kalugampitiya

 

 After Sri Lanka’s Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar was assassinated on the 12^th of August, 2005, the incident became the issue of primary importance for almost all the local media. The media institutions were in a kind of competition with each other to bring the latest news regarding the assassination and the way the inquiries were being conducted. The institutions, especially local newspapers, began to talk about Mr. Lakshman Kadirgamar extensively rather than just reporting on what had happened. My short note and comment aims to see how Mr. Kadirgamar’s identity was constructed by local newspapers after his assassination.

 

Almost all the Sinhala and English local newspapers have shown a tendency to project Mr. Kadirgamar as a brilliant diplomat and the best foreign minister Sri Lanka has ever had who contributed immensely to uphold the name of the country among the international community. The following is a rough translation of the first paragraph of the article titled “Kadirgamar Ghathanaya saha Athuru Katha” (Kadirgamar’s Assassination and Related Stories) published in Lanka:

 

A few days have elapsed since the Tiger terrorists had killed the best foreign minister Sri Lanka has ever produced. He sacrificed his life for the betterment of the Sri Lankan State. Mr. Lakshman Kadirgamar was a leader who had become a major obstacle for the Tiger terrorists in attaining their goals and accomplishing their mission. He was committed to establishing a respectable peace that could be acceptable for all the peoples in Sri Lanka while endowing the Tamil community with democracy and human rights. He employed his special skills in order to elevate the dignity of the Sri Lankan State. Because of that the Tamil Eelam Tiger Terrorists killed him.

 

Divaina reported, “Mr. Lakshman Kadirgamar who was the most brilliant diplomat, a rare intellect, and a far-sighted and veteran politician bids farewell to the nation today.”

 

These newspaper accounts also seem to focus attention on the fact that Mr. Kadirgamar was born a Tamil. The article titled “Weerawarayekuge Nikmayama” (The Departure of a Hero) states, “this incident could be regarded as an instance where the death of a Sri Lankan Tamil citizen became the reason for the grief of the entire nation.” Ajith Samaranayaka of Sunday Observer makes the following observation that highlights Mr. Kadirgamar’s Tamil identity:

 

What made his mission almost impossible was that he was a Tamil but yet he carried out his task with typical aplomb which made him a hate figure in the eyes of the extremist Tamil opinion.

In death as in life Lakshman Kadirgamar will be cynically dismissed by these quarters as the token Tamil in the Cabinet, an anglicized Tamil who had no roots in the Jaffna Tamil community.

 

These accounts depict Mr. Kadirgamar as an exceptional Tamil citizen who contributed immensely to uphold the fame of the country. These accounts at the same time carry the implication that it is not within the orbit of a Tamil to carry out his/her duties as Mr. Kadirgamar did on behalf of the country. If by any chance Mr. Kadirgamar had been a Sinhalese by birth, these newspapers would not have highlighted his Sinhalese identity. Accordingly, we can see a strong demarcation between the Sinhalese and Tamil “sub-identities” within the large Sri Lankan identity. At the same time these accounts also suggest that the Sri Lankan Government is primarily Sinhalese in character. Mr. Kadirgamar has been seen as a Tamil who was only a part of the Sinhalese dominated Cabinet. This projects him as an ethnic figure transformed into a national figure.

 

One of the most significant trends in constructing the image of Mr. Kadirgamar is to attribute a certain Sinhalese and Buddhist identity to him. The following passage is a translation of the first paragraph of an article published in Divaina. The Article had been given the title “Sebe Sinhalayekuge Maranaya” that can be translated as “The Death of a True Sinhalese.”

 

A man who was more Sinhala than most of the present-day Sinhalese and a better Buddhist than most of the present-day Buddhists was killed last Friday. This is a country where people try to be more Sinhalese than King Dutugemunu; this is a country where people think they know Buddhism better than the Lord Buddha did. In such a country that is full of fools, Lakshman Kadirgamar, who was born as a Tamil and who sacrificed his life for the unity and territorial integrity of the country, is going to be buried.

 

In the course of the article the note has also been made, “Lakshman Kadirgamar was concerned with the unity of the country more than most of the Sinhala Buddhists were.”

 

Quoting Rev. Daranagama Kusaladhamma Thero, Lanka makes the point, “he (Mr. Kadirgamar) was a better Buddhist than those leaders who claim themselves Buddhists.” The article also says:

 

A number of foreign ministers have served on behalf of Sri Lanka since its independence. There were Buddhists among them. However, the service that has been rendered by Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar for Buddhism cannot be matched by the service rendered by any of those Buddhists or foreign ministers.

 

According to these accounts, Mr. Lakshman Kadirgamar who was born as a Tamil Protestant Christian died as a Sinhala Buddhist. The idea that he was more Sinhala and Buddhist than most of those who call themselves Sinhala Buddhists has frequently been emphasized. In my opinion, these accounts are based on the assumption that the true patriot of the country has to be always a Sinhala Buddhist. The fact that Kadirgamar stood for the unity and territorial integrity of the state has made him a Sinhala Buddhist. This indirectly implies that all non-Sinhala Buddhists cannot be regarded as true patriots of the country. Here we can see how the Sinhala Buddhist “self” gets constructed as opposed to the non-Sinhala Buddhist “other”.

 

Accordingly, these newspaper accounts attempt to construct Mr. Lakshman Kadirgamar’s identity based on three factors: that he was the best diplomat and foreign minister Sri Lanka has had, that he was born as a Tamil (rather an Anglican Tamil) but still acted as a true patriot, and that he had become a true Sinhala Buddhist in spirit.

 

All these newspaper accounts say that Mr. Kadirgamar was a true son of the soil. These also seem to project him as an ideal Sri Lankan who sacrificed his life for the nation. They also suggest indirectly that the Sri Lankan identity is something that is always associated with the notion of being Sinhala and Buddhist. This is the main reason behind his getting identified as a Sinhala Buddhist before he began to be seen as a true Sri Lankan. He would not have been given the status of the ideal Sri Lankan if he had been seen as anyone but a Sinhala Buddhist.

 

The way these accounts construct Mr. Kadirgamar’s identity may lead someone to see him as a person who always stood for the interests of the majority Sinhala Buddhists. As a result, this would also lead Mr. Kadirgamar to be read as a traitor who fought against the interests of certain powerful minority movements like the LTTE that is said to represent the interests of the minority Tamils.

 

The question I ask here is: is there a different way of approaching the assassination of Mr. Kadirgamar and assessing his contribution to the people of Sri Lanka. We are mourning his death, but how do we mourn? This is the conundrum I am in..

 

 

 

 

 Works Cited

  

Samaranayake, Ajith. “Lakshman Kadirgamar April 1932 – August 2005.” Sunday Observer. 14 Aug. 2005: 06.

 

“Kadirgamar Ghathanaya saha Athuru Katha.” Lanka. 21 Aug. 2005: 08.

 

“Bauddha Yei Kiyaganna Naayakayanta Wada Ohu Honda Baudhdhayek!” Sandakadapahana (of Lanka). 21 Aug. 2005: 04-05.

 

“Sebe Sinhalayekuge Maranaya.” Divaina. 15 Aug. 2005: 01.