EASTER IN
SRI LANKA
China’s BRI and the
Weaponisation of Religion
DARINI
RAJASINGHAMSENANAYAKE
A Paul Klee painting named ‘Angelus Novus’ shows an angel looking
as though he is about to move away from something he is fixedly
contemplating. His eyes are staring, his mouth is open, his wings
are spread. This is how one pictures the angel of history. His face is
turned toward the past. Where we perceive a chain of events, he sees
one single catastrophe which keeps piling wreckage and hurls it in
front of his feet. The angel would like to stay, awaken the dead, and
make whole what has been smashed. But a storm is blowing in from
Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such violence that the
angel can no longer close them. The storm irresistibly propels him
into the future to which his back is turned, while the pile of debris
before him grows skyward. This storm is what we call progress.
—Walter Benjamin (1968)
I
t is as if someone, perhaps Walter Benjamin’s ‘Angel of History’,
somehow managed to pause the storm that blows from Paradise;
the ceaseless getting and spending that lays waste our powers in the
mad rush to modernity, progress and development. Three weeks after
the Easter Sunday carnage in Sri Lanka on 21 April 2019, the nation
appears to have paused collectively to mourn for a long, long moment.
Or, perhaps, a fear psychosis has gripped a land once only too familiar
with terrorist violence, now puzzled, confused and unconvinced by
international terror expert narratives that claim that the Islamic State
(IS) had somehow chosen a tropical island for its caliphate, following
the Hollywood-style ‘shock and awe’ attacks staged by hooded villains
morphed into backpacker suicide bombers on Easter.
Summer 2019, Volume 46, Numbers 1
140
D A R I N I
R A J A S I N G H A M - S E N A N A Y A K E
:
E A S T E R
I N
S R I
L A N K A
As tourists retreated and so-called friendly countries—whose
intelligence experts arrived in droves to craft the post-disaster
narrative on Sri Lanka—issued travel warnings on Paradise Lost,
commentators familiar with the country note that it has taken much
longer to return to normal than at any point during its 30-year war
when such similar explosions rocked the island like the LTTE attack
on the Central Bank of Sri Lanka. Has the country lost its resilience?
Or is it wiser, questioning the narratives, the potted history that
dooms Sri Lanka to endless spirals of ethnic and religious violence
that are so easily reproduced?
There exists a long history and tendency of fetishising ethnoreligious violence in much of social science literature and political
analysis on Sri Lanka, to the point that economic and social inequality
factors that might lie at the root of conflict are often elided. Indeed, many
Colombo NGOs, funded by the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID) and Asia Foundation, had undertaken detailed
studies of inter-religious relations for their US funders.
Many columns by international and local political analysts,
experts and social scientists have tried to fit and frame the Easter
attacks on Catholic churches and luxury hotels by suicide bombers
in Buddhist-majority Sri Lanka into what is already known: either
about ethnic, party–political conflicts, or religious tensions and
the history of so-called ethnic conflict between the state and the
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Most of these analysts have
focused on religious identity politics, and forgotten, or chosen to
ignore, geopolitics and the island’s strategic location in the Indian
Ocean that is being rapidly militarised as a Cold War looms between
the United States and China—between America First and Asia
Rising—the fact that tourist hotels were attacked, and that there
was also a clear economic motive in the design of the crime and
targets selected.
What many current analyses ignore, or choose to ignore,
is that there is no history of conflict between local Muslim
communities and Christians. Therefore, the lens of religious conflict
might not be relevant to an explanation of the Easter Sunday crime,
the designers of which clearly had other interests.
As various expert narratives in Sri Lanka pile up, with as
many unanswered questions, it is clear that a paradigm shift—even
a break in history—has occurred. Old explanatory frames, lenses
141
I I C
Q U A R T E R L Y
and perspectives of, and for, analyses, seem increasingly inadequate
to illuminate or decode the attacks on sea-front luxury hotels and
coastal churches by minority Muslims in the absence of any motive
or local history of attacking fellow minority Christians. Undoubtedly,
it is as Benjamin described it (1968).
The process of thinking involves not only the flow of
thoughts, but their arrest as well. Where thinking suddenly stops in
a configuration pregnant with tensions, that configuration receives a
shock by which it crystallises into a monad. A historical materialist
approaches a historical subject only where he encounters it as
a monad. In this structure, he recognises the signs of a Messianic
cessation of happening, or, put differently, a revolutionary chance in
the fight for the oppressed past. He takes cognisance of it in order
to blast a specific era out of the homogenous course of history by
blasting a specific life out of the era or a specific work out of the
lifework. As a result, the lifework is preserved in this work and, at
the same time, cancelled—in the lifework, the era; and in the era,
the entire course of history. The nourishing fruit of the historically
understood contains time as a precious, but tasteless, seed.
Indeed, it is increasingly evident that a monad has
appeared—a configuration pregnant with tension. The facts on the
ground, the local realities of everyday life belie the global grand
narrative of foreign experts that the Islamic Caliphate somehow
came to be interested in a tropical Indian Ocean island. A paradigm
shift has taken place in patterns of conflict in the country, and so too
a paradigm shift is needed to blast open the continuum of history
to explain the apparently ‘religious’ violence. Taking cognisance of
this shift, this break in history is important to lay open the easy, lazy
history of ethno-religious violence replayed.
Clearly, the Sri Lankans’ struggle for a narrative to frame and
contextualise events, and explain the plot, continues. Even as it is
increasingly clear that history is no longer seen to be fit for such a
purpose, or no longer adequate to provide substantive answers, such
questions arise as: why now; why did the IS choose Sri Lanka; and
why an Indian Ocean island with a Buddhist majority? The questions
seem to call for a different sort of analysis, a hermeneutics of suspicion
(Ricoeur, 1970), or in Benjamin’s words, ‘to brush history against the
grain’ (1968).
142
D A R I N I
R A J A S I N G H A M - S E N A N A Y A K E
:
E A S T E R
I N
S R I
L A N K A
The analysis of the Easter carnage in Sri Lanka that has
focused on the massacre of innocents, which took place in three of
the nation’s coastal churches and in three luxury hotels in Colombo,
largely overlooks the fact that the ocean-front, super-luxury, five-star
Shangri La Hotel was the only non-Sri Lankan ‘asset’ (to use security
jargon) that was targeted. Moreover, it appears that the masterminds
of the crime ensured that two bombers were used at the Chineseowned Shangri La Hotel, whereas the other targets were hit by a
single bomber in this carefully coordinated and minutely planned
logistics operation.
That there were no reprisals against the Muslims of Sri Lanka two
weeks after the carnage, which killed over 250 people and wounded
many more, is a tribute to the leadership of the Church and Cardinal
Malcom Ranjith, the Archbishop of Colombo. It is also a tribute to the
silent majority of peaceful and long-suffering people of Sri Lanka who,
through this disaster, may perhaps rediscover the value and strength of
the island’s diverse religious communities and traditions.
However, unless solid answers regarding the motives, and
masterminds, of the crime are forthcoming, so that the future may
be discerned and the national fear psychosis calmed, the quiet
may not be sustained. Dead men tell no tales—those who might
have had some clues appear to have died later in Sainthumaruthu.
The number of foreign intelligence agencies in the country appear
counterproductive to a focused investigation conducive to revealing
the masterminds behind the carnage.
The struggle for the narrative and search for motives behind
the suicide bombing has revealed much about radicalised and
deluded local youth who killed themselves and others. Nevertheless,
little is known about the master planners of the crime. The manner
in which the story is framed to explain this apparently religious
and economic violence will be most critical to how soon these most
recent wounds inflicted on the already beleaguered nation may be
healed, and the recovery of the country as a whole from this attack
on its diverse and plural public culture and economy.
At the time of writing, stories about plans to bomb bridges and
indefinite school closures amidst parents’ fears for the safety of their
children continue to circulate based on unspecified, mainly foreign
‘intelligence’, warnings. Attempts may be ongoing by some of the
masterminds of the carnage to build and sustain this fear psychosis
143
I I C
Q U A R T E R L Y
to prevent a return to normal life, and to start a cycle of violence
to destabilise the nation in order to distract and deflect attention
from the search for them. There have been unfortunate incidents of
harassment of refugees from Pakistan and Afghanistan, even as there
has been significant support, both private and state, for them.
Therefore, it is urgent and important that the masterminds,
who guided the suicide bombers, are identified: to name, shame
and let them know that they are being watched, even if relatively
powerless to do much else at this moment, in order to try to prevent
more violence.
There is evidence to suggest that attempts are ongoing to
mislead the Sri Lankan people about the identity of the masterminds.
For example, the video of IS leader Abu Bakr al-Bagdhadi,
purportedly speaking of the attacks in Sri Lanka, appears to have
an audio recording that has been introduced later. It has been
questioned, and rejected, by Arab and French intelligence experts.
Cardinal Malcom Ranjith has suggested that there is a hidden hand
behind the carnage and the subsequent Islamophobic IS narrative
that encouraged attacks on innocent Muslims.
COLOMBO’S SEA-FRONT LUXURY HOTELS
In addition to the three selected churches, suicide bombers hit three
carefully chosen five-star hotels, out of a line-up of six- or seven-star
hotels on Colombo’s seafront luxury hotel strip, indicating that this
was also a planned and systematic attack on the country’s already
debt-trapped and currency manipulated economy.
The Galadhri and Taj Hotels that are located on the same strip
and flank the Shangri La escaped unscathed, as did others—Galle
Face, Hilton and Ramada. The other two hotels that were targeted,
the Cinnamon Grand and Kingsbury, were owned by local Sri
Lankan conglomerates. John Keells (JKH), which owns Cinnamon
Grand, is building its most recent Tri-Zen property development
with China State Construction Engineering Corporation, Ltd.
According to the Chinese Embassy in Colombo, four oceanic
scientists, who were staying at the Kingsbury, were among the six
Chinese nationals who lost their lives. The deceased included Li
Jian, 38; and Pan Wenliang, 35, who were senior engineers at the
South China Sea Institute of Oceanology of the Chinese Academy of
Sciences (SCSIO). Two others—Li Dawei, 30, and Wang Liwei, 26—
144
D A R I N I
R A J A S I N G H A M - S E N A N A Y A K E
:
E A S T E R
I N
S R I
L A N K A
were from the First Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural
Resources, according to the state-run Global Times. They had been
scheduled to board the Chinese research vessel Shiyan 3 to begin
the China–Sri Lanka joint scientific exploration missions in the East
Indian Ocean.
MARITIME DOMAIN AWARENESS: INDIAN OCEAN COMMUNITIES AND
THE DIEGO GARCIA MILITARY BASE
The design of the attack and the venues—churches in coastal
communities with congregations whose livelihoods largely depend on
fisheries; Indian Ocean resources in Colombo, Negambo and Batticaloa;
and luxury hotels—suggests a theme as well as a coded message.
Marine affairs is the red thread that runs through the design
and detail of the attacks—no inland cities were targeted—and
thus a pattern emerges. It would appear that the engineers of the
attack were attempting to draw a security cordon sanitaire around
strategically located Sri Lanka that sits atop major global energy
and trade routes, and crucial global Internet Undersea Data Cables
(UDC). After the attack and arrival of droves of intelligence experts
and agencies, habours in the island were locked down.
In other words, it would appear that the masterminds had an
interest in Sri Lanka’s oceans and marine affairs, described by the
US ambassador in Sri Lanka, Alina Teplitz, as ‘Maritime Domain
Awareness’ (MDA) in a recent interview to Ada Derana TV, regarding
the US’ Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) that provides
assistance to Sri Lanka for so-called ‘poverty alleviation’.
While it has been announced that the IS is behind the
attacks and the suicide bombers, there is no evidence at this time to
suggest that the IS, which has a history of operating in deserts and
mountainous regions, had any special interest in the Indian Ocean,
or China, or affinity for tropical islands, or even a great deal of MDA
to support the narrative of Singapore’s Technical University expert
Rohan Gunaratne, who has established connections to IS terror
networks and the US military business industrial complex.
Gunaratne recently claimed that the IS had declared South
Asia as a ‘Province of the Islamic Caliphate’, and would continue
to target Sri Lanka—a claim seemingly calculated to spread fear
psychosis among the general public of Sri Lanka. It is, in fact, the
United States that invented a new ocean called the ‘Indo–Pacific’,
145
I I C
Q U A R T E R L Y
reflecting keen interest in Indian Ocean MDA, also evident in its
so-called MCC Compact with Sri Lanka.
However, it was only on 25 February 2019, in a landmark
case, that the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United
Nations’ (UN) highest court, called on the United Kingdom (UK) to
decolonise the Chagos Islands. Located just south of Sri Lanka and
the Maldives, the islands were to be returned to Mauritius to enable
its native peoples, who were forcibly displaced to build the topsecret US military base, Diego Garcia, to return. The Chagossians
were brutally driven from their Indian Ocean island home in the late
1960s so that the UK government could lease the islands to build a
US military base and a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Black Site.
The Diego Garcia military base, the largest base outside
mainland United States, is currently maintained under the ruse of
fighting global terrorism. Maintaining Diego Garcia, despite the ICJ
ruling, is a top US priority, and arguably the second ‘hidden signifier’
or motive for the Easter attacks in Sri Lanka.
For years, the base has been vital to the US military, serving as
a landing spot for bombers that fly missions across Asia, including
over the South China Sea. The ICJ ruling, which is ‘advisory’, raises
questions about its future, as the UK has a history of following ICJ
rulings. CNN quoted Carl Schuster, a former director of operations
at the US Pacific Command’s Joint Intelligence Center, who said
that the Indian Ocean base was ‘very important to US operations in
the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean’ and its loss could have a major
impact, forcing the United States ‘to change logistics support’ in the
region. ‘It wouldn’t weaken (US military strength) necessarily but
logistics are everything,’ he added. Diego Garcia was used to guide
tactical aircraft supporting US military missions in Afghanistan and
Iraq, and featured remote satellite tracking stations, an Air Force
Space Command and Pacific Air Force support and logistics teams.
The United States has faced legal challenges to its Diego
Garcia base for the past five decades. The bereft Chagossians
took their case to the British courts, hoping to exert pressure.
Subsequently, the attempt by the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)
and the UN to constitute the Indian Ocean as a ‘zone of peace’ posed
a challenge to US operations on Chagos Islands. In 1970, the NAM
summit in Lusaka, Zambia, declared the Indian Ocean a ‘zone of
peace from which Great Power rivalries and competition, as well as
146
D A R I N I
R A J A S I N G H A M - S E N A N A Y A K E
:
E A S T E R
I N
S R I
L A N K A
bases’ must be excluded (Prashad, 2019). The United States attacked
this idea; Admiral Elmo Zumwalt told the US Congress in 1974 that
the USSR stood atop the ‘central part of the West’s energy jugular
down to the Persian Gulf’. For that reason, the Indian Ocean—and
Diego Garcia—has ‘become a focal point of US foreign and economic
policies and has a growing impact on our security’ (ibid.).
Questions arise as to why various foreign intelligence
agencies and experts involved in the investigation have refrained
from drawing attention to information regarding the economic
and geopolitical dimensions of the attack, and would rather focus
exclusively on religious motivations and networks, especially as
there appears to be no history or motive for Sri Lankan Muslims to
bomb their fellow minority Christian brothers and sisters.
A PARADIGM SHIFT
These bombings, targeting minority coastal Catholic communities and
churches, constitute a ‘paradigm shift’ in patterns of ethno-religious
co-existence and conflict in Sri Lanka. This is indexed by the fact that
there was, and is, no local history of, and no motive for, Muslim–
Christian violence in the country as both Christians and Muslims are
minority communities. Both have sometimes been under siege from
extremist majoritarian Buddhist groups. There is no conceivable
motive for local Muslims to attack Christians, who number roughly
8 per cent of the Sri Lankan population. In fact, during the conflict
years, Christians, who are well integrated into Sinhala and Tamil
communities, often played an important bridging role.
In such a context, recourse to ‘history’, past violence, and
endless excavation and examination of old patterns of ethnic conflict
in Sri Lanka serve little purpose—rather, they are likely to obscure the
facts on the ground. This is precisely what the planners of the attacks
want in order to create distractions from the big picture, or on-going
geopolitical developments and external engagements in the country.
Few self-respecting Sri Lankan social scientists or political
analysts would, or should, accept at face value the ‘narrative’ of
Muslim–Christian violence to explain this attack 10 years after
war between the state and the LTTE ended. Critical researchers on
religious coexistence and conflict, who study deep structures and
patterns of conflict and amity between multi-religious communities,
are increasingly convinced that the bomb blasts at three churches
147
I I C
Q U A R T E R L Y
are part of a wider, systematic, post-war weaponisation of religious
identity politics by external parties to divide, distract and destabilise
this strategically located island which is in the cross hairs of Cold
War tensions between the United States, India and its allies on the
one hand, and China on the other.
As such, explanations that focus on old patterns of internal
religious politics and violence rather than external and geopolitical
explanations may not be very useful to grasp the problem and help
try and prevent more violence. The narrative of Christian–Muslim
conflict is a Euro–American one that does not mesh with local
history and will not gain traction in Sri Lanka, but may provide
clues to the external parties involved in, and behind, the highly
sophisticated logistics operation of simultaneous bombing in
disparate locations.
The bomb attacks on St. Anthony’s Church in the heart of
Colombo’s old city, which is a famous multi-religious site with a
long history of attracting believers of all faiths—Buddhists, Hindus
and occasional Muslims—were attacks on multi-religiosity, religious
amity and tolerance in Sri Lanka. Likewise, the suicide bombings
were not and should not be seen merely as attacks on a single
minority religious community. In fact, they are body blows to the
very heart of the county’s plural multi-religious social fabric and,
ipso facto, an attack on all religious congregations in the country.
They were undoubtedly meant to sow confusion, mistrust and a
spiral of violence in the island and destabilise the country, making it
prey to larger geopolitical forces and superpower designs.
The Bodu Bala Senava (BBS) and Ravana Balaya, two ultranationalist Buddhist organisations emerged in the post-war period
in the south, while the Ravana Senai, a Hindu organisation, came
into existence in the predominantly Tamil northeast, all of them
seemingly targeting Muslims and Christians. During fieldwork
interviews at multi-religious sites in Batticaloa in 2018, I was
informed by members of a Sufi shrine that funding from Saudi Arabia
and Iran was changing the texture of Islam and gender relations
in the country, as women did not wear the burqa and hijab a few
decades ago. Similarly, Catholic and Anglican community members
noted that ‘new churches’ with more fundamentalist leanings
that did not blend with local cultural traditions, unlike the older
established churches, presented a challenge to established traditions
148
D A R I N I
R A J A S I N G H A M - S E N A N A Y A K E
:
E A S T E R
I N
S R I
L A N K A
and practices of inter-religious amity and cooperation. Funding from
various so-called diaspora groups and networks was also resulting
in competitive religiosity and religious outbidding, and struggles for
public space and territory in the post-war period. Ten years after the
war between the state and the LTTE, we are clearly witnessing what
may be termed the ‘Weaponisation of Religious Identity Politics’, and
the fanning of religious conflict in this vulnerable island nation.
1983 REDUX?
Sri Lanka has historically been home to four great world religions—
Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Islam—and has a long
history of multi-religiosity. However, religion, like ethnicity, has
been periodically weaponised by local political actors who use
and politicise religion, whom we may term ‘ethno-religious
entrepreneurs’. Nonetheless, there are also clearly external interests
working in collusion with local political actors in order to divide,
distract, rule and loot the resources of the Indian Ocean and
advance external geostrategic interests. Ever since the United States’
invention of the Indo–Pacific, there has been increased militarisation
of the Indian Ocean, with Sri Lanka’s ports being visited by warships
of big powers and their allies.
As political transitions and elections loom in the country,
we may be seeing a revival of 1983, even as geopolitical tensions
and instability increase. Even then, in 1983, there were external
interests at play, as ethnic tensions and civilian riots were militarised
and weaponised by a neighbouring state’s intelligence agencies and
security apparatus. Small nations are often targets of ethno-religious
identity politics and weaponisation in Cold War proxy wars—and
these are dangerous times, as in 1983.
Crucial information on the Bondscam at the Central Bank
of Sri Lanka, where the prime minister was implicated, was to be
revealed as well as information on the inquiry into threats to the
life of the president after the end of the Sinhala–Tamil new year and
Easter holiday. A pattern of religious riots may be discerned when
pro-Western leaders are in peril. Anti-Muslim riots in Digana and
Kandy took place when the report of the Presidential Commission
of Inquiry into the Bondscam (PCOI) was released, apparently
as a distraction from calls for impeachment of those responsible.
While those who are being protected with violence may not have
149
I I C
Q U A R T E R L Y
direct knowledge of the attack, they are complicit in so far as proper
investigations into the Digana attacks were not carried out and the
culprits tried in open court. The bomb blasts at the churches appear
to be part of a systematic weaponisation of religious identity politics
by external parties working with small, local political–religious
groups, even as the current regime’s days are numbered and elections
due in a year.
Ironically, but perhaps not coincidentally, the worst cases of
ethnic and religious violence in Sri Lanka have taken place during
neo-liberal governments—as with the anti-Tamil pogrom of July
1983, the anti-Muslim riots of May 2018, and the current attack
on multi-religion religious tolerance and coexistence. Moreover,
there is clearly an economic dimension to these attacks, which are
an attempt to destabilise the Sri Lankan economy, debt-trapped and
suffering from currency manipulation.
At this time, further attempts to promote a fear psychosis
about the IS and pass a new, so-called anti-terrorism law to prevent
democratic protests, instrumentalise party–political divisions, and
postpone elections in order to keep the current pro-American prime
minister in power, may be ongoing by external parties and related
intelligence agencies and networks.
In this context, it is important that all communities keep calm
and seek to understand some of the deeper historical patterns, structures
and issues that underlie these terror attacks on religious diversity and
tolerance in Sri Lanka, as well as new geopolitical developments.
ZOOMING OUT: LOCAL–GLOBAL CONNECTIONS
Even though a naïve article written by New York Times journalist
Hannah Beech (2019) may suggest that Sri Lanka is a country where
ethnic and religious ‘hate’ is entrenched, in the final analysis, in
the bigger picture of global geopolitics China may well emerge as
the hidden signifier in the violence experienced, with a Cold War
brewing in the Indian Ocean seemingly coming to a head.
Yale University academic Eugene Ford (2017) details how,
during the height of the Cold War, religion was researched and
weaponised to fight communism and socialism. Ford, who analysed
declassified Asia Foundation documents, guides us to recognise
exogenous factors that configure patterns of apparently endogenous
religious violence in Asia, and deep structures and histories that
150
D A R I N I
R A J A S I N G H A M - S E N A N A Y A K E
:
E A S T E R
I N
S R I
L A N K A
appear as roadblocks to incitements of religious violence in some of
South and Southeast Asia’s diverse and multi-religious polities. Sri
Lanka and Burma were both part of the US Southeast Asia strategy
to use Buddhism to fight communism at the time.
At the same time, Islam too was weaponised in Afghanistan,
various parts of Southeast Asia and the Middle East against
communism and socialism, and later violence was directed inward
and within its own communities, including the Sunni–Shia conflict.
Asia Rising and the quietly emerging superpower, China
(that has yet to make formal comment on events in Sri Lanka on
Easter Sunday), with its ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI),
may well have been the prime target of the bombings. Moreover, in
recent times, there has been a propaganda war to blame China for
Sri Lanka’s primarily international sovereign bond, IMF, Eurobond
and ADB development debt trap.
In such a context, the Easter Sunday suicide bombers appear
as pawns, bit-players—victims, even—caught in a murky web of
intertwined terror and counterterror networks, and the narrative of
a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ following Huntington’s thesis emanating
from war-torn Syria and Iraq, as much as from Saudi Arabia, Israel
and the United States. Simultaneously, hundreds of dead, wounded,
maimed, injured, grief stricken and traumatised, along with the Sri
Lankan economy in shambles after the attacks, all currently appear
as ‘collateral damage’ in a high-stakes global (in)security great game
in the Indian Ocean.
Finally, critical thinking, or what philosopher Paul Ricoeur
termed the ‘hermeneutics of suspicion’, or ‘brushing history
against the grain’, as Jewish Frankfurt school social theorist Walter
Benjamin, who lived and worked in an extended ‘moment of
emergency’ in Nazi Germany, termed it, is called for at this time of
crisis in Sri Lanka. Careful analyses and decoding of global and local
‘expert narratives’ on economy and security are needed to critique
an increasingly popular narrative of a so-called clash of civilisations
that renders Christian–Muslim conflict and other forms of religious
violence a self-fulfilling prophesy everywhere in the world.
Such narratives often are intended to further strategic
security and business interests, including massive sales of arms,
hyper-security and surveillance systems, and the setting up and/
or continued existence of the colonial occupation of Indian Ocean
151
I I C
Q U A R T E R L Y
islands, with military bases like Diego Garcia, even after the ICJ
ruled against it in February 2019.
A study of deep local histories, structures and patterns of
ethno-religious coexistence as much as conflict, coupled with local
knowledge and attention to global geopolitical currents, enables
critical thinking that may possibly bring us nearer the truth, so that
informed action could be taken to avert future violence, both locally
and globally.
POSTSCRIPT
A historical materialist cannot do without the notion of a present
which is not a transition, but in which time stands still and has
come to a stop. For this notion defines the present in which he is
himself writing history. Historicism gives the ‘eternal’ image of the
past; historical materialism supplies a unique experience with the
past. The historical materialist leaves it to others to be drained by the
whore called ‘once upon a time’ in historicism’s bordello. He remains
in control of his powers, man enough to blast open the continuum
of history.
Benjamin saw the ‘enlightenment’ view of historical progression
as a justification of the status quo: ‘a triumphal procession in which
the present rulers step over those who are lying prostrate’ (1968: 256).
It is once such triumphant history is set aside or blasted open that
we are able to see the ongoing colonisation of the Indian Ocean and
South Asia to advance Euro–American imperialism.
One such blasting open of the (neo)liberal historicist narrative
occurred on 14 May 2019, when Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith spoke of
the intervention of Western nations in Sri Lanka to the Sri Lankan
News First TV channel. While noting that the United States has
strategically placed its warships across the globe in key positions,
the Archbishop pointed out that their positions allow the United
States to take over any country at a moment’s notice. The Cardinal
explained that countries like the United States want to create conflicts
in other nations in order to sell the weapons they manufacture; that
they create these conflicts by identifying countries and groups with
differences, and highlighting these differences. He also noted that
they implement a programme that creates disharmony among various
religions and groups in order to create these conflicts. It was his belief
that the IS is a part of such a programme.
152
D A R I N I
R A J A S I N G H A M - S E N A N A Y A K E
:
E A S T E R
I N
S R I
L A N K A
The Easter Sunday carnage happened a few weeks prior to
the Sri Lankan government signing a Status of Forces Agreement
(SOFA) with the United States, which would enable US forces to
enter Sri Lanka in a situation of ‘emergency’. Two days prior to the
Cardinal’s comments, Sri Lankan Army Commander LieutenantGeneral Mahesh Senanayake had opposed SOFA. Senanayake
termed it a lop-sided treaty that ‘undermines’ domestic laws and
tax regimes without reciprocity from the United States. Several
opposition parliamentarians had earlier alleged that Washington had
requested that American military personnel be subject to US law and
exemption from taxes when in Sri Lanka at a time when the United
States has all but declared war on Iran, unilaterally withdrawn from
the Nuclear Pact, and imposed sanctions on Iran while trying to
choke China, India and Sri Lanka which are dependent on Iranian
oil imports.
The story is told of an automaton constructed in such a way that
it could play a winning game of chess, answering each move of an
opponent with a countermove. A puppet in Turkish attire, with a
hookah in its mouth, sat before a chessboard placed on a large
table. A system of mirrors created the illusion that this table was
transparent from all sides. In reality, a little hunchback, who was
an expert chess player, sat inside and guided the puppet’s hand by
means of strings. One can imagine a philosophical counterpart to
this device. The puppet called ‘historical materialism’ is meant to
win—always. It can easily be a match for anyone if it enlists the
services of theology that today, as we know, is wizened and has to
keep out of sight.
REFERENCES
Benjamin, Walter. 1968. ‘Theses on the Philosophy of History’. Illuminations: Essays
and Reflections. Translated by Harry Zohn, edited by Hannah Arendt. New York:
Harcourt, Brace & World.
Beech, Hannah. 2019. ‘A New Enemy but the Same Hate: Can Sri Lanka Heal its
Divisions?’, New York Times, 5 May.
153
I I C
Q U A R T E R L Y
Ford, Eugene. 2017. Cold War Monks: Buddhism and America’s Secret Strategy in
Southeast Asia. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
Huntington, Samuel P. 1997. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.
New York: Touchstone.
Prashad, Vijay. 2019. ‘A US Military Base, a British Occupation and a UN Judgment
for the Decolonization of Mauritius’, Peoples Dispatch, 12 March.
Ricoeur, Paul. 1970. Freud and Philosophy: An Essay on Interpretation. Translated by
Denis Savage. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
154