LTTE
and the Assassination of Rajiv Gandhi
Guest Column by
Dr Geeta Madhavan
(The views
expressed are author’s own.)
"It (India)
must stop all military assistance given to
Sri Lanka, remove the ban on our movement
and recognise our struggle. I like to
point out that our movement and our people
are true friends of India." – B. Nadesan
– LTTE political head in emailed interview
to a magazine – Times of India 22 Nov. 2008
Almost everyone
remembers the night of 21st May 1991 when
the erstwhile Prime Minister Mr Rajiv Gandhi
and leader of the Congress party was
assassinated in a meticulously planned and
well co ordinated violent act by a LTTE
female suicide bomber as he went to address
an election meeting in Sriperumbudur in
the outskirts of the city of Madras. It did
not matter whether one was a Congress party
supporter or not, party affiliations were
not relevant; what was pertinent was that a
heinous and violent act was perpetrated by a
foreign terrorist group on Indian territory.
The citizens of India woke up next morning
to the fact that a vile and horrible act had
been committed against the nation itself.
Analysts and experts woke up to the fact
that international terrorism had arrived in
India. The country had been grappling with
militancy within its territory for quite
some time and had developed a concerted and
long term strategy to deal with it. What it
did not expect was that a terrorist
organisation would from across the borders
act directly to shatter the Indian national
unity and add a new dimension to terrorism
against India.
India was drawn
into the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka due to
ethnic ties, strategic interests and
geopolitical considerations. When the
separatist Tamil movement started in Sri
Lanka there were various organisations
representing several groups espousing the
aspirations of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. The
moderate voices intermingled with the more
militant voices in demanding rights for the
marginalised Tamils who had suffered under
successive repressive policies of the Sri
Lankan governments. It is now well
documented that there was support and
sympathy for these movements in India
especially in the state of Tamil Nadu where
it was seen as protecting the interests of
the Tamil brethren across the waters. Almost
all the groups had well established bases in
Tamil Nadu during that period. Subsequently,
however, the most militant and the deadliest
of them all, the LTTE systematically
obliterated the leaders and key persons of
the other outfits and the demand for a Tamil
Eelam nation for the Tamils translated into
a demand for a Prabhakaran-led Eelam.
Relentlessly and with single mindedness the
LTTE has pursued its dream of establishing a
separate Tamil nation under its control on
the island.
India became
actively involved since the 1980s in the
conflict in Sri Lanka and sought to create
an atmosphere where the opposing factions
could negotiate a peaceful settlement to the
conflict. In 1985, the LTTE which had been
part of the Eelam National Liberation
Front along with the TELO, EROS and
EPRLF participated in June 1985, in the
talks sponsored by India held in Thimpu, the
capital of Bhutan. Initiated by India, the
leaders of the Tamil militant movements who
were engaged in an armed struggle for the
establishment of a separate Tamil Eelam
state agreed to a cease-fire to create a
congenial atmosphere for the talks. The LTTE,
which was willing to settle for nothing less
than an independent Eelam, was a reluctant
participant. The LTTE sought to emerge as
the sole repository of the Tamil aspirations
and was wary of the possibility of the other
groups of agreeing for something less than
an independent Eelam. It was unwilling to
share the power to control the destiny of
the Tamils with the other Tamil outfits or
fragment the sympathy and logistic support
of the Tamil diaspora. Consequently during
1985-86 the LTTE launched attacks on the
other groups justifying its actions by
calling them traitors to the cause of the
Tamils. The LTTE efficiently eliminated
opposition from other groups, growing
stronger by killing the leaders and
prominent members of those groups. Later,
unwilling to accept India's exhortation to
enter into an agreement with the Sri Lankan
government to find a permanent solution to
the conflict, the LTTE leader Prabhakaran
left India to establish himself in Jaffna.
The Indo Sri
Lankan Accord signed in 1987 between India
and Sri Lanka by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi
of India and President J.R. Jayawardene of
Sri Lanka, and under its mandate, the
Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) was sent
to Sri Lanka with the intention of restoring
peace to the island torn by the war between
the militant Sri Lankan Tamil nationalists
and the Sri Lankan military forces. The
military contingent , like peace keeping
forces worldwide , was not sent in as a
combat force - its mission specifically
being to "guarantee and enforce cessation of
hostilities" much in the spirit of the
United Nations peace keeping forces sent to
help countries all over the world torn by
conflict create conditions for sustainable
peace. As reluctant participants to the
Accord, the LTTE was against Indian military
intervention and abhorred the clause by
which it was required to surrender weapons.
Under the Accord although a large quantity
of arms were surrendered by the LTTE, it was
suspected that larger quantities were still
being held. Over a period of time in
internecine battles within Sri Lanka with
rival militants the LTTE killed members of
the other groups and emerged as a stronger
organisation.
The IPKF by
several turn of events in September and
October 1987 , became embroiled in direct
confrontation with the LTTE .Consequently,
the LTTE launched into vituperative attacks
on the IPKF and in its publication A
Nation Betrayed alleged that by the Indo
Sri Lankan Accord, India had completely
negated Tamil hopes to serve its own
geopolitical interests. It also set up
effective propaganda against the IPKF
alleging human rights violations. The IPKF
operation resulted in the death of more than
a thousand Indian soldiers and public
opinion in India favoured withdrawal of the
IPKF. The newly elected President of Sri
Lanka R.Premadasa was against the presence
of the IPKF in Sri Lanka and in April 1989
demanded the withdrawal of the IPKF within
the timeframe of three months. The newly
elected Indian Prime Minister Mr. V.P. Singh
reviewed the Sri Lankan policies of Rajiv
Gandhi and stating it a failure, ordered the
withdrawal of the IPKF from Sri Lanka. .
With the change of governments in India and
in Sri Lanka, the final withdrawal of IPKF
took place in March 1990.
The LTTE exulted
in the removal of the IPKF and eliminated
Amirthalingam in 1989 when he expressed in
an interview in July 1989 that that the IPKF
should remain to ensure the safety and
security of Tamils. After the withdrawal of
the IPKF, LTTE became the sole power in the
north-east of Sri Lanka – a triumphant step
towards the establishment of Tamil Eelam.
It was therefore, with trepidation that the
LTTE watched the unfolding election scene in
India in 1991. It was apparent that Rajiv
Gandhi supported a solution to the conflict
maintaining the unity and integrity of the
Sri Lanka which was completely unacceptable
to the LTTE's single minded ambition for the
establishment of a separate nation of Eelam.
In the assumption that it was close to
achieving its goal of independent Eelam and
exulting in its control of the territory
where it acted as the sole power, it viewed
the return of Rajiv Gandhi to power in India
as a severe impediment of its grandiose
plans. Therefore, to prevent his return to
power he had to be dealt with in a manner
best known to the LTTE – by assassinating
him. The LTTE pathological hatred for Rajiv
Gandhi and his policies towards Sri Lanka
involved the formulation of the plan, the
movement into India of the LTTE personnel
instructed to accomplish the act, the
recruitment of local sympathisers, the
elaborate preparation of the master plan,
the intense and constant study of local
congenial conditions, the monitoring of
movements of the target and the final
execution. Detailed examination of the
events makes a chilling study of the
capabilities of a ruthless terrorist
organisation.
The tacit
admission to the assassination finally came
from the statement of Mr Balasingham in 2006
when in an interview he stated
" As far as
that event is concerned, I would say it is a
great tragedy, a monumental historical
tragedy for which we deeply regret and we
call upon the government of India and people
of India to be magnanimous to put the past
behind," .
On March 19, 2008
Priyanka met Nalini, one of the conspirators
of the Rajiv Gandhi assassination in Vellore
jail. Nalini is lodged in Vellore jail after
her death sentence was commuted to life
imprisonment by a plea for clemency for the
sake of the convict's daughter by Mrs. Sonia
Gandhi. Priyanka went on record accepting
that she had met the killer of her father
and stating that it was a personal meeting
and clarified it further : "I do not
believe in anger, hatred and violence and I
refuse to allow these things to overpower my
life," . Her action as an individual to
come to terms with the personal tragedy
does not in any manner dilute the grim truth
that the nation was avenged only when the
death sentences were handed down to the
perpetrators of the assassination. The
country had to bear the ignominy of being
the victim of a terrorist organisation whose
ideology it had understood, sympathised and
supported. The sheer audacity of LTTE, with
total disregard to the stability of the
political and social structure of India and
with the sole purpose of furthering its own
delusion, to defiantly subject the nation to
shame is unjustifiable. Despite
Balasingham's self serving appeal to
Indians,(statement quoted above ),
it is undeniable that the LTTE had carried
out an act of aggression against the Indian
nation. The
The LTTE
has
encouraged elements in Tamil Nadu, where
there is a deep sympathy for the
humanitarian crisis in the island, to twist
it into a support rally for the LTTE. It
had, by the suicide bombing sought to
manipulate the Indian political scene and in
its propensity of self preservation wanted
to manoeuvre the political destiny of India.
It was not just the death of a prominent
citizen of India – the violent act chose to
cause permanent damage to the democratic
system of India which allows the citizens to
choose their representatives and their
government. It also demonstrates the
contempt the LTTE holds for the Indian
nation and its people. The LTTE sought to
impose upon the Indians a different choice
by eliminating the person who it did not
desire to return to power.
To seek to
destroy the integrity of the Indian nation
is unpardonable but to imagine that the
nation will forgive the perpetrators of the
act is to scoff at the national conscience.
(Dr. Geeta
Madhavan is an analyst working in areas
related to international security and
Terrorism. She can be reached at:
geeta.madhavan@gmail.com)