History and context

Today Sri Lanka celebrates Poson Poya, which is the day of Buddhism’s arrival in Sri Lanka in the 3rd Century BC. Embraced by King Devanampiyatissa and his officials, Buddhism gradually became firmly entrenched in the social, cultural, and economic fabric of Sri Lanka.

For centuries, Buddhism co-existed with other religions and ethnicities, making Sri Lanka a country rich in diversity. The historic monuments, practices, traditions, cultural practices, and folklore bound together to create a rich collective history, though this was not always harmonious. Unfortunately, this collective nature of Sri Lanka’s history was gradually side-lined, and over the decades a stronger nationalistic interpretation of history came to the forefront, especially after the start of the conflict. This interpretation has become more and more mainstream in the last two decades, as it found its way into school syllabuses and politicians began using pseudo-historians to twist the narrative to serve their own political ends, drastically shrinking the space celebrating diversity.

The latest attempt at rewriting history comes from the very top. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa this week appointed an 11-member Task Force to conduct a comprehensive survey of archaeological sites in the Eastern Province and recommend measures to preserve them. Unfortunately, this Task Force, the latest of six appointed by the President since he came to power, does not have a single Tamil or Muslim member, even though these two ethnicities make up 70% of the province’s population.

The Task Force does however have at least two members with no academic qualifications on the subject, who could easily have been jettisoned to make way for genuine experts.  Establishing the Task Force at the behest of the Buddhist Advisory Council, and having only Buddhist clergy as members, also reduces minority trust in the process, which should ideally be based on academic findings.   

Refusal to be inclusive has left the Task Force dangerously vulnerable to partisan decisions. Without sufficient representation of diversity, the space to discuss the deep-rooted complexities of archaeological sites, and how they are linked to the belief systems of the people in the region and the rest of the country, has been left out in the cold. The powers of the Task Force also include demarcating land around the archaeological sites and presenting ideas on how to preserve them for future generations. This could not only deepen rifts between the Buddhist and minority communities in Sri Lanka, they could also skewer the approach of future generations on how they define and interact their own communal and collective national histories.

How history is viewed is often defined by context as much as archaeological findings. Sri Lanka is only little over a decade out of a 27-year long conflict, which included the Eastern province for much of that time. Successive Governments, including the United National Party (UNP) during the Mahaweli Project, and more recently before 2015, have been criticised for implementing State-led demographic change programs in the Eastern Province. The recent attacks on the Muslim community have also severely dented their confidence in the Sri Lankan Government.

When this Task Force is placed in the centre of these interplays the prospect of peaceful and inclusive outcomes that celebrate the diversity of this small island becomes bleaker. The Task Force and the Government has to do better to address these concerns and ensure that minority rights and inclusiveness is not just respected but championed.