Hakeem slammed for 'political grandstanding at its worst'

[TamilNet, Thursday, 02 January 2003, 08:36 GMT]
(News Feature) As the crisis gripping Sri Lanka's largest Muslim party deepened this week, its leader came under heavy criticism for seeking to enhance his domestic political standing through the Norwegian peace process. Fending off a challenge to his leadership of the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) from two factions within the party, Mr. Rauf Hakeem, was lambasted by the Tamil press for undermining efforts to resolve the island's protracted ethnic conflict by claiming the peace process was inimical to Muslim interests.

The SLMC, a key ally of Sri Lanka's United National Front (UNF) government, has split into three factions, each representing a contender for the party's leadership. Simmering internal tensions erupted into open rebellion on the eve of the third round of talks between the UNF government and the Liberation Tigers in early December while another faction split from Mr. Hakeem's camp last week.

Amid the SLMC's escalating crisis, Mr. Hakeem last week wrote publicly to Sri Lanka's Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, demanding equal Muslim representation in the peace talks with the LTTE and insisting he (Hakeem) be recognized as Sri Lanka's representative on Muslim affairs at the talks.

Mr. Hakeem, who is Minister of Ports, is presently on the Sri Lanka government's delegation to the talks. But in his letter to the Premier, he protested the "present constraint of the Muslim presence at the talks" which, he said, was "a fundamental flaw in the peace process."

"Muslim interests are not being adequately addressed in the peace process," Mr. Hakeem said, seeking "a public reiteration by you [the Premier] ... that the Muslim community will be represented independently under my leadership at the peace talks."

The UNF has not responded to Mr. Hakeem. But an alliance of Muslim Parliamentarians called on the Premier to remove him from the Sri Lankan delegation, saying he does not enjoy the countrywide support of Muslims.

The Alliance of Muslim Parliamentarians for Peace (AOMPFP) says it had no objection to Mr. Hakeem's participation in any other capacity other than a negotiator appearing on behalf of the Muslim people, "since he represents only his party and that too only a faction".

In his letter to the Premier, Mr. Hakeem also demanded "Muslims should be given the status of a separate and independent party in all the mechanisms of the peace process" and that the "Muslim community should be recognised and involved in any international process and other mechanisms on an equal basis [with the LTTE]."

However, pointing out that "the [peace] talks are not intended to be an all party conference," the London-based Tamil Guardian newspaper said in its editorial this week that "while Mr. Hakeem's presence at the talks might be a recognition of the SLMC's position in the UNF coalition, his demand that the talks be treated as a tri-partite affair is untenable: the Muslim community is not a third protagonist in the conflict."

"Mr. Hakeem's vocal denunciation of the peace process and public articulation of demands of the UNF is political grandstanding at its worst.," the Tamil Guardian said.

"Creating [communal] confrontations and disharmony will not contribute to a peaceful solution," the Jaffna-based Uthayan said in its editorial last Sunday.

Criticising Mr. Hakeem's complaints to the Premier that important issues were discussed at the third round of talks without Muslim representation being present, the Tamil Guardian pointed out that "Mr. Hakeem abandoned his seat at the talks to return to Colombo where the SLMC had fallen apart, in order to sort out the mess."

"Now, amid open competition for Muslim credentials amongst those vying for the party's leadership, he paints a woeful picture of unaddressed Muslim grievances and puts himself forward as a suitable champion," it said.

"Mr. Hakeem also routinely paints a bleak picture of Tamil-Muslim relations in the eastern province. But he has also repeatedly refused calls by LTTE leaders to meet and discuss problems. In the meantime, Tamils and Muslims continue to coexist harmoniously in the east," the Tamil Guardian said.

The Uthayan argued "what is needed today is compromise and mutual understanding. Mr. Hakeem should cease detracting from the major issues of the day by imposing [non-existent] problems on the peace process to assist him in the power struggle within his party and [Muslim] community."

The SLMC's infighting "was dividing the Muslim community" and "would be a hindrance to the government's peace efforts, the Virakesari newspaper warned in its editorial last Friday. Given its 'kingmaker' role in the UNF coalition, the SLMC's troubles are inevitably felt to have a direct impact on the stability of the Sri Lankan government.

"Despite Mr. Hakeem's self-styled title of 'Muslim National leader' it is evident that the are deep differences of opinion amongst the Muslim people on the matter," the Tamil Guardian also said.

"Mr. Hakeem's [protest about the conduct of the talks] is curious since he is one of the Sri Lankan government's four official negotiators and [this is] particularly [so] given that, although tasked with representing the Sri Lankan state, the Ports Minister has only raised matters that relate to the Muslim community," the Tamil expatriate newspaper said.

"In effect, given the SLMC's crucial position within the UNF, Mr. Hakeem is blackmailing the government into recognizing him - and his faction - as sole representatives of the Muslim community which, he hopes, will help him regain control over the party," it concluded.