Understanding Eelam through the Diaspora's online engagement

Abstract

This paper argues that a study of Diaspora's engagement with the media, especially that of ‘conflict-generated Diasporas’ is imperative to understand the dynamics of the conflict in the homeland in order to devise ways and means for conflict resolution. In the light of arguments that Diasporas often contribute to the prolonging and sustenance of a conflict, the paper takes up the example of the Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora in Australia and makes a case for exploring the members' engagement with media, particularly online media, to understand the dynamics and the trajectory of the conflict. This is significant, firstly, in the context of the Sri Lankan Diaspora's role in the two-decade-long civil strife in Sri Lanka that is currently poised to enter another phase,1 and secondly in the context of websites having been and continuing to be one of the most sought after sources of information on the Sri Lankan Tamil issue. The paper argues that the study of the reception of information on Tamil Eelam online by members of the Diaspora is imperative for an understanding of the ‘reconfiguration and remaking’ of Tamil Eelam.

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Professor Jenny Hocking of NCAS and Mr Dinesh Kumar of the Monash Asia Institute for reading the first draft of this paper, and the anonymous referees for their comments on an earlier version of the paper.

Notes

 1. At the time of revising the paper, the armed conflict between the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which led the movement for a separate Tamil state known as Eelam in Sri Lanka, and the Sri Lankan defence forces seems to have concluded. On 18 May 2009 the Sri Lankan president announced the extermination of the LTTE and announced the death of its leader V. Prabhakaran. The announcement has been greeted with relief by some and disbelief by others in the Diaspora, as reflected by their media. At least one online publication (www.tamilnation.org) has since been inaccessible.

 2. ‘LTTE plans to reorganise, Colombo dismisses the move’, http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title = LTTE = plans (accessed 18 June 2009).

 3. See Tamilnet Editorial Board (2009b).

 4. See Tamilnet Editorial Board (2009a).

 5. Although Sheffer's paradigm has been critiqued for the implication that Diasporas are ideologically cohesive (see Mishra 2006, 28), it is relevant in the study of some Diasporas where internal fissures remain less articulated or even unarticulated for several reasons.

 6. Hroch usefully identified three stages in the creation of a nation. The first phase is one of intellectual inquiry into the past, the history and the culture of the community; the second phase is the dissemination of the information and winning over the support of a large number of people; and the last phase is the transformation of the demand of a few into a people's movement leading to the creation of a nation.

 7. Thillainathan (1997, 194) states that the ‘sedate and high-brow’ Eelakesari which espoused social causes was supportive of Sir Ponnambalam Ramanathan's political policies and opposed to Tamil political leader G.G. Ponnambalam and his All Ceylon Tamil Congress.

 8. Some of the hurdles that faced journalists functioning in the north and east came to light during a personal visit to Jaffna in December 2004 at a discussion with journalists enrolled in the programme for working journalists organized by the UN jointly with Jaffna University. Most journalists pointed out that the parties to the conflict were reluctant to part with information, which rendered reporting of events not only difficult but also seem partisan. More worrisome was the justification by the journalists for passing off ‘propaganda’ as news as the people were caught in an ‘abnormal’ state of war.

 9. The ban has since been extended every two years and now holds until 14 May 2010. See http://www.asiantribune.com/?q = node/11201 (accessed 26 May 2008).

10. The Indian media display confusing trends with regard to the coverage of the Sri Lankan ethnic issue. While the English-language newspapers are by and large critical of the LTTE, the Tamil media are more sympathetic to the cause and the organization. However, they are forced to walk a tightrope owing to the ban on the LTTE in India. This is explored in another context, although not in this study.

11. The 2001 census figures put the number of migrants of Sri Lankan origin at 53,610, of which 24.1% spoke Tamil at home. See http://www.wesleycollege.org/lankans_in_oz.pdf (accessed 14 April 2008). However, the Sydney Morning Herald put the number of Sri Lankan Tamils in Australia at 100,000. See http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/worlds-tamils-can-only-watch-as-sri-lanka-edges-closer-to-war/2008/01/11/1199988590441.html (accessed 14 April 2008).

12. Hence, ‘migrant’ is used as a blanket term to refer to all Sri Lankan Tamils in Australia, excluding those on a temporary visa.

13. By ‘Sri Lankan Tamil websites’ I do not refer to websites in Tamil but those that deal with the Sri Lankan ethnic issue in any language.

14. See http://www.tamilsydney.com/index.php?option = com_content&task = view&id = 1019&Itemid = 37 (accessed 12 May 2008).