Fishing in Turbulent Waters BY Sumith Chaaminda

Fishing in Turbulent Waters

Working Paper No: 02August 2012

Sumith Chaaminda


This paper explores the relationship between development and ethnic reconciliation in post-war

Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan government espouses the view that economic development can

address ethnic reconciliation through reducing disparities in the distribution of economic and

livelihood opportunities. Using the fishing industry in the Northern and Eastern provinces as a

case-study, the author assesses the extent to which the government’s development initiatives

have contributed towards reducing ethnic tensions in the war affected areas. This paper argues

that, rather than opening new avenues towards ethnic reconciliation, the governments post-war

development strategy has led to an increased asymmetry in the distribution of the benefits of

economic growth between ethnic communities. Whilst, the Northern fishing communities have

received a certain amount of technical and resource assistance, the government has failed to

adequately address the vast (economic, educational and technological) disparities that exist

between Northern fishing communities and their competitors from the Southern provinces and

South India. This has resulted in the (actual and/or perceived) reinforcement and reproduction

of existing social hierarchies and power relation as well as the emergence of new forms of

suppression and inequality.

Sumith Chaaminda is a Research Associate at the International Centre for Ethnic Studies

i

ICES Working Paper series: 2


Sumith Chaaminda

International Centre for Ethnic Studies

August 2012

ii

© 2012 International Centre for Ethnic Studies

2, Kynsey Terrace, Colombo 8

Sri Lanka

E-mail: [email protected]

URL: http://ices.lk/

ISBN: 978-955-580-131-7

Printed By: Karunaratne and Sons

iii

Acknowledgements

My interest in analyzing post-war development discourse has been shaped by various

conversations at different conjunctures with Dr. Nishan de Mel, Dr.Nirmal Ranjith Devasiri,

Mr. Ahilan Kadirgamar, Ms. Chulani Kodikara, Ms. Lakmali Jayasinghe and Ms. Nethra

Samarawickrema. I would also like to thank Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda, who made insightful

comments on the first draft of this piece, and Dr. Soosai whoe shared with us, his expertise

on the changing dynamics of fishing industry in Jaffna.

My research assistant, Thiyagaraja Waradas made a significant contribution to this project

not only in organizing field visits and interviews but also in generating new arguments and

ideas. Ms. Begum Rahman and Ms. Vishalinee also supported me by translating and

transcribing interviews and collecting secondary data. My thanks also go to Mr. Lewis

Garland who did an excellent job in copy editing and in preparing an abstract for this paper.

Geethika Dharmasinghe, Vidarshana Kannangara and my colleagues of Praxis Collective

engaged with me in some interesting discussions that enriched this paper in terms of

identifying politically articulated form(s) of development discourse in the post-war context.

Finally, I would thank all the staff members of the ICES who did their best to make this

publication possible.

Sumith Chaaminda

August 2012

v

Acronyms and Abbreviation

District Fisheries Exchange Office

Eelam People’s Democratic Party

High Security Zone

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam

National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency

Tamil National Alliance

United National Party

United States of America

United Nations

DFEO

EPDP

HSZ

LTTE

NARA

TNA

UNP

USA

UN

vi

ICES Working Papers

1. Kodikara,Chulani (2012), ‘Only Until the Rice is Cooked?: The Domestic Violence Act,

Familial Ideology and Cultural Narratives in Sri Lanka, ICES Working Paper 1, May

2012


1


Introduction

Newly initiated development projects in the Northern and Eastern Provinces in post-war Sri

Lanka are expected to open new avenues towards ethnic reconciliation, as proclaimed not only

by government media but also by the mainstream development scholarship. However, this

popular emphasis on reconciliation through development arguably fails to recognize the

barriers and obstructions existing within, what we will refer to as, the development highway.

These obstacles are particularly acute for ethnic minority communities. To understand the

possible repercussions of the current development-community encounter, one should turn

one’s ears not only to the subject-agents of the development discourse but also to those who

are subjected to the development industry, considering the fact that subalterns are also

involved in creating meanings or counter-articulating the dominant discourse. This paper

explores the ways in which the local communities in the Northern fishing villages receive the

messages enunciated by the dominant or official discourse of development. It also analyses

how these communities counter-articulate meanings of development, asking how does this

community-development encounter affect the wider problem of post-war ethnic and social

reconciliation?

The paper is based on a field study of the fishing industry in the Jaffna peninsula, with a

particular focus on the encounter between the local communities in Northern Sri Lanka and

the development discourse in the post-war context. It examines how the social situations in

the war affected regions have increasingly been identified as development problems as a

means of justifying development focused interventions. By critically analyzing the priorities in

development plans and the problems related to implementing those plans, the paper also

inquires as to whether local livelihood issues are being adequately addressed by the recently

initiated development projects. Finally, we turn our attention to the perceptions and possible

counter-articulations of development by the fishing communities in the Jaffna peninsula. The

main objective of the paper is to develop a critical engagement with the dominant

development paradigm to post-war social reconciliation

Conceptualizing Development as a Discourse of Power and Control

In order to understand the multiple problems associated with the local community -

development encounter, discourse analysis, as applied in Development Studies by scholars like

Auturo Escobar, may be considered a valid approach( Escobar, 1995). In the approach of

development discourse analysis, the politically articulated nature of development has become a

ICES Working Papers

2

significant field of research. The political dimensions of antagonism, power and hegemony

within mainstream development discourse were initially highlighted by critical development

studies scholars who were critical of two strands of modernization theory; liberalism and

Marxism. Both liberalism and Marxism were based on the assumption that postcolonial

countries in the non-Western world were in a process of transformation from traditional to

modern societies. According to some dominant trends of Marxism, ‘advanced’ industrial

countries show backward countries the image of their future form of development'(Agnew,

1987). The basic assumption of modernization theory is that development with capitalist

modernity should be externally introduced or supported in non-Western societies that lack the

internal dynamics, which are favorable for development (W. Rostow 1960; Lipset 1959), This

approach was challenged by various new developments in the social sciences, especially since

‘the theoretical revolution’ in the 1960s; dependency School started a new debate on capitalist

underdevelopment in the peripheral countries (Baran, 1957; Frank, 1967), while postcolonial

studies challenged the Euro-centric universalistic assumptions in modern social sciences

including development studies (Said 1978; Spivak 1990; Fanon 2004). Some of the significant

themes introduced by this debate were the role of political agents/actors in altering the status

quo, importance of politics, power and ideology, and different articulations of democracy and

development in peripheral social formations. As a result of this important epistemological

shift, the scholarly attention was turned away from mere economistic understandings of

development towards a broader societal and political understanding of development.

Interestingly, new understandings of development emerged within critical scholarly trends.

These resulted in the development of new practices and institutional arrangements in the

development field. Participatory development and sustainable development became central

themes in development practices in peripheral countries; the ‘Right to development’ was

formally accepted by the UN Charter in 1986; development became an object of study among

non-economists including anthropologists, political scientists and sociologists; The theory of

social capital that emphasized the significance of social relations and networks in economic

development had a huge policy impact even within the World bank. In the 1990s, Amartya

Sen made an important contribution to transcending the disciplinary boundaries between

politics and economics by articulating ‘development as freedom’ (Sen 1999).

Arturo Escobar’s thesis of post-development (Escobar 1995) is arguably the most critical

approach developed within development studies because it questions some of the

fundamental assumptions of the current day dominant development paradigm. Escobar argues

that development should be considered as a discourse, which cannot be separated from

political contestation for power and hegemony.

It was rather the result of the establishment of a set of relations among these elements,

institutions, and practices and of the systematization of these relations to form a whole. And

the development discourse was constituted not by the array of possible objects under its

domain but by the way in which it was able to form systematically the objects of which it


3

spoke, to group them and arrange them in certain ways, and to give them a unity of their

own. To understand development as discourse, one must look not at the elements

themselves but at the system of relations established among them. It is this system that

allows the systematic creation of objects, concepts, and strategies; it determines what can be

thought and said. These relations – established between institutions, socio-economic

processes, forms of knowledge, technological factors and so on- define the conditions under

which objects, concepts, theories, and strategies can be incorporated into the discourse

(Escobar 1995:40).

This hegemonic discourse, he argues, emerged and was consolidated in the early post-World-

War-Two period, as a result of the problematization of poverty in under-developed countries

by the global economic and political powers (Escobar 1995: 17-18). The construction of social

identities, inclusion and exclusion of certain communities, employing power over human

bodies, fashioning and refashioning the body politic are all strategies employed by proponents

of the hegemonic development discourse. In development projects men and women are

objectified, classified, and given identities so that they can be subjected to certain mechanisms

of governance. The hegemonic approach of developmentalism, when it is applied in the

countries of the Global South, has tended to marginalize indigenous social and cultural

processes, local knowledge and experiences. Escobar argues that we need ‘alternatives to

development’ other than development alternatives (Escobar 1995).

Although there has been minimal application of the discourse analysis approach in the Sri

Lankan context, the political aspects of development have not completely been ignored by

social science studies in Sri Lanka, at least since the 1980s. Newton Gunasinghe and Sunil

Bastian have explored how economic liberalization of the 1980s went hand in hand with

widening tensions amongst ethnic communities (Gunasinghe, 1996; Bastian and Luckam,

2003). Serena Tennekoon has analyzed the reinforcement of ethno-nationalist ideologies

within the Mahaweli development project, re-initiated by the UNP regime which came into

power in 1977 (Tennakoon 1988). Darini Rajasingham-Senanayake and Dhammika Herath

have analyzed, in different contexts, the relevance of social capital in the development of the

Northern and Eastern provinces (Senanayake 2003; Herath 2008). Kalinga Silva has

contributed to this scholarship by analyzing the inter-connectivity between armed conflict,

displacement and poverty trends (Silva 2003). Sunil and Nicola Bastian have analyzed

development and participation and their role in social reconciliation (Bastian and Bastian,

1996); James Brow has conducted an interesting anthropological study on the production of

conflictual dynamics in a rural community by a development project in the village named

Kukulewa in the Dry Zone of Sri Lanka (Brow 1990). Although all of the aforementioned

studies have explored certain political dimensions of development in the Sri Lankan context,

development as a political discourse in the post-war context is yet to be examined and

analyzed comprehensively.

Nalani Hennayake’s analysis of the difference between the official discourse of

developmentalism and what she has termed the ‘indigenous discourse’ of development in Sri

ICES Working Papers

4

Lanka is useful but needs to be further explored (Hennayake 2006). She argues that an

indigenous discourse of development, which was contradictory to the official discourse,

emerged in postcolonial Sri Lanka. However, one can also argue that these two approaches

are complementary rather than contradictory. It is also debatable whether this ‘indigenous

discourse’ has its roots in a pre-colonial past or, as many postcolonial scholars suggest,

whether it was retroactively produced by the postcolonial modernity itself. The relationship

between state, ethno-nationalism and development as a political strategy has not been

sufficiently considered in Hennayake’s analysis.

This paper examines how politics, power and hegemony work within the development

discourse in post-war Sri Lanka, through a case study on the fishing industry in the Northern

and Eastern Provinces of the country. The status of the fishing industry in post-war Sri Lanka

provides an important case to explore the political dimensions of development because it is

situated within an important historical conjuncture where Tamil separatism led by the LTTE

has been militarily defeated, paving the way for the Colombo based state to re-establish and

consolidate its power and hegemony over the communities living in Northern and Eastern

Provinces. What role has development played in the consolidation of state power and in

ensuring inter-ethnic reconciliation since the end of thirty years of ethnic war? To answer this

question we must examine the political dimensions present within the development industry in

Sri Lanka since independence. The paper commits to fill this knowledge gap.

Contextualizing the Study Although the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka was initially based less on economic and more on

political issues, there is no doubt that state-centric development policies have played a crucial

role in sharpening tensions amongst ethnic minorities. The agrarian colonization project in the

dry zone, which was widely criticized for its ethnic bias, coincided with the emerging ethno-

nationalist rift within the indigenous elite power blocs in the 1930s. In its formative years, the

postcolonial Sinhalese ruling bloc, with the leadership of D.S Senanayake, established new

agrarian colonies in the Northern and Eastern provinces, changing the ethnic composition of

those areas in favor of the Sinhalese (Peebles 1990) This may be considered the first instance

in which local communities encountered macro level development initiatives propagated by

emerging indigenous rulers. This strongly suggests that the uneven distribution of

development benefits between different ethnic communities has been a crucial issue since the

dawn of ‘national development’. Many Sinhalese dominated electorates in these areas were

created by the intervention of delimitation commissions, which were also criticized for their

ethnic bias.

Uneven distribution of economic wealth among different ethnic groups took a newer form

with the initiation of large scale national development projects by the government of Mrs.


5

Bandaranaike in the early 1960s. This marked the beginning of an import-substitution

economic policy in which state-owned capital played a significant role. Within this policy

framework state patronage politics became a central aspect in society, given that the state was

not only a political institute but also a primary economic entrepreneur. This was not an

isolated phenomenon in Sri Lanka but a worldwide process which the Regulation School of

International Political Economy terms, the ‘Keynesian regime of accumulation1’. In the way in

which the Keynesian model was practiced in Sri Lanka, distribution patterns were designed

according to patron-client relationships between politicians and voters, which were mostly

beneficial for the ethnic and religious majority. Another important aspect of this process was

that it favored the ethno-religious majority through the state control of public sector jobs and

higher education opportunities. As a result of the implementation of the ‘Sinhala only’ policy

in 1956, the percentage of Tamil speaking employees was decreased.

Sri Lanka entered into a new paradigm of development in the late 1970s, with the introduction

of economic liberalization policies in 1977 by the newly elected UNP Government under

President J.R Jayewardena; since then, ethnic inequality with regard to distributing

development benefits acquired a new form. Even within the liberalization agenda, the role

played by the state in the economy and related patronage structures were not decisively

changed. Liyanage explains the political economic transformation in the late 1970s in Sri

Lanka as a transformation from the model of ‘state-led welfarism’ to a ‘state-led neo-liberal

model’ (Liyanage 1977). Interestingly, within the state-led macro development projects initiated

in the 1980s such as the accelerated Mahaweli project, political patronage remained a central

aspect of economic life. At the same time, Sinhalese-Buddhist ethno-nationalism remained the

hegemonic ideology, acquiring a new significance against the background of the emerging

ethnic civil war between the Sinhalese dominant state and the Tamil separatists.

It is also important to highlight that, while championing a neo-liberal economic reform

agenda, President Jayewardene made use of Sinhalese patriotism and Buddhist ideologies in

order to win popular support (Kemper 1990). In fact in the Sri Lankan case the economic

liberalization agenda and national patriotism have often gone hand in hand, although seldom

without tensions and contradictions. The heightening ethnic tensions against the background

of economic liberalization in the 1980s imply that the development disparities between ethnic

groups were not weakened by new economic policies. As Newton Gunasinghe and Sunil

Bastian have pointed out in different contexts, the way in which economic liberalization

functioned in Sri Lanka in the 1980s facilitated the heightening of ethnic tensions amongst

Sinhalese, Tamil and Muslim communities (Gunasinghe 1996; Bastian et al 2003) Thus

1 Theoreticians of Regulation School use the term regime of accumulation to explain how production, circulation, consumption and distribution patterns are organized in certain ways that stabilize the economy over a period of time. The Keynesian regime of accumulation was the dominant economic model during the 1930s and the early 1970s (Aglietta, 1976).

ICES Working Papers

6

hegemonic Sinhalese-Buddhist ethno-nationalist ideologies have been working on the

dominant development discourse throughout the 1980s, as Serena Tennakoon highlights in

her study on the accelerated Mahaweli Development project (Tennakoon,1988).

Against this background, it is important to examine how development is being articulated in

post-war Sri Lanka and how it affects ethnic relations, especially in the war affected areas.

During the last phase of the war, the government introduced two main development projects

in the Northern and Eastern provinces, Uthuru Wasanthaya (Northern Spring) and Negenahira

Navodaya (Eastern Revival). These were officially described as steps towards social

reconciliation through economic development and as a solution to the conflict. It is important

to question the extent to which these new development initiatives have contributed towards

reducing ethnic tensions through reconstructing people’s livelihoods in the war affected areas

and addressing the crucial issues regarding uneven regional development, It is also necessary

to ask whether development remains a contributing factor to ethnic tensions among different

communities? These problems are worth exploring against the background where, after

defeating the LTTE, the government approaches development not only as an economic

imperative for social reconciliation but also as a solution to the conflict. In some public

speeches given by senior government representatives, development has also been defined as a

strategy through which to prevent the reemergence of any sort of separatist struggle similar to

that fought by the LTTE. In the political economic perspective, it is also interesting to note

that, through development, the Northern and Eastern provinces have been opened not only

for the consolidation of state power but also for the spread of financial capital; it should be

kept in mind here that these areas were minimally touched by economic liberalization when

compared with the Southern provinces.

Fishing Communities in the North Affected by the War

The fishing industry, being the primary livelihood of a large number of the population in the

Jaffna Peninsula was one of the economic sectors worst affected by the thirty years ethnic civil

war. Before the war, Jaffna was the largest fishing production district, contributing around

48,000 metric tons per year; almost one fourth of the total production of the country.

However, fish production in Jaffna was severely hampered by the war. “While the Jaffna

District alone provided 20%-25% of the total fish production in Sri Lanka before 1983, its

contribution was reduced to 3%-5% by the end of the third Eelam war” (Siluvaithasan &

Stokke 2006: 240). The annual fish production in the District numbered around 2000 metric

tons during the war. Although fish production has been recovered to some extent in the two

years after the war, it remains a long way from pre-war levels.


7

year Fish Production (MT)

Mannar Jaffna

1951 9200 4351

1961 4309 11935

1971 9117 16364

1981 13175 43797

1982 9745 N.A

1983 8685 48677

1984 7825 23157

1985 8246 23775

1986 8246 13053

1987 8567 1981

1988 8694 24702

1989 9050 25078

1990 6299 21639

1991 1783 1191

1992 1225 1327

1993 2300 1514

1994 3510 3102

1995 3800 2263

1996 3850 1540

1997 4100 2762

1998 4547 2428

1999 4600 3232

2000 4600 2211

2001 4758 2676

2002 6083 5311

2003 6066 21206

2004 8747 21310

2005 N.A 15157

2006 8428 13431

2007 N.A 2963

2008 5734 2670

2009 6578 11978

2010 10057 20739

Source: DFEO, Jaffna and Mannar, 2010

ICES Working Papers

8

It is very clear that, in the post-war era, the fishing industry in Jaffna and the Northern

Province as a whole is now facing a series of new challenges, given the increasing competition

in the sea with Indian trawlers and Southern fishermen who are technically more

sophisticated than the Northern fishers. One of the negative affects of the war on the

Northern fishing communities was that it was placed in an unfavorable situation in the

structure of uneven development. Their competitors –South Indian and Sri Lankan Southern

fishermen- have been able to obtain more advanced economic and technological capacities

much quicker and have therefore increased production at a much faster rate

Characteristics of the Current Development Approach

It is true that the government has resolved a number of technical issues related to post-war

reconstruction of livelihoods. Restrictions on fishing have been significantly reduced with the

removal of high security zones, and as a result, the monthly production has been increasing; a

new office for fisheries issues named District Fisheries Exchange Office (DFEO) has opened;

transport facilities have been developed through government’s infrastructure development

projects; for instance the newly constructed Mannar Bridge, Thalladi Bridge and road

developments in the coastal areas have benefited the fishing communities and encouraged

merchants in other areas to expand their market relationships with Jaffna. As part of the

reconstruction and development of these areas, , the government has distributed certain

means of production such as fishing nets and established some new fishing villages.

However, questions remain as to whether these development initiatives have given enough

priority to the livelihood issues of the area. The following quotation from a fishing community

leader in the area highlights many gaps between the expectations of the community and the

government's development approach.

They have opened the sea for fishing and relaxed some restrictions like the pass

system. Now many people can fish any time. But the government has not yet

completely removed High Security Zones. Anyway, now our monthly production is

increasing. Although some fishermen are allowed to go fishing in their own places, it

is not always the case. Coolers are now coming from the South and the transport

facilities also are developing. Export items like prawns, cuttlefish are increasing and

fishermen are earning much money only from these export items. At the same time

the government has introdroduced laws regarding illegal fishing, although they are

not implemented well. They have provided some of us some nets. New fishing

villages and coastal roads also are being constructed. It is true that they do certain


9

things here and there but many of these development activities are not on the

concerns of fishing communities”2

The above statement draws our attention to a very significant problem not only in relation to

post-war development in Sri Lanka but also to the dominant development thinking as a

whole; to what extent have the perspectives of the communities been taken into account in

development planning and implementation? It also highlights the need for a broader

approach that can address not merely isolated, context specific issues, but also structural

problems with regard to community development. Any initiative looking in this direction

must recognize that the perspectives and development priorities of the community are

crucial.

Regional and other Forms of Disparity

Interestingly, community leaders who were interviewed for this study prioritized and

highlighted the structural issues rather than the isolated issue faced by them in their day-today

life. The unfavorable conditions faced by the Northern fishermen in the competition for

limited resources in the sea are central to their explanations of the current situation. There is

no doubt that the most crucial issue in their perspective is the 'encroaching' of the South-

Indian fishermen and Sri Lankan Southern fishermen into the Northern Sea. Illegal fishing in

the Northern Sea by Indian fishermen who own sophisticated Trawler boats, popularly known

as 'the Indian Trawler Issue, has become the most disturbing problem for the Northern

fishing community. The following map explains the scale of the Indian Trawlers entering into

the traditional fishing areas of the Sri Lankan Northern inhabitants.

According to leaders of Jaffna fishing organisations, more than three hundred Indian Trawler

boats are entering into the Sri Lankan Sea at least three days a week. The Northern fishermen

who are not capable in competing with the technologically sophisticated Indian fishermen lose

almost all harvest within those three days. One fisherman articulating their grievances said,

“Our people not only lose their earnings but their resources also; our people who don’t use

sophisticated methods cannot even protect their nets from these Indian Trawlers; sometimes,

Indians are deliberately cutting our nets”3.

2 Interview with the president of fishermen society of Myliddy, Jaffna on 12.11.2011. The interview was carried out by the author and Mr. T. Waradas, the research assistant of the project. 3 Interview with Karainagar Fishermen Society president in Jaffna on 11.11.2011, which was carried out by the author and Mr. T. Waradas.

ICES Working Papers

10

Source: (Soosai 2004: 19)

In a news paper interview, the President of the Jaffna District Fisheries Cooperatives

Federation, S. Tavaratnam has explained that:

Security restrictions on fishing have been somewhat lifted. Yet, we do not have the

necessary facilities to carry out our livelihood. The fishermen in Jaffna are faced with a

great problem. The problem is that Indian fishermen encroach into our seas and

forcibly take away resources of our fishermen. About 2,000 Indian fishing boats enter

our waters at one time. Our fishing activities came to a standstill during the war. The

Indian fishermen have poached in our waters for about 20-30 years. When fish become

less in their waters, their officials have themselves asked them to come to our waters.

They did it for 20-30 years. Not only the fish, but the natural resources in our waters

have also been destroyed. These resources cannot be replaced. It takes a long time for

them to develop. The Indian fishermen are continuing with it. No one is taking any

measures to stop it. This is one of our biggest problems” (Tavaratnam in The Sunday

Leader, 2010)

Competition with Southern Fishers in unequal terms: Another important issue

highlighted by the Northern fishing community is the abundance of Southern fishermen who


11

practice seasonal fishing in the Northern Sea with sophisticated technologies and multi-day

boats. In the early 1980s, Northern fishermen were more highly advanced than Southern

Fishermen in terms of their technological development and economic wellbeing. However,

this has been reversed during the period of war. As a consequence, the fishing community in

the war affected areas is now forced to compete on unequal terms with Southern fishermen

who are traveling to the North from Matara and Negombo areas. The Southern fishermen

who enter into the Mannar area are using temporary shelters and staying in the area for up to

six months. This, in fact, it is no longer seasonal fishing. In the past they would stay in areas

like Mannar, Silawathutai and Thalai Mannar and sometimes engage in sea side fishing rather

than coastal fishing.

According to Point Padro fishermen, the multi-day boats or trip boats are coming not only

from Negombo but also from distant areas like Matara and Beruwala. It is very clear that this

competition in the sea is mostly beneficial for Southern fishermen. One fisherman in

Karainagar explained the impact of the arrival of Southern fishermen to the North as follows;

Earlier, sometime when we were unable to catch enough fish, we were satisfied with

catching at least two conches; one conch was worth more than 800 rupees. So, it was

not a big issue for us if we did not catch enough fish for one or two days. Now we no

longer have that opportunity because people coming from Sinhala areas with

permission, not only catch all the conches, but also totally destroy the future

reproduction of these conches, by blasting shells using cylinders. If this happens in their

areas, the government’s response would have been different but here they are

destroying our resources, without facing any consequences.4.

The influx of Southern fishermen and Indian fishermen to Northern Sri Lanka can be

explained in economic and geographical terms, given that fisheries resources are largely

concentrated around the Jaffna Peninsula. However, the way that Northern fishing

communities perceive this issue should not be ignored, given they are not supported by the

government or other agencies to develop their capacities at least to the level that they were

in the pre-war years. Although the main reason why Northern fishers are not going to the

South for seasonal fishing is the lack of resources in those areas and because they lack the

technological ability to justify this journey, there is a tendency amongst Northern fishermen

to perceive this issue in ethnic terms. For instance, when asked why southern fishermen

were coming to the north, and Northern fishermen remained in the North, one fishing

community leader answered:

Northern fishermen have not been moving to any southern area so far, because firstly

they are a minority and hence the Southern people would not allow them to go there.

Many of our people feel fear to enter into the Southern Sea, in the same way as

4 Interview with a fisherman in Karainagar, Jaffna on 11.11.2011, which was carried out by the author and Mr. T. Waradas.

ICES Working Papers

12

Southerners coming into our areas. But, traditionally Southern fishermen have been

coming here and fishing in the North and East. In those days there were no large scale

fishing here because a large number of people did not engage in fishing and therefore

Southern fishermen’s arrival was not a big concern at all. It was actually an accepted

thing. But, now the situation is changing. Increasingly more people are engaging in

fishing in our areas as well. So, it is not fair to claim that Southern fishers can enjoy

their fishing rights in these areas as we do, only because they have enjoyed those rights

in the past. If they will continue to behave like this, I would say, it would create new

problems. At the same time, especially in Mannar, army is supporting the Southern

fishermen. Sometimes, Northern fishermen were even threatened by the Southerners in

the sea. They have told that these areas were ours and you are not allowed to fish

here.5”

Illegal Fishing Methods: Northern fishermen are highly concerned about the violation of

rules and regulations of fishing by Indian fishermen and Sri Lankan Southern fishermen in

their traditional hunting grounds. Although the use of illegal fishing methods is a relatively

common issue, the Northern fishing organizations argue that the issue if far more acute in

their region. This issue may also increase inter-regional disparities because it is not only the

Indian fishermen but also the ‘Southern fishermen’ who are traveling from Matara and

Negombo who are alleged to be using environmentally harmful fishing methods. The fishing

community in Jaffna is unhappy about the fact that Southern fishermen are using dynamite in

fishing because this method increases environmental pollution in the area, directly affecting

the sustainability of fishing resources in their living areas. The use of environmentally

destructive fishing methods suggests that fishermen who travel from other areas for seasonal

fishing are less concerned about the longevity and sustainability of oceanic resources than the

fishermen who have been living in these areas for generations.

Some illegal fishing methods like the use of dynamite also destroy coastal vegetation.

Sometimes, as members of the Jaffna fishing community explain, Southern fishermen put

trees in to the sea to attract Cuttlefish who are attracted to these tree parts. They then use

dynamite and catch the fish. This is a hugely harmful method that destroys all of the sea plants

and the oceanic environment. There are similar problems regarding resource management as

well. Members of Jaffna fishing organizations explain how the Southern fishermen tend to use

‘small eye nets’ to capture prawns in an environmentally harmful manner; “these nets capture

so many other small fish in addition to prawns and those fish are mostly thrown away. In fact,

to catch one kilogram of prawns, they catch and throw away at least 10 kilograms of small

fish6.”

5 Interview with Karainagar Fishermen Society president in Jaffna on 11.11.2011, which was carried out by the author and Mr. T. Waradas. 6 Interview with the president of fishermen society of Myliddy, Jaffna on 12.11.2011, which was conducted by the author and Mr. Waradas.


13

Indian trawlers are very much responsible for exploiting and destroying the resources in the

area, according to almost all persons interviewed. “The number of fish they catch within a

month is equal to the fish that we normally catch within five years”, a leader of a fishing

organization explained7. Another interviewee articulated the connection between Indian

Trawler issue and the destruction of fishing resources as follows:

“Indian trawlers are exploiting our resources. They have already destroyed their

resources in their sea. That’s why they are coming here to exploit our resources. If they

will continue this we will lost our entire fishing resources within few years. They are not

only fishing in our sea; they are destroying all the sea resources by using various kinds

of harmful methods. It destroys all the sea species which should protect for future

generations. They remove all the sea plants which are crucial to reproduction of fishes.

They are foreigners who exploit our resources and they illegally enter in to our sea. But

we are unable to do anything on this case8”

Narrow Understanding of Economic Infrastructure and Under-emphasis

of Social Infrastructure

While the main focus of the current development initiatives in the Northern region is on

economic, infrastructural development, the concept of infrastructure seems to be narrowly

understood. While the authorities highlight the importance of constructing roads, harbors and

markets, the priorities of the communities themselves are quite different. The latter emphasize

the need to develop their capacity to accrue benefits from the macro-level infrastructural

development. It is interesting to see that, against the dominant discourse of development, the

communities' emphasize the importance of infrastructure at the community level. This

community level development is perceived to be a prerequisite for attaining benefits from the

government's macro development initiatives. These are some aspects of the above problem:

Lack of infrastructure facilities and machinery: During the time of war, the majority of

the infrastructure facilities of Jaffna fishing industry, especially ice factories and boatyards

were damaged and destroyed. As a result, only two small scale ice factories remain in the area,

one at Point Padro and the other at Gurunagar. A significant number of merchants livingin

Jaffna had to buy ice from merchants coming from the South, whilst, as Prof. Soosaianandan

points out, there were about 12 – 13 ice factories in the District before the war9.

7 Interview with a fishermen society leader from Point Pedro, Jaffna on 12.11.2011, which was conducted by the author and Mr. Waradas. 8 Interview with a fisherman in Point Pedro, Jaffna on 12.11.2011, which was conducted by the author and Mr. Waradas. 9 Interview with Augustine Soosai: an academic activist on fisheries issues in Northern Province of Sri Lanka, on 10.11.2011, by the author and Mr. T. Waradas.

ICES Working Papers

14

The war has also reduced the number of net factories to two, which is not sufficient for the

demand in the area, As a result, many Jaffna fishermen have to buy fishing nets from the

merchants based in Colombo. Lots of prawns and crab processing centers situated in Jaffna

were also destroyed by the war, badly affecting the women workers who engaged in the

processing activities. Currently, there are some multi-day boat owners in Jaffna District who

live at Pesalai and Gurunagar areas. The Lack of boat and engine repairing centers and spare

parts add to this issue. As a consequence, the fishing community in Jaffna has to buy these

goods from Colombo at higher prices.

Lack of Institutional Infrastructure: Within the new development initiatives in the

Northern Province, insufficient attention has been paid to establishing an institutional

infrastructure that benefit the fishing community. In the pre-war period, they had a private

institute that gave education and training on the fishing industry but this also collapsed as a

result of the war. Currently, there is only one educational centre for the fishing industry which

is very poor in resources and training capacity because it is functioning in a small house where

there are a dearth of training equipment. The lack of institutional support has led to an

absence of trained, properly resourced persons who could contribute towards the

development of the industry. Although the University of Jaffna is running a two year diploma

course on the fishing industry, it is limited only to class room level theory courses.

Establishing an institutional infrastructure for further research and practical innovation is a

prerequisite for the development of this sector.

Lack of stock assessment: Although the Northern Sea is full of marine resources, a stock

assessment of these resources through an oceanographic study is yet to be conducted. Any

development plan on the fishing industry should begin with such an assessment. According to

Jaffna based experts, an assessment of the current status of the marine resources in the area is

absent in the government’s current development initiative10. In the Southern Provinces,

institutions such as National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency (NARA)

have been involved in assessing the stocks and studying the fish resources. However, there is

no such institution functioning in the Northern Province. Although NARA searched for a

suitable place to establish a Jaffna branch in 2010, some Jaffna based civil society members

feel that it was not adequately supported by the Fisheries Ministry.

Limitations in Insurance Facilities: During an interview conducted by this researcher, a

community leader at Point Pedro pointed out that there is still no insurance coverage available

for fishing communities in the area, although they face a greater risk in their occupation11.

10 Interview with Augustine Soosai: an academic activist on fisheries issues in Northern Province of Sri Lanka, on 10.11.2011, by the author and Mr. T. Waradas. 11 Interview with Augustine Soosai: an academic activist on fisheries issues in Northern Province of Sri Lanka, on 10.11.2011, by the author and Mr. T. Waradas.


15

This is an important fact given that many other occupations including farming are now

covered by insurance policies. The Point Padro fishing community members explain that they

have been supporting themselves using their own money in cases where accidents occur. For

instance, after losing two of their members at sea, they collected a sum of Rs. 50,000/=

through their own society and supported the affected families. They articulate the existing

situation using vulnerable language, saying that “we are not receiving any kind of subsidies

from anyone; we have to look after our own; we are facing to lots of difficulties; but we are

surviving on our own12.”

Lack of Sophisticated Boats and Difficulties in Deep Sea Fishing: At present a large

majority of Jaffna fishermen are using 16 feet boats and other small scale fishing techniques,

while in the other areas of the country like Negombo and Matara, a significant number of rich

fishermen own multi-day boats or Trawler boats. This signifies the uneven development

between the North and the South with regard to the fishing industry, which has come about

due to the protracted war. It is important to remember that prior to the war the Jaffna District

was at the forefront of Sri Lanka’s fishing industry, providing 20%-25% of the total fish

production in the country.

Another important issue related to the lack of infrastructure capacity is that of deep sea

fishing. There are not enough deep sea routes for fishing around the Jaffna peninsula. The

community leaders in the area point out that to utilize sophisticated multi-day boats, it is

necessary to make the existing fishing roots in the sea deeper. There is no point in providing

fishing communities with credit facilities to get Trawler boats, as the World Bank and the

Bank of Ceylon are doing, without developing deep sea fishing routes. These are a prerequisite

for developing a technologically sophisticated fishing industry. Another problem related to the

proposed bank loan system is that it benefits only those who are already wealthy in the

industry; for instance, one needs to deposit one million rupees in the bank to get five million

back as a loan.

Furthermore, with regard to the deep sea fishing issue, the Northern fishing community feel

that the government shows less political will to support them, while dedicating huge amounts

of money to other development concerns, which in most cases, are not directly beneficial for

the fishing community. As some community leaders explained to this author, a channel is

required to make a deep sea fishing route. Further to this, they explained what happened when

Minister Douglas Devananda initiated such a project and sent a dowser to dig a channel. This

is the way they articulated the incident:

12 Interview with a fishermen society leader from Point Pedro, Jaffna on 12.11.2011, conducted by the author and Mr. T. Waradas.

ICES Working Papers

16

“then the whole project was suddenly banned by coastal authorities, saying that no

permission had been given to go ahead with the project; so the project was completely

abandoned; we are totally disappointed about it; if they are unable to do such small

things for us, and then think about our situation here? This is our situation; that’s why

we feel there is no point in giving data to people like you; if this happens in Colombo or

in other areas, we are sure that government’s response would be different.13”

Unaddressed Structural Problems

Throughout this paper, it has been argued that any meaningful post-war development in

Northern Sri Lanka, can not only address isolated and selected livelihood issues. The primary

reason why the Northern communities have been dispossessed of the benefits of development

are the structural circumstances that have been reinforced and worsened by thirty years of

war. Understanding how, and the extent to which, these structural problems have been

addressed in current development discourse is of paramount importance for any initiative

attempting to reframe development so as to accommodate the perspective of communities in

the war affected areas.

Dependency Structures: As the above section indicated, the dependency structures within

the Northern fishing community which were strengthened during the war have not been

dismantled yet. Some members of the St. Thomas’ Fishing Society in the Eluvaitivu Island

explained that, even though the pass system and security banning no longer exist, the

fishermen in the island region have now become debtors to big businessmen. One fisherman

explained it in the following words:

They come here and buy our fish. We cannot decide the price. We have got loans

from them during the war time. So now they are exploiting our situation. They take all

our fish at lower prices. We cannot go to the market directly and sell them. In fact,

they take our fishs and sell them in the market at higher rates. They earn total profits

from our fish. For instance, in some cases, they buy our fish at 125 -150 rupees and

sell them at the market at 450 rupees. They again give us loans from the earnings that

they got by selling our fish. When we try to sell fish on our own, they ask us to settle

the loans that we initially borrowed from them. We need a market facility to avoid

such exploitations and injustices. See, our situation today; we are like slaves here. We

need ten litre of fuel per day. Five litres costs 400-500 rupees. We need to buy oil at

prices like 4000- 5000 rupees. Sometimes, we catch only one kilo of fish; and in such

13 Interview with a fisherman from Point Pedro, Jaffna on 12.11.2011, conducted by the author and Mr. T. Waradas.


17

cases, we cannot even earn the fuel cost. It is not profitable to do fishing here

anymore14.

Political Patronage Structures: Significant structures of political patronage developed in

the island region in the Jaffna Peninsula during the period of the war. There were region-

specific strategic reasons for the development of these structures. As inhabitants explain,

neither military forces nor the LTTE attempted to capture these islands, because both

parties suspected the other were hiding there15. However, a third party named the Eelam

People’s Democratic Party (EPDP) that supported the government, captured the

opportunity and established its power over the Northern islands in the early 1990s. Minister

Douglas Devananda, the leader of the EPDP, visited these areas and, utilizing his contacts

with the Colombo government, delivered certain benefits (economic and other) to the

people who supported him. Initially, the EPDP distributed portions of rice of 300 grams for

each person in the Eluvaitivu Island; gradually, those people were also allowed to go further

into the sea for fishing. Moreover the Sri Lankan Navy distributed packets of milk for their

children and helped them to bring sick persons and pregnant women to the hospital. Once

Minister Devananda became an MP on the capture of the vote bank in the Island region,

further support was provided to them by delivering material benefits such as a community

hall, a water tank, a boat that is used for water transport, a loudspeaker etc. When the

hurricane Nisha hit the islands in November, 2008 destroying the community hall,

Devananda supported them again by rebuilding the hall. The government also distributed

2000 liters of drinking water to the 150 inhabitant families in the Island.

Although these patronage systems initially helped the inhabitants to fulfill their basic needs, in

the long run, this patronage led to the formation of unfavorable dependency structures. For

instance, the economic dependency relationships between the businessmen and the local

community, as the previous section explained, was facilitated by various political patronage

structures. Interestingly, during our field visit, we observed that posters of Minister

Devananda graces the walls of many households in the area.

Counter-Articulations of the Development Discourse

It is yet to be seen whether the people in the Northern and Eastern provinces will respond to

the above problems by articulating their grievances and demands in ethno-nationalist terms.

According to in-depth interviews conducted by this author with Northern fishing

communities, people articulate their demands in various different ways. Some of the main

issues articulated by Northern fishing community leaders and representatives are as follows:

14 Interview with a fisherman from Eluvativu, Jaffna on 14.11.2011, conducted by the author and Mr. T. Waradas. 15 Interview with Eluvativu fishermen, conducted by the author and Mr. T. Waradas, on 14.11.2011.

ICES Working Papers

18

Militarization: Many problems related to the fishing industry in the North are, directly or

indirectly, related to the militarization process. The militarization of the region which was

increased during the final phase of the war has not been completely relaxed despite the end of

the war. For instance, some coastal areas, which are significant to the fishing industry are still

designated High Security Zones (HSZ). Consequently, fishermen are banned from carrying

out their livelihood activities in those areas. In many areas, fishermen were allowed to go to

sea only within a permitted corridor and even to do so, they had to get passes from military

forces.

Although some of these restrictions have been removed, some coastal areas that are very

significant for the fishing industry like Valikamam North, Wadamarachchi, Nagarkovil,

Thenmarachchi, Thetkarly, Punagari, Mandaitivu and Keytes are still, in one way or the other,

under military control. During the war, almost 81 KM of the Northern coastal line became

HSZs; although restrictions have now been relaxed, the Northern fishing community, CBO

leaders and intellectuals are very much concerned about the continuity of high security

arrangements established in the period of war in areas where Northern fishermen used to

carry out their livelihood activities. According to Prof. Soosaianandan, in mid 2010, nearly 10

villages were still banned from the fishing community and the restrictions had not relaxed in

some areas like Palali because of security concerns16.

Although the authorities are claiming that the situation in the Northern Province has largely

been normalized in terms of de-militarization, this claim was highly contested by the special

report on the situation in Northern and Eastern Provinces presented to the parliament by

M.A Sumanthiran, a TNA parliamentarian on the 21st October, 2011. The report explains the

impact of militarization on the fishing industry in Jaffna as follows:

Severe restrictions are placed on members of Tamil fishing communities, resulting in a

drastic impact on their means of livelihood. The report tabled by me in July of this year

detailed the restrictions placed on members of the fishing community in Mullaitivu,

especially in the areas of Kokkilaai to Chundikkulam in Kilaakaththai, Maathirikkiraama,

Uppumaaveli, Thoondai, Alambil, Semmalai, Naayaaru, Kokkuththoduvaai, and

Karunaattukkernee. These restrictions are still in place and of serious concern is the fact

that several Sinhala fishermen in the area have received direct permission to fish in this

area from the Ministry of Defence. Sinhala fishermen are also permitted to fish for

prawns in Nanthikkadal. In addition to such restrictions faced by Tamil individuals in

fishing communities in the North and East, these individuals have received no

reciprocal permission to engage in fishing in the South. Resentment over such incidents

16 Interview with Augustine Soosai: an academic activist on fisheries issues in Northern Province of Sri Lanka, on 10.11.2011, by the author and Mr. T. Waradas.


19

is now becoming apparent, with recent objections from fishing unions in

Vadamaarachchi over fishermen from the South occupying their property and also over

their fishing practices which adversely impacted fishing in the area17.”

Many people, who had recently been returned by the government to Uduththurai in

Maruthenkerny (Vadamarachchi East), were soon after evicted from their houses along the

coast and placed in transit camps on the other side of the coastal road. These houses are

now being occupied by people from the South who are permitted by the Ministry of Defense

to engage in diving for coral and star fish. Therefore, in addition to the forced eviction, local

members of the fishing community are also unable to pursue their traditional livelihood of

fishing as the sea bed is being disturbed by diving activities. At a meeting in the

Maruthenkerny District Office on 15th of June 2011 at which Minister Douglas Devananda,

and four TNA Members of Parliament were present, members of fishing unions complained

that they had been threatened and that their consent was forcibly obtained for the evictions

(Sumanthiran 2011). They also complained that they had no access to the buildings that had

been constructed for their use.

Conclusion: Development Highway towards Post-war Reconciliation?

Although the recently initiated development projects in the Northern Province have addressed

some of the issues discussed above, they have not been successful in making a significant

breakthrough with regard to the structural problems related to the fishing industry like

regional disparity, dependency relations, political patronage structures and related socio-

economic issues. On the contrary, these development initiatives have sometimes contributed

to the intensification of these issues. For instance, the merchants from the Southern Provinces

who have coolers, sophisticated techniques and market networks are now coming along the

‘development highway’ and entering into the Northern fish market, establishing their

dominance over the North. Although the perceptions of the Northern fishing community

over this new development is not yet heard publicly, Jaffna civil society members are tending

to unfavourably compare the current situation with the ‘good old days’ of the Jaffna fishing

industry in the pre-war period. Signs of uneven development are shown not only in the

competition for limited resources in the sea but also in the disparity in technological

capabilities.

It seems that the fishing industry, which has been the main livelihood for a large number of

populations in the Peninsula, has not acquired a central space in the government’s

development agenda. Although fishing communities do enjoy some benefits following the end

17 Interview with Augustine Soosai: an academic activist on fisheries issues in Northern Province of Sri Lanka, on 10.11.2011, by the author and Mr. T. Waradas.

ICES Working Papers

20

of the armed struggle and the implementation of post-war development activities, there needs

to be a broader approach for addressing not only the technical issues, but the major structural

issues that obstruct the development of the industry.

Throughout this paper I have attempted to critically review the optimistic libertarian

explanation of post-war development in the Northern and Eastern provinces, which is

primarily based on the idea of opening up new economic avenues for minority communities.

The case study on the fishing industry in the Jaffna Peninsula suggests that there are some

structural barriers and obstructions existing along the newly introduced development highway.

It also shows that the current development strategy has served to both reinforce and

reproduce existing social hierarchies, power relations and suppressions among people in the

war affected areas. The main argument in this piece is that post-war development is being

fashioned by mainstream nationalism in such a way as to strengthen uneven development

among different ethnic communities. This is likely to increase tensions amongst inhabitants in

the war affected areas. This research counteracts the popular belief that development is the

solution for the ethnic problem, arguing instead that a politically articulated discourse of

development can fuel the conflict, by unevenly distributing the benefits of economic growth

among different ethnic communities. Furthermore, as the case of the fishing industry in Jaffna

suggests, certain political articulations of development can reinforce the existing power

relations and can even produce new forms of suppressions, inequalities, and grievances among

the subjects of development.


21

References

Books and Articles

Abeyratne, S 2004 Economic Roots of Political Conflicts: the Case of Sri Lanka, World Economy,

27, 8, 1295-1314.

Aglietta, Michel (1976), A Theory of Capitalist Regulation: The US Experience, Verso

Agnew, John 1987 Bringing Culture Back in: Overcoming the Economic-Cultural Split in Development

Studies, Journal of Geography 86, no. 6: 276-301.

Bastian, Sunil and Luckham, Robin 2003 Can Democracy be Designed? The Politics of Institutional

Choice in Conflict Torn Societies, London, Zed Books.

Bastian, Sunil and Bastian, Nicola 1996 Assessing Participation: A Debate from South Asia. Delhi:

Konark

Bastian, Sunil 1994 Devolution and Development in Sri Lanka, New Delhi: Konark Publishers

Pvt. Ltd.

Brow, James 1990)Nationalist Rhetoric and Local Practice: the fate of the village community

in Kukulewa, in Spancer, Jonathan (eds,) Sri Lanka; History and the Roots of Conflict

Fanon, Frantz (2004), The Wretched of the Earth, Grove Press

Escobar, Auturo(1995 Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third

World, Princeton University Press.

Franciscans International (Eds) 2003 The Right to Development; Reflections on the First Four Reports

of the Independent Experts on the Right to Development; Geneva, Sida.

Frank, A.G 1967 Capitalism and Under-Development in Latin America-Historical Studies of Chile and

Brazil, Monthly Review Press.

Green, Jessica F and Chambers, W Bradnee 2006 The Politics of Participation in Sustainable

Development Governance, Tokyo. New York. Paris: United Nations University Press.

Gunasanghe, Newton 1996 Selected Essays, Social Scientists’ Association: Colombo.

Hennayake, Nalani 2006 Culture, Politics, and Development in Postcolonial Sri Lanka, Lexington

Books: Oxford.

Herath, Dhammika 2008 Rural Development through Social Capital? An Inquest on the Linkages

between Social Capital and Development in War-Torn Villages in Sri Lanka, Intellecta Docusys,

University of Gothenburg, Sweden.

ICES Working Papers

22

Kemper, Steven 1990 J.R Jayewardena: Righteousness and Real Politik, in Spencer, Jonathan

(eds.), Sri Lanka; History and the Roots of the Conflict: pp 187-204.

Lakshman, W.D (Eds)(1997 Dilemmas of Development. Fifty Years of Economic Change in Sri

Lanka, Colombo: Sri Lanka Association of Economists.

Liyanage, Sumanasiri 1997 in Lukshman, W.D. (eds), Dilemmas of Development–Fifty years of

Economic Change in Sri Lanka, Colombo: Sri Lanka Association of Economists.

Mayer, Markus et al. (eds.) 2003 Building Local for Peace –Rethinking Conflict and Development in

Sri Lanka, New Delhi: MacMillan.

Peebles, Patrick 1990 Colonization and Ethnic Conflict in the Dry zone of Sri Lanka,

Journal of South Asian Studies 49 (1): 30-55.

Peiris, G.H 1993 Economic Growth, Poverty and Political Unrest, In KM. de Silva (eds.) Sri

Lanka Problems of Governance, New Delhi: Centre for Policy Research. Spencer, Jonathan

(eds.), (1990), Sri Lanka History and the Roots of Conflict, London and New York: Routledge

Rajasingham-Senanayake, Darini 2003 Beyond Institution and Constitution Building: Linking

Post/Conflict Reconstruction and Deep Democracy, in Markus et al (eds.,) Building Local

Capacities for Peace: Rethinking Conflict and Development in Sri Lanka, Delhi: MacMillan India Ltd.

Richardson, John 2005 Paradise Poisoned –Learning about Conflict, Terrorism and Development from

Sri Lanka’s Civil Wars, Kandy: ICES Publication.

Rostow, W (1960), The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto, Cambridge,

Cambridge University Press.

Sarvananthan, Muttukrishna 2005 Post-1977 Period Economic Reforms in Sri Lanka, Colombo:

ICES.

Said, Edward 1978 Orientalism, Vintage Books

Sen, Amartya 1999 Development as Freedom, Oxford University Press, UK.

Silva, Kalinga Tudor 2003 Armed Conflict, Displacement and Poverty Trends in Sri Lanka:

Evidence from Selected Displaced Populations, in Markus et al (eds.,) Building Local Capacities

for Peace: Rethinking Conflict and Development in Sri Lanka, Delhi: MacMillan India Ltd.

Siluvaithasan, Augustine Soosai & Stokke, Kristian 2006 Fisheries under Fire: Impacts of War and

Challenges of Reconstruction and Development in Jaffna Fisheries, Sri Lanka. Norsk Geografisk

Tidsskrift. ISSN 0029-1951. 60(3), s 240- 248


23

Sosai, A.S 2004 Indo-Sri Lankan Fishermen Conflict in the Palk Bay Region, Fisheries and

Aquaculture Development Organization, Norway.

Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty 1990 The Postcolonial Critique, London: Routledge.

Sriskandarajah, Dhananjayan(2003 The Returns of Peace in Sri Lanka: the Development Cart Before

the Conflict Resolution Horse? Colombo: ICES.

Tennakoon, N. Serena 1988 ‘Rituals of Development: The Accelerated Mahaweli

development Program of Sri Lanka, American Ethnologist, 5(2), pp 294-310.

Wickremasinghe, Nira 2006 Sri Lanka in the Modern Age, A History of Contested Identities, New

Delhi: Foundation Books.

Interviews

Fisherman in Karainagar, Interview carried out by the author and Mr. T. Waradas, 11.11.

2011, Karainagar, Jaffna.

President of the Fishermen Society at Karainagar, Interview carried out by the author and

Mr. T. Waradas, 11.11. 2011, Karainagar, Jaffna.

President of the Fishermen Society at Myliddy, Interviews carried out by the author and Mr.

T. Waradas, Myliddy, Jaffna on 12.11.2011.

Leader of the Fishermen Society at Point Pedro, Interview was carried out by the author and

Mr. T. Waradas, Point Pedro, Jaffna on 12.11.2011

Augustine Soosai: an academic activist on fisheries issues in Northern Province of Sri Lanka,

Interview was carried out by the author and Mr. T. Waradas, Jaffna, 10.11.2011

Fisherman in the Eluvativu Island, Interviews was carried out by the author and Mr. T.

Waradas, Eluvativu Island, 14.11.2011.

Other sources

Sumanthiran, M.A 2011, Situation in North-Eastern Sri Lanka, A Series of Serious Concerns,

http://dbsjeyaraj.com/dbsj/archives/2759, (accessed on 24th of December 2011)

The Sunday Leader (Newspaper) 2008 www.thesundayleader.lk/2010/08/22/jaffna-a-year-

since-the-end-of-the-war/ (accessed on 21st of February 2011).

Printed by Karunaratne & Sons (Pvt) Ltd.

Sumith Chaaminda is a Research Associate at the International Centre for Ethnic Studies

This paper explores the relationship between development and ethnic reconciliation in post-war Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan government espouses the view that economic development can address ethnic reconciliation through reducing disparities in the distribution of economic and livelihood opportunities. Using the fishing industry in the Northern and Eastern provinces as a case-study, the author assesses the extent to which the government’s development initiatives have contributed towards reducing ethnic tensions in the war affected areas. This paper argues that, rather than opening new avenues towards ethnic reconciliation, the governments post-war development strategy has led to an increased asymmetry in the distribution of the benefits of economic growth between ethnic communities. Whilst, the Northern fishing communities have received a certain amount of technical and resource assistance, the government has failed to adequately address the vast (economic, educational and technological) disparities that exist between Northern fishing communities and their competitors from the Southern provinces and South India. This has resulted in the (actual and/or perceived) reinforcement and reproduction of existing social hierarchies and power relation as well as the emergence of new forms of suppres-sion and inequality.

Fishing in Turbulent Waters BY Sumith Chaaminda

Documents

Transcript of Fishing in Turbulent Waters BY Sumith Chaaminda