Of Priyantha and tribalism

Priyantha Kumara, his is a name that will soon not be forgotten. Even a cursory glance on social media over the past few days might have seen mention of the Sri Lankan migrant living in Pakistan, who was lynched by a mob in Sialkot over alleged ‘blasphemy’. Indeed, the hashtag #JusticeforPriyantha is one of the top trending topics in Sri Lanka at present.

But while his death has been mourned and rightly decried as needless violence borne out of religious extremism, it is unfortunate that some have attempted to use this tragedy to cry crocodile tears and push their own nefarious agendas.

There is an uneasy sense of this incident, in some quarters, being used to justify bigoted views and rhetoric. And those who point out this fact have been targeted and abused online.

The reality is that this tragedy is not a victory for anyone, it is not a ‘gotcha’ moment to win arguments for your ‘tribe’ over another – it is plain and simple, the by-product and outcome of politicians weaponising religious rhetoric for their own gains, be it in Sri Lanka or Pakistan. This is something that Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan has long been accused of, while President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has been charged of doing the same in Sri Lanka – the appointment of a documented racist Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thero to a Presidential Task Force on implementing ‘One Country, One Law,’ being a prime example. The fact remains that Sri Lanka’s grievous ethnic divide is a deep one and in some ways fostered by racially focused political parties. Be it the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC), the Tamil National Alliance, Jathika Hela Urumaya or the Bodu Jana Peramuna (BJP) of the infamous Bodu Bala Sena (BBS), they have all led the way along with dozens of others and have arguably deepened divisions between communities.

Granted the political parties were born to fulfil a need. As ethnic tensions deepened in Sri Lanka there was a feeling among minorities that they needed a voice for their grievances and the only way to protect their rights was to engage in politics as a group. Such sentiments can even be traced back to pre-colonial times and the formation of ethnic parties can be justified in such a context. 

Yet the truth is that for Sri Lanka to go forward as a peaceful country it has to create a platform for all religions and ethnicities to have equal rights and for these rights to be protected by the State regardless of majority or minority concerns.

In some ways, the old divide and rule policies have been allowed fresh life through the formation of ethnic or religious parties that has sought to promote politics by fertilising insecurities, distrust and injuries between the three main ethnic groups of the country.

It is no secret that many in these parties use sensitive and ethnically charged arguments to justify and camouflage their greed for power. But while politicians should definitely be taken to task over such tactics, it is the public that must reflect and not allow themselves and their neighbours to be taken over by such empty yet vile rhetoric. It is convenient to think, like rapper Iraj tweeted, that the election of Gotabaya Rajapaksa as President is what has prevented such a lynching from occurring in Sri Lanka. That may be true for Muslim on Buddhist violence, but what about vice versa? Were not the incidents in Digana and Aluthgama in recent years borne out of the same sort of fearmongering?

In fact, there is a growing school of thought around Kumara’s lynching, that ‘blasphemy’ was simply an excuse manufactured to resolve a gripe over a labour dispute. Even if this is not true, the mere fact that it could be shows how dangerous fostering a culture of religious intolerance can be – how it can be used to justify any manner of horrific act. So next time you take up that keyboard or get into a heated argument with a colleague, think about how those words will be construed, what harm they could potentially cause, and if the target of your ire is indeed the root cause of the problem.