Ramesh Rao has a column in ReligionAndSpirituality.com on the mis-use of the term 'Hindu extremists' to describe Sri Lanka's LTTE. In a January 4 New York Times op-ed entitled "Bhutto's Deadly Legacy," William Dalrymple said Rajiv Gandhi "was assassinated by Sri Lankan Hindu extremists." But Rao argues that there is no merit in that claim:
"I wrote to The New York Times' editors, arguing that Sri Lankan terrorists are not "Hindu extremists," and that the most well-known of the Sri Lankan extremist groups is the LTTE which stands for "Liberation Tigers for Tamil Eelam," and that language (Tamil) and ethnicity (Tamilian) are the influencing factors, not Hinduism. It was the LTTE that was connected to Rajiv Gandhi's killing. The LTTE finds sympathy and support from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party of the bordering South Indian state of Tamil Nadu, which claims to be both anti-Hindu and atheist.
"It is reported that the LTTE leader Prabhakaran, originally from the Karaiyar caste, is a lapsed Methodist. Prabhakaran named his son Charles Anthony, after one of his associates, Charles Lucas Anthony, alias Seelan, who was killed in 1983. Anton Balasingham, who was LTTE's lead political strategist and thinker, was a Christian. It is also said of the LTTE that "religion is not a major factor in his philosophy or ideology," and that it "does not cite any material from religion or religious texts in any of its ideological documents and propaganda but are driven only by the idea of Sri Lankan Tamil nationalism. ... " So, to assert that Rajiv Gandhi was killed by "Hindu extremists" is therefore both tendentious and mischievous."
So far, Rao says he hasn't heard back from the Times.
Read the rest of Ramesh Rao's piece, and please post your thoughts below.
