tw news-features

[Transcript of interview to Thinakkural by Ambassador Robert Blake]

Question: Mr. Ambassador, how do you see the present situation in Sri Lanka? Are you optimistic about the (inaudible)?

Ambassador Blake: Well, I think we have an important opportunity now to achieve peace here in this country. As you know the SLFP and the APRC are working on a power-sharing proposal, and we very much support that effort, believe it is an extremely important effort, and we encourage the government to proceed as quickly as possible with that so that it can be shared with the full All-Parties Committee, and we hope that it will be something that will meet the aspirations of the Tamil people, but also of the Muslims and the Sinhalese people. And we think that we have in the President somebody with very considerable political skills who would be able to sell this to the South. And so we are optimistic, and we do believe that this represents an important opportunity for Sri Lanka.

Question: Are you happy with the efforts taken by the parties to start the peace process, or the dialog?

Ambassador Blake: Well the process is under way now, and as I said earlier, we hope that this will proceed as quickly as possible. Because the sooner there is a proposal ready to put on the table, the sooner the negotiations can get going, and the sooner the fighting and some of the other problems associated with the conflict can be solved.

Question: How do you see the international community’s efforts?

Ambassador: The Co-Chairs remain very involved in encouraging this process. I think that everything that I have said so far would be supported by my Co-Chair colleagues. The United States continues to support, strongly, Norway’s facilitation efforts and also the role of the SLMM – the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission – and I think we are united in the conviction that there cannot be a military solution to this conflict, and that the solution lies in a negotiated settlement that meets the aspirations of all the communities that I mentioned.

Question: Considering the last one year, the violence and the human rights (inaudible), do you feel that the Tamil people still really have confidence in the international community’s words? You have visited Jaffna, you have seen (inaudible). How do you feel (inaudible)… reason to believe the international community?

Ambassador Blake: Well I can’t speak for the Tamil people. As you say I have been to Jaffna, and I know that they have been living under very difficult situations there, and I think the government has taken some efforts to try to address those, and clearly more needs to be done. I was very pleased that the Hon. Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights visited Jaffna several days ago. So I think that is a good sign that the government is committed to try to address the problems there.

Question: Are you happy with government’s efforts to supply rations to Jaffna?

Ambassador Blake: Yes, I think the government has made a strong effort to try to provide essential goods and essential services. I think there are still some things that need to be done, and I think our friends in the government would agree with that – for example, building materials. There is a need now to get livelihoods back up so that people can earn money and go about their daily lives, and for that you need cement and other construction materials. Again, I think the government is working on ways to address that, and we encourage that.

Question: At the Galle Conference you came out very strongly in support of the NGOs. How do you see the present situation?

[Ambassador Robert Blake, File Photo]

Ambassador Blake: Our position, and I think the position of most of the donors, is that the NGOs play a very crucial role here in Sri Lanka, and indeed in all countries where they operate, to deliver the assistance that all of the donor countries are providing. In the United States’ case all of our assistance – tsunami relief assistance, but also other kinds of assistance – goes through NGOs. So we very strongly support their role, and we are concerned that there have been recent unsubstantiated attacks against some NGOs, American and other NGOs, and we are very pleased that Minister Samarasinghe has pledged on behalf of the government not to allow state media to make unsubstantiated allegations against NGOs, and that all such accusations should first be investigated and, if indeed an NGO is found to be doing something in violation of Sri Lankan law or American law, then of course remedial action should be taken. But before then no statement should be made in the press, because such statements can be very damaging to the operations of those NGOs, and they can often affect the physical safety of NGO workers.

Question: How would you assess the human rights situation? Disappearances, abductions – especially around Colombo? Even one of the vice chancellors has gone missing. No details about him yet.

Ambassador Blake: Yes. Our assessment is that the human rights situation deteriorated in the last year. We will be publishing our human rights report next month sometime. This is our annual human rights report that we submit on all countries around the world. Our assessment is that the human rights deteriorated in 2006. We are pleased that the President decided to appoint this commission of inquiry, and the United States and other important countries are providing observers and also experts to observe the work and support the work of the commission, and that work is now under way. So I think that will be a very, very important effort. But we think that that is only part of the solution. The government must also take steps to address some of the underlying problems that exist, such as abductions and disappearances and other violations, and the international community stands ready to support the government in any way that it can to see that this happens.

Question: Would you like to speak on press freedom? How do you see the press freedom in Sri Lanka, especially in the last (year?)?

Ambassador Blake: Again, I think there have been some challenges to press freedom here. A free media is a very important part of any democratic society, and certainly Sri Lanka is a democracy and has every right to expect to have a free and vibrant media. So again, we would like to support the role of the free media here. I have made it a practice to try to call on various members of the media here, as we do in any country, and this will be one of the efforts that I think all of the international community also will be following very closely to support the right of a strong and free media to operate here in Sri Lanka.

Question: Going back to the Tamil problem, do you feel the armed struggle has legitimacy?

Ambassador Blake: No we do not feel that that has legitimacy. We have taken a very strong stand against terrorism and against violence. We believe that the LTTE should renounce terrorism and violence, and that the only way forward is through a negotiated settlement; and we have made, of course, that same point to our friends in the government. There is no place here or anywhere else for violence and terrorism.

Question: So, do you separate the Tamil grievances from the armed struggle?

Ambassador Blake: We do. We Do. We think that the Tamil people have very legitimate grievances that need to be addressed, and that is one of the crucial roles of the devolution, or power-sharing proposal that comes out would be to address those. But again, we do not see that there can be any role for violence or terrorism.

Question: Would you like to comment on the power sharing, federal or (inaudible)? How do you see the Northeast merger and de-merger?

Ambassador Blake: Well, the recent government military victories in Vakarai and elsewhere have, I think, substantially changed the situation on the ground, and as a result of the Supreme Court decision, the merger of the Northern and Eastern provinces is no longer in effect. And our position is that all of these questions should be resolved as part of the power-sharing proposals that the SLFP and the APRC process that are now developing. So we hope that neither side will take any steps that will foreclose whatever options those committees decide on. Really, that is where these things should be sorted out. Neither side should be taking pre-emptive steps now to try to decide unilaterally or prejudge the outcome of that process.

Question: Will the international (community?) recognize the paramilitary forces, if tomorrow there is an election in the East? If Karuna contests the elections and he comes to power, with the international (community?) recognize him; will he be given equal weight like what the LTTE is getting?

Ambassador Blake: Well, our view is that Karuna and other paramilitary factions are like any other political group around the world. They cannot compete for power while they are engaging in illegal activities, and there is widespread evidence that the Karuna faction is engaged in abductions and child recruitment and many other forms of intimidation against local NGOs on the ground in the East. And while they continue such behavior I don’t think there is place for them in the political system. So they have got to stop those kinds of activities before the international community, at least, would be willing to acknowledge any kind of a political role for them.

Question: Do you want to send any message? What is the message to the LTTE, especially?

Ambassador Blake: Well, my message to the LTTE is that we hope that they will renounce violence, renounce terrorism; but also that they will engage seriously. Because, as I said earlier, we believe that there is an important opportunity this year – in 2006 – for this beautiful country to finally make progress towards a negotiated settlement. We believe there is an important opportunity to take advantage of the parliamentary majority that the President now has, and I think that the UNP even though it is outside the government it will be prepared to support a credible power-sharing proposal so the government will have the votes necessary in Parliament to amend the constitution to implement a devolution proposal, provided it has the support of the people of Sri Lanka. So this is a very significant opportunity, and I hope that the LTTE will recognize that, that they will negotiate in good faith, because twenty-five years of violence have really not achieved anything for the LTTE, or for the Tamil people. On the contrary, I think that the Tamil people have suffered a great deal as a result of the LTTE’s campaign. What we hope for is a final settlement that can address these legitimate grievances, and then we hope that the LTTE will lay down its arms and that Sri Lanka can finally achieve the potential and the promise that we have all long believed it has.

Thank you.

[Released by Embassy of the United States, Colombo]

Professor Tissa Vitharana, whose name is synonymous with the hitherto elusive quest for a constitutional framework that would satisfy both the LTTE and the Sinhalese, speaks to C. A. Chandraprema on the accusations leveled at him by the JVP, and the bona fides of President Rajapakse on the question of actually desiring a negotiated settlement to the ethnic conflict.

Q. In the leaflet the JVP distributed island wide on Monday last week, you had been mentioned by name as one of the main reasons for their decision to disassociate themselves from the PA government. The accusation was that you were preparing schemes to turn Sri Lanka into a federal state. What do you have to say about that?

A. What I have to say is that I don’t use the term federal because the terms ‘unitary’ and ‘federal’ have lost their original meaning. Today you have states which are called unitary but which have federal characteristics and federal states that have unitary characteristics. Therefore, to quibble over words when we are faced with a grave situation which affects the future of our country, I think is a waste of time. Dr Vasantha Bandara participated in all sessions of the All Party Representatives’ Committee as the official representative of the JVP. The discussions were acrimonious at first but gradually the mood changed and we had a very friendly atmosphere where an attempt was made to listen to what the other side has to say and then to understand why different viewpoints were being held. Right throughout, the JVP participated fully in these discussions. When it came to the stage where we had to come to a decision on power sharing and devolution, we had a very free discussion within the APRC and we came to an agreement. Every word of what every delegate said is recorded and the proceedings are available. The gist of what Dr Vasantha Bandara said was that they would agree to devolution, provided the devolution of power benefited the people. The issue was raised that the 13th amendment had hitherto not been effective in benefiting the people and that therefore it was worthless trying to have that type of devolution. That is what the JVP representative said. I too hold the view that the process of devolution that we have had under the 13th amendment is in no way adequate. Too much power is concentrated in the centre and tight control has been kept on funds.

Q. Now when you say that the powers devolved under the 13th amendment were ‘not adequate’ and when the JVP representative says that the power devolved under the 13th amendment did not ‘benefit the people’, even though it may superficially seem that you are both on the same track, each of you are saying that for different reasons…

A. I didn’t get that feeling. I would think there is only one common reason. If you are not satisfied with the devolution that has already been put into effect through the 13th amendment, it does not mean that you are against devolution in principle, but rather that you want effective devolution.

Q. Isn’t it the case that the JVP is against devolution and they want to retain the unitary state?

A. All I can say is what transpired at the APRC. I went from delegate to delegate, each representative of the political parties in turn, and said that we have studied this whole issue, and that we have to take a decision as to whether we are agreeable to power sharing at the centre and devolution to the periphery, and that I would like each member to express their views. And they expressed their views individually. The common position taken by the JVP, MEP and JHU representatives was that they would agree to devolution within the unitary framework. The JVP representative added that in addition, he would want the devolution to benefit the people. All these are recorded. Representatives of several political parties said that we were all very happy that we had reached a consensus and they actually congratulated me as Chairman, for having brought the discussion to this point.

Q. Did the JVP and JHU representatives also congratulate you?

A. Well I can’t remember, but all I can say is that there were three or four people who congratulated me. After reaching consensus, we agreed on a media conference. My practice has been that before media conferences, I tell the APRC what I am going to say. If I remember correctly, they were all present at the conference where I made this statement. The next day, the JVP spokesman made a statement to the effect that they had not agreed to devolution. The next stage was to decide how we were going to implement it. I suggested that instead of our going through the same process, the expert panel of the APRC (Which was appointed by the President) has come to some position and it would be useful to get their input to our discussions and we agreed to have a joint meeting. At the meeting where it was decided to have that joint meeting, the JVP was present and they agreed on that. When we did have that joint meeting the JVP representative participated. During that meeting, it so happened, that there were two main reports one by group A and the other by group B, and after those reports, two individuals, one of them being the chairman, gave their individual reports because they felt they couldn’t sign either of the other two and they indicated why. Then we had a one and a half hour discussion between the members of the two committees to clarify issues and if I recollect correctly, the JVP representative also posed questions, to the members of the experts’ panel who were there to clarify certain issues. The experts’ panel was not to dictate to the APRC but to assist it. We were completely free to accept or reject any of the proposals.

We were hopeful that there would be a single report but the fact that this didn’t materialise doesn’t in any way lessen the value of those reports. And I feel very sorry that thereafter the JVP made the report of one group their target and the reason for their leaving the APRC. Just to give an example, the report of group A which was their target, had with regard to the north east issue, four options. One of the options was that in the event of the north and the east being kept separate, there should be an apex body for cooperation on cultural and other matters of common interest. It is unfortunate that certain newspapers played a very unfair role and only reported the most extreme positions and made that the focus of attack. The whole process which we agreed to following our discussions would be kept confidential and not revealed to the public because these are sensitive issues and when we are engaged in a discussion of this nature, before we come to a decision, there are so many angles that have to be looked into. Making this an item for public debate is not going to achieve anything other than being divisive and bringing unnecessary pressure to bear on the representatives of the political parties. Everyone agreed that this would not be divulged to the public. The whole matter was going to be discussed within the APRC.

Q. Who leaked the majority report to the press?

A. I have no idea.

Q. People say you leaked it.

A. Why should I leak it? Can you tell me one valid reason?

Q. Well the JVP says that you leaked out the majority report in order to put pressure on the government to go in for a devolution package.

A. Anyone can say anything they want. In this particular instance, I outlined the procedure which we should follow. I said very clearly, please keep everything confidential. I also said that if there was anything that we felt should be rejected in the expert panel reports, we are free to do that as members of the political parties.

Q. Soon after the majority report of the experts committee was leaked out, I discussed it with Victor Ivan, and one of the things that he said was “Meka abhyasayak” In other words, saying that it was a kind of intellectual exercise, where people sit and talk and formulate plans which are not accepted by the LTTE and not accepted by the Sinhlaese, or even the Muslims.

A. I wouldn’t agree. This was a group of people who gave of their time without any payment, they got together in the interests of finding a solution. They are not peoples’ representatives, but individuals who have some expertise in the relevant areas. I wouldn’t expect them to be conscious of the political imperatives because they are not politicians. It is up to us as politicians, as representatives of the various political parties, to accept or reject their proposals. The report of the experts’ panel in my view would be a useful basis for working out a solution.

Q. Soon after this experts’ committee report was publicized, I was at a gathering where Suresh Premachandran of the TNA and Dr. Rajitha Senaratne was present. Suresh Premachancdran spoke very dismissively about the experts’ panel report. I can’t remember everything that he said, but one thing was, “Why can’t they use the word federal? They have refrained from using the word federal in order to appease Sinhala opinion. Why can’t they look at Tamil opinion also..,” and more to that effect. Rajitha Senaratne had to argue with him, saying that the majority report can provide a beginning for dialogue. What Victor Ivan said was right. It was rejected by the Tamils, and rejected by the Sinhalese as well.

A. As we know, the TNA s under duress. Their leaders who held independent opinions have been killed. They will not say anything that will lead to losing their lives. One thing that the JVP should realize is that the argument that the LTTE has always brought up hitherto has been that there is no point in negotiating with the government because when the government changes, the new government will not honour the agreement. But here for the first time, the two main political parties, that form the core of governments are represented. The issues that were brought up at the APRC were all relevant to achieving peace through negotiations.

Q. The point that Victor Ivan made was that we are sitting here in Colombo and churning out solutions on paper whereas what would have been necessary would be to get the agreement of both sides to the conflict to adhere to this kind of solution. In other words, the LTTE will first have to agree to a non-separatist political solution.

A. One of the main arguments that have been advanced by the LTTE for not participating in the peace talks, is that the government has not offered anything. This has been echoed by all the international stakeholders. We are trying to fill that lacuna, with a consensual approach.

Q. The consensus is here in Colombo. But what about the most important party to the conflict, the LTTE?

A. When the LTTE asks, “what are you offering us?” we have to put something on the table, and that is what we are in the process of fashioning.

Q. Some people think you are compiling documents for the consumption of the international community. When you have some sort of a proposal for devolution, that would keep the international community happy. Are you simply trying to keep the international community happy on behalf of the government?

A. In the very first briefing that the President gave the APRC, he made it very clear that he wanted to work out a home grown solution to our own internal problem.

Q. Do you think this President is actually interested in a political settlement?

A. In the Mahinda Chintanaya, it s very clearly stated that he will get all the parties together to work out a settlement. The image that the world had of him at the time of the Presidential election, was that he was a hawk intent on a military solution. That in my view is why the LTTE assisted in his victory. They did that in the expectation that he would play the part of a hawk so that the military objectives of the LTTE could be justified in the eyes of the world. Unfortunately for them, he turned out to be different. Before the first round of peace talks that took place in Geneva in February last year, seventy four armed forces personnel were killed by the LTTE. Despite that provocation, there was no retaliation. And progressively, with the attacks directed at the Army chief and the Defense secretary among others, the retaliatory approach has come to the fore. This is something the LTTE brought on itself. They were trying to justify their course of action and to put the blame on the government and the President. They have failed in that exercise. The world has seen that the President is serious about having talks, By setting up the APRC process, he has actually taken concrete action to work out a consensus document. [island.lk]

“There has to be an alternative to a separate state” – Suresh Premachnadran

TNA Member of Parliament Suresh Premachnadran speaks to C.A.Chandraprema about the war, Indian intervention, the bus bombings, and the possibilities of a negotiated settlement.

Q. What does the Tamil National Alliance actually stand for, a separate state or the devolution of power?

A. From the 1950’s onwards, the Federal Party has consistently won in the North and East in the Tamil speaking areas. There was thus a mandate for a federal system. No government took this mandate given by the Tamil people into consideration. At one point, one Mr Navaratnam from Kayts formed a new party and said that a separate state was the only way forward for the Tamils because all the pacts entered into by Chelvanayagam with SWRD Bandaranaike and with Dudley Senanayake, were broken by the Sinhala leaders. But Chelvanayagan opposed this and said, “We have to be within a united Sri Lanka.” He fielded another candidate in Kayts and defeated Navaratnam. So till the 1970s, Chelvanayagam was for a federal state. But by 1976, Chelvanayagam himself had arrived at the conclusion that the only answer was a separate state. So we see a moderate political party being pushed into the position of advocating separatism. After that, various groups that emerged decided that violence was the only way to achieve this goal. When the Indo-Lanka Accord was signed, all Tamil groups accepted the accord and were willing to give it a try. The EPRLF formed the government in the north and east and was supported by various other groups. But even here, President Premadasa and other forces did not accept the Indo-Lanka Accord. They sent back the IPKF. Thus, whenever there is an attempt to work with the government, someone opposes it. There was also the case of the P-TOMS proposal by Chandrika Kumaratnga in the wake of the tsunami. Everybody supported this arrangement - the international community, the government, the LTTE, and even the United Nations. But the JVP went to courts and the courts put a stop to it. Before that, the LTTE had put forward the suggestion for an Interim Self Governing Authority (ISGA). The demands they put forward, were very high. We are not denying that. But the LTTE was prepared to discuss it. They said, “Give us a time we can discuss the matter and come to some solution.” But when Ranil Wickremasinghe was willing to give a date for the discussions, Chandrika took over the three ministries and this proposal was shelved. Chandrika won the subsequent Parliamentary election with the support of the JVP and the ISGA proposal was put in the dustbin. Then again, after eighteen years, the north east merger has been declared null and void by the Supreme court. This was on a technicality. The court said that the two provinces could not be merged on a Presidential proclamation, and it had to be done through Parliament. But the government is doing its best to keep the two provinces separated with separate governors for the north and east being appointed. On the P-TOMS and North-East Merger, the Supreme Court bench that gave judgments on these matters, was entirely Sinhalese. There were no Muslims or Tamils. What the government is telling the TNA: “You can’t live with the Sinhalese. That is what they are telling us again and again. Even if we are trying to live in a united Sri Lanka, the government is pushing us in a different direction.

Q. Why do you consider the merger of the north and east to be so important? Two thirds of the Eastern province is Sinhalese and Muslim.

A. If you take the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayagam pact or the Dudley-Chelvanayagam pact, colonisation was one of the main points raised. If you go back beyond 1921, the proportions of Sinhalese, Muslims and Tamils in the Eastern province were different. By 1947, the demographic pattern in the east was totally changed because the government brought Sinhalese colonists into the east. We are not against the Sinhalese living in the east or in the north. You can check the census reports to see by what proportions the population of the eastern province grew as against the population growth in other areas of the country. This will show you how the Tamils and the Muslims are becoming minorities in their own area. This is the main reason why Chelvanayagam said that the Northern and Eastern provinces should be merged . Even today, the Muslims are blaming the government for implementing colonisation schemes in Potuvil and Panama. In the Amparai district, Muslims are the majority, but they have only 20% of the land. And the Sinhalese who constitute 24% of the population have 80% of the land. What we are saying is that in the north and east, the Tamil speaking people are in the majority. In a power sharing arrangement, or in an autonomous state, what we expect is that the Tamils will control the north and east while the Sinhalese will control the rest of the country. Just as there will be Tamils and Muslims in the Sinhala controlled area, there will be Sinhalese and Muslims in the Tamil controlled area.

Q. When you speak of autonomy and power sharing, are you expecting anything more than what the Indian states have got?

A. In various countries, there are various models for the devolution of power. The USA, Canada, Switzerland, all have their own systems. We fought for a separate state and 65,000 people have died. In that situation, there has to be some alternative to a separate state.

Q. India is also a participant in this process. We cannot think of any devolution package without taking into account India’s interests as well. If the powers devolved in Sri Lanka exceed the powers given to the Indian states, that will set off a chain reaction in India. There is a history of separatism in Tamil Nadu long before it started here in Sri Lanka.

A. India has already said that it is for a federal system in Sri Lanka. India itself is not a fully fledged federal system. It’s a quasi-federal system and the central government has most of the powers. The Indian government has never said that Sri Lanka should not go beyond the Indian model. Take for instance the 13th amendment which stipulated that the Sri Lanka central government can’t dissolve the north eastern provincial council for five years. But according to the Indian constitution, the Indian central government can dismiss a state government at any time. This provision was later amended by Premadasa and the north east government was dismissed. India is not rigid. India has never said that Sri Lanka has to follow the Indian model. We have held discussions with many important Indian personalities and they have never said that we should follow the Indian model.

Q. Do you seriously believe that after so many years of fighting for a separate state, the LTTE will settle for a federal System? In the late eighties the JVP had a slogan “The motherland or death!” Isn’t it the same for the LTTE?

A. But the JVP joined the democratic mainstream and now they are in Parliament…

Q. That’s after they were defeated.

A. The LTTE is prepared to talk. Their willingness to talk means that they are willing to come to a settlement within a united Sri Lanka. The LTTE knows that they cannot win a separate state through talks, so their willingness to negotiate is an indication that they are willing to come to an agreement short of a separate state. We have to sit and work it out. But successive governments of Sri Lanka have not made an effort in this direction.

Q. Do you think the LTTE can ever win a separate state through military means?

A. I do not know whether they can win the war. In 1979, Bull Weeratunga was sent to Jaffna to wipe out terrorism. What happened? That was twenty eight years ago. At that time we had only Shotguns. Now, they have artillery and multi barrel rocket launchers. And they have sea tigers, air tigers and black tigers. I don’t know whether the LTTE can win this war, but I am sure the Sri Lankan government can’t win this war either. They can win some battles. The LTTE also won some battles. They overran Elephant Pass, they attacked Katunayake. Likewise the Army can also overrun camps.

Q. Do you envisage a never ending war?

A. I strongly feel that this is a political matter, we have to negotiate a settlement. The entire international community accepts that the Tamils are having problems which need to be solved. Even the Sri Lankan government accepts it. They have to sit and discuss the issue. Various people like the present Army commander may be advising the President that the LTTE can be defeated. Since the time of J.R.Jayewardene, how many thousands of government soldiers have been killed? Of course the LTTE also has suffered. What happened in Mulleitivu and various other places? Sarath Fonseka will be in the Army for another year. During that time he will say “Look, I can defeat the LTTE.” But by the end of next year, he will be at home and somebody else will take over. But they will not be able to defeat the LTTE totally. You can brand the LTTE as Fascists, but they are fighting for a cause and the people are with them. Now they are controlling a large area. Later they may decide to go back to the jungles and resort to guerrilla war. So these things will drag on…

Q. There have been ups and downs in the LTTE campaign. There was a point when they could overrun camps like Elephant Pass. Today, they have come down to individual assassinations and bus bombs. What would you say to this?

A. The government tried to overrun Muhamalai and come down to Elephant Pass. The Army Commander himself has accepted that over 300 soldiers died. Now the LTTE is having battle tanks as well – which were captured during the Muhamalai battle.

Q. Coming back to the bus bombs, this is exactly the kind of tactic used by terrorists in the West, bombing buses and trains. When the LTTE resorts to bus bombings, the west is going to stand up and take notice because this is what is happening in their own countries as well. Your comments?

A. I do not know whether the LTTE is to blame. They have denied involvement. There is some talk that Sinhala nationalists who have a history of armed uprisings have carried those out in order to pressure the government to ban the LTTE. That is one school of thought. The TNA is totally against this kind of killings. This is a case of killing innocent civilians. From the beginning the EPRLF was against this. There is also another matter to take into consideration. There is so much aerial bombardment in the north, and civilians are getting killed, as in Mannar and in Vakarai. We told the President several times not to do it. The government is trying to show the world that it is the LTTE targets that are being bombed. That however, is not the case. The LTTE is very much intact. They have been targeting civilians. The government says that the LTTE is using civilians as human shields. If people live in proximity to a Army camp and the LTTE attacks it killing civilians in the process, are we going to say that the Army was using civilians as human shields? An elected government has a duty to protect the ordinary people. If you take the past few months, there were no killing of civilians. There were no bus bombs and things like that. It is the government that started killing civilians. I do not know whether these bus bombings are in retaliation for that. But we as the TNA, totally condemn the killing of civilians.

Q. Would you be in favour of Indian intervention in Sri Lanka again like in 1987?

A. I don’t think India is in a position to send the Army once again. But India wants to solve this problem through negotiations.

Q. How is a solution going to be implemented without sending an Army?

A. If both the parties agree to a settlement, and agree to a settlement that won’t be necessary.

Q. Are you saying that you are against Indian intervention?

A. I don’t think the government of Sri Lanka or the LTTE will invite the Indian Army. Through various sources, we have come to know that India is not in a position to send an Army. We can talk and come to a settlement without the Indian Army. With the participation of Indian experts and officers, we can solve this through negotiations, without the need for an Army.

Q. When you are thinking of negotiations, who is the leader that you are talking of? Are young thinking of Mahinda Rajapakse or Ranil Wickremasinghe? Who in your view is the leader who would be most amenable to a solution?

A. It is the Sinhala people who have to decide on the best leader to solve this problem. We have seen so many leaders from J. R. Jayewardene’s time onwards. Chandrika Kumaratunga also said she was for peace, but what happened? She ended up saying it was “peace through war”. After Ranil Wickremasinghe was elected, he spoke of an international safety net, and Milinda Moragoda said that if the LTTE started a war, it would not be the Sri Lankan Army that will fight the LTTE but the American Army. Such nonsense was uttered by the UNP also. We have leaders but not statesmen. Here everybody is thinking about the next election.

Q. If the two provinces are merged and powers devolved, will you be willing to devolve similar powers to the Muslim and Sinhalese minorities living in the east?

A. If you envisage a scenario where the north and east are merged and power devolved, there will be Sinhala and Muslim minorities living in the east, and Tamil and Muslim minorities living in the south. Whatever the powers given to the minorities living in the south will also be given to the minorities living in the north and east. I strongly feel that there should be some sort of institutional arrangement in the east for the Muslims. They have issues of religion and security and they do not have much faith in the Tamils. As a Tamil I feel that there should be some sort of an institutional arrangement with the Muslims in the east which should be worked out through negotiations. [island.lk]

Victor Ivan, Editor of Ravaya speaks to C. A. Chandraprema on the current state of the ethnic conflict and the need to radically rethink our attitudes. Ivan, one of the most respected figures in Sinhala journalism has often combined activism with his journalism. He has campaigned vigorously for democracy and the rights of minorities.

Q. Don’t you get the feeling that we have reached a turning point in the ethnic conflict?

A. We have, indeed, reached a stage where we cannot continue like this. Prabhakaran also cannot continue as he is doing at present. Prabhakaran will not be able to sell the concept of a separate state even among his own people in the future, because`A0the Tamil people are beginning to realise that this is nothing but a Utopian dream. When I speak to the Tamil people I know, they accept that a separate state is not a realistic goal. We are caught up in a vicious cycle. They have been wronged by us. They, too, have wronged us in turn.

In my view, the real problems of the Tamil people do not relate to the demand for a separate state. I do not deny that`A0constitutional reform will be necessary to solve the problems of the Tamil people. But even without constitutional reform, many problems can be solved. I do not understand why the Sinhalese leadership does not resolve these problems that can be cleared up without waiting for constitutional reform, and why the Tamil leadership does not ask the Sinhala leaders to solve these problems.

For example, the language issue still exists. If someone goes to a police station in the Tamil areas, quite often there aren’t officers who can write down a statement in Tamil. In the Colombo High Courts complex, there is only one Tamil typewriter for all the courts. These basics are no longer on the agenda. Look at the latest set of proposals, the majority report of the all party conference expert panel. They talk of big issues, but the actual causes of the conflict which can be solved quite easily, have escaped our attention.`A0 Before we go on to big issues, an effort should be made to address these lesser issues which can win the goodwill of the Tamil people`A0 and see how`A0 they`A0 react to it. We need a radical change in the approach of both the Tamil and the Sinhalese sides.

In my view, there is some justification for the suspicion the Sinhalese have of`A0Tamil demands. On the other hand, the mistrust the Tamils have of the Sinhala leadership also has some justification. There is some truth in the claims of the Tamil nationalists. There is also some truth in the claims of the Sinhala nationalists. Take for instance the question of merging the northern and eastern provinces. This is an attempt to lay claim to a certain territory. This is a small country. When a small segment of the population lays claim to a large portion of the land, people naturally look askance at it. The slogan “Tamil speaking people” had some validity only if the Muslims supported it. At some point they may have supported it, but not any longer. That means that this slogan of “Tamil speaking people” is no longer valid. Why can’t the Tamil people agree to a formula like this - an exclusively Tamil regional government cantered on the Jaffna peninsula and a regional government for the eastern province which belongs to all three communities?

Q. Separate governments for the north and east?

A. Yes! It will be such a beautiful arrangement. An exclusively Tamil area and a mixed area! The demographic mix`A0 in the eastern province is not found even in Colombo.`A0 The eastern province is unique in this respect, and it can set an example for the rest of the country, as to how to live together and share power. I can’t imagine why anybody would oppose an arrangement like that. Once an arrangement like that is in place, if the two provinces were to merge, they should be free to do so.

If the two provinces are merged from the top, the Sinhalese and the Muslims in the east think they will become minorities and suffer marginalization. How are we to allay these fears? The Muslims argue that in a stand-alone eastern province they have strength in numbers, which they feel will be diluted if the east is merged with the north. This is a valid argument which we have to take into account. Another important point to consider is that there is a`A0difference between the Tamils of the north and the Tamils of the East. This is a historical fact.

The Tamil community in Sri Lanka is not one homogeneous group. When the Up-country Tamils were being disenfranchised, the Ceylon Tamil leadership did not stand up for them. A few, like Chelvanayagam spoke up.`A0 But those who really opposed the disenfranchisement of the Up-country Tamils were Sinhalese - the leaders of the LSSP and CP and people like D. M. Rajapakse, Sri Nissanka, Iriyagolle, W. Dahanayaka.`A0 The vast majority of the northern Tamil leadership actually supported the disenfranchisement of the Up-country Tamil people. It is only now that the northern Tamil leadership speaks of the Up-country Tamils with some sympathy.

It is interesting to observe the behaviour of these minority communities. In 1956, the Muslims thought that the problem is between the Sinhalese and the Tamils, therefore, they should make a separate peace with the majority community and solve their own problems. When the northern problem boiled over, Saumyamoorthy Thondaman made use of it to leverage his own interests. He pointed to the north and said, “We are not like that” and used it to solve his own problems. The powers that be also thought it was going to be a big problem if the Up-country Tamils joined the north. So, they took steps to solve their problems. All these minority communities acted very opportunistically to get their own problems addressed. We also made use of this opportunism for our purposes.

When it comes to the question how we are going to bring about a radical change in attitudes, my personal view is that the Sinhala leadership should apologise to the Tamil people. That will give the Tamil leadership the opportunity to apologise in turn to the Sinhalese. If they do not do that, its going to become a major issue because they, too, have caused grievous harm to the Sinhalese. One thing that the Tamil leadership has never understood is that if a struggle of this nature is to triumph, they need the sympathy and understanding of the Sinhala majority. This is the only such movement in the world that I know of, which has rejected wooing the majority community to their cause. Even in a struggle against an oppressive majority community, you have to have friends within that majority community. You should carry on your struggle in such a way as to win the respect of the majority community.`A0 The Tamil armed struggle has failed in this regard. Had there been no attempt to form a separate state, to demarcate boundaries and territories, and had they not been cruel towards`A0the ordinary Sinhala civilians,`A0 the Sinhala public opinion would have been different. They have created a fear in the minds of the Sinhala people. It is they who should take the initiative to allay those fears. If they are to allay those fears, the first step they should take is to move away from the concept of a separate state and refrain from talking about`A0boundaries and territories. If they are unable to do that, they should at least eschew violence. They should cease being cruel towards the Sinhala public and they should apologise for what they have done. We, too, should be humble enough to apologise to the Tamil people for the wrongs done to them. If this happens, it will be easy to change the way things are.

There is, of course, the question whether we have gone too far to turn back. The LTTE will find it difficult to change, considering the distance they have travelled on the path of violence, sacrificing thousands of`A0lives for a separate state. They may be a very effective armed movement, but in my opinion,`A0they are not an astute political movement. Had they been an astute political movement, they would never have killed Rajiv Gandhi. They have been able to put on a show of indomitable fearlessness through such acts, but it alienated the whole of India. This shows that they did not have the ability to take the big picture into account in political terms. This limitation is not confined to Prabhakaran but common to the entire Tamil movement.

Q. Previous leaders as well?

A. Yes! A golden opportunity that came the way of the Tamil leadership was when they got the leadership of the Opposition in 1977. While fighting for their rights, they could also have fought for the rights of the Sinhalese. Even today, Tamil political parties say they have no interest in other people’s problems. I think this is a wrong policy. They should be sensitive to the problems of the Sinhalese people as well.

The next issue is the peace movement. I do not see anything wrong in talking about peace. King Asoka became a righteous ruler because his conscience was troubled by the large number of`A0deaths caused by his wars of conquest. King Dutugemeunu is said to have been troubled by the large number of deaths caused by his wars of unification. The Mahavamsa has not tried to conceal that fact. These people had a conscience.

The war has raged over the past 20 years or so. In the LTTE controlled north and east, I have seen dwellings that are less than seven feet in height. In the south, the only dwellings below seven feet in height are constructed for animals. When the LTTE tells these hapless people to move, they migrate in their thousands with all their belongings. When the Army tells them to move in the opposite direction, they do that as well. If I were told to live in a large hall for an indefinite period with 300 families, I would commit suicide. But some people have been living in such conditions for years. What have we gained or they gained from this war?

Take the IRA for instance, there is a story about a man who contributed to the change in the IRA. He was a man who had spent a long time in Jail and was held in very high regard by the Irish people. After his release, he had asked some searching questions. “When is this going to end? Is there no end to this? Is there no timeframe to gain national self-respect? Are we going to be ruled all our lives by this conflict? Is that fair?” This kind of questioning led to a change in Irish attitudes. I cannot understand why the same does not apply to the Tamil people. Look at the way people die here. Dying for the ideal of a separate state may evoke a great deal of respect in that society, but the goal is Utopian. Does the person killing himself`A0for the cause know that there will be`A0 a worthwhile result of his actions?

He not only destroys others, but himself as well. Before this conflict erupted, the northern and eastern provinces were arguably more developed than most areas in the south. Today, those areas are the most backward in the country. The government is responsible for this to some extent. But can we absolve the armed Tamil groups of the blame? Isn’t there a better way to do things, to win their rights without subjecting their people to such hardships? The Tamil people should begin to look at this problem rationally.

Q. Are you saying that there is a certain poverty of philosophy within the Tamil movement?

A. I do not claim that the philosophy of the Sinhala leadership is highly developed, but a movement that engages in armed struggle, needs a sound philosophy much more than ordinary political movements. Their philosophy should deal with`A0the`A0goals of the movement and the course of action adopted to realise those goals. But, if the goals are Utopian and the course of action adopted to achieve those goals`A0consist of nothing but unbridled ruthlessness, the result achieved will not be of any benefit to them. Look at the example of Vietnam. They fought the French and later the Americans and defeated them both. But amidst all that bravado, what was the Vietnam that was left in the end? It was a Vietnam that knew how to fight but not much else. Now the Americans have come back to rehabilitate that Vietnam. The result gained was basically useless. Is this what we, too, are going to achieve?

Prabhakaran lives in a bunker. The President of the country also lives in a bunker. They can’t move around freely. We should ask ourselves how to destroy these bunkers. Those who live in bunkers can’t think properly. We need a Tamil-Sinhala initiative for this. The Tamil people have reasonable grievances, the Sinhalese, for their part, have reasonable criticisms of the Tamil armed movement. These have to be brought together and a new discourse initiated.

A criticism levelled against the present day peace movement is that there is no common movement to protest against ALL killings in the country regardless of who perpetrated it. Had such been the policy, the peace movement would have been held in very high esteem. Whether the killings are carried out by the LTTE, the armed forces or by some other group, they should come out in protest against them all, and call for a halt to the blood letting. Had there been a common campaign like this, such a campaign would not have been labelled as pro-LTTE or`A0pro-government. They would have won the respect of the people.

Q. What you are saying here is a question of commonsense. If we talk of peace, we should oppose all killings, instead of protesting selectively. Why has this commonsense approach not been adopted by the present day peace movement?

A. The way I see it, this is a society that is inured to conflict. People tend to look at rebels with some sympathy. But, at times they go over the limit. Because of that sympathy, people tend to look at the killings perpetrated by the rebels also with sympathy. We should look with sympathy only at their grievances, their acts of barbarity should not be approved or condoned. We have arrived at a crossroads in this cycle of violence. Over a 100,000 people have died as a result of armed conflict in this country. Those who remain are alive physically, but their sensibilities and conscience are dead. They can’t distinguish between sweet and foul odours. This society needs to be rehabilitated.

Q. What is the first step that should be taken in this regard?

A. A respected European academic once told me that there were only two successful peace movements in the world - one in South Africa and the other in Germany. In South Africa, the success of the peace movement is well known, but I found the mention of Germany curious considering the killings that occurred in that country. He told me that in the 1960s, the then German Chancellor was shown on TV kneeling at a Jewish cemetery. There was no fanfare or major pronouncements - it was a simple symbolic act of contrition shown on TV. The Jewish people accepted this as an apology for what had happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany. The Chancelleor did not stop at that. In German schools at that time, text books did not mention that dark phase of German history. He ordered that everything should be included in the textbooks as they had happened. I think the healing process should begin in Sri Lanka with a similar symbolic act. I do not know what form this symbolic action should take. But we cannot continue as we are doing at present, blaming one another for what has happened.

Q. You said that there was certain narrowness in the outlook of the Tamil leaders who came before Prabhakaran. What was the reason for this?

A. All our national leaders had certain narrowness in outlook. Leaders in other countries in Asia which have achieved success are different. Take Mahathir Mohomed for example. The people of Malaysia were able to judge his capacity by his first book. He went to jail and was anointed as a leader while in jail. In neighbouring India, all leaders from Mahatma Gandhi to the present President and Prime Minister have written at least one book. Our leaders in contrast have not published any serious work other than collections of their speeches. We have small-time leaders. This smallness was to be seen within the Tamil leadership as well. At the party congress in Vadukkodai, a young leader spoke emotionally about traitors and the need to punish them. S. J. V. Chelvanayagam was also on the stage. At that time, moderate Tamil intellectuals posed the`A0question whether Chelvanayagam did not hear what was being said on stage. (Chelvanayagam had a hearing problem.) Or, was it that a disillusioned Chelvanayagam thought these young men were on the right path? I believe that Chelvanayagam thought they were right. Amirthalingam openly encouraged the northern rebellion. He never thought he would become a victim of that very rebellion. Those Tamil youth were not mature people like Amirthalingam, they were dazzled by the Utopian ideal posited. At that time, they were just a bunch of young men agitating against issues like standardisation. When the separatist demand was announced at the Vaddukkodai conference, Tiruchelvam Senior, (The father of Neelan Tiruchelvam) asked`A0Amirthalingam whether that separatist statement was not dangerous. Amirthalingam told him that it was simply meant to keep the ‘boys’ happy. Those leaders made a big mistake. In the end, they too were killed. This was all due to shortcomings in their thinking.. They did not know where they were going. If they really wanted, there was an alternative way.`A0 Bertrand Russell has said that the characteristics of the great men who contribute to creating a nation automatically become the characteristics of that nation. I believe that to this date. India is running on the fuel pumped in by Mahatma Gandhi. India has a functioning democratic system, a highly respected judiciary, a highly respected bureaucracy, and a highly respected mass media. Nobody gets excited when a Muslim becomes President or a Sikh becomes Prime Minister. That maturity,`A0 was inherited from the struggle led by Mahatma Gandhi.

Q. Various proposals have been put forward to devolve power. We have another such set of proposals. Do you think these proposals serve any purpose, because it originates in Colombo?

There is little or no response to it from the other side. A. When an oppressed nation agitates for their rights, it is the oppressed side that should put forward their`A0proposals, without waiting for the oppressor to do so. This is a major weakness in the Tamil struggle. If Prabhakaran is a real leader, he should present his own set of proposals. Once presented, it can be discussed and debated by all sides.

Q. One might say that Prabhakaran has already put forward his set of proposals - which is the demand for a separatist state`85

A. The demand for a separate state is not a set of proposals. It`A0is a programme that can only lead to the destruction of both them and us. When I went to Jaffna in 1995 at the request of the then President Chandrika Kumaratunga, there was a big dispute about the petroleum ban in the north. The LTTE was bitterly complaining about the ban. I asked Anton Balasingham, “If a separate state is your goal, why is it so important to get petroleum from Colombo? You should be able to survive without help from the south. By your demands I gather that you are unable to survive without Colombo”. The upshot of all this is that a separate state is not feasible. Balasingham did not give me any reply.`A0 If India supports a separate state in the north and east, they will have a line of supply. Without that, this will become a completely meaningless struggle. If their existing goal cannot be achieved, how can we get them to agree to a lesser goal? I think they should engage in a critical self-examination of their goals and their method of struggle. If not, one day, the Tamil people will accuse them of having ruined their lives.`A0 Without moving away from the concept of a separate state, there will never be a solution. It is only when they accept that fact that a basis will emerge for peace talks.

Q. In the absence of a favourable response from the other side, will these new proposals (the majority report) serve any purpose?

A. What I think is that this is a kind of intellectual exercise engaged in by some big people. The Provincial councils were once touted as a solution to the Tamil problem. But the provincial councils function everywhere except in the north and east. These provincial councils are white elephants. India spent a long time formulating a constitution. They debated it vigorously`A0 and ended up with the world’s longest constitution, which has over the years, proved to be very functional and flexible. We in contrast, are too hasty. We try quick-fix solutions. In my view, what should be done first is for both sides to engage in a critical self-examination. We should ask ourselves: How have we wronged them and how have they wronged us? If we start from that point, we will be able to achieve something more meaningful.

Q. If a Tamil person opens his mouth to express a view different to that of the LTTE, he is shot dead. What is the way forward in a culture like that?

A. When a violent struggle is in progress, expressing a dissenting opinion is a risky business. A certain woman I knew carried out an experiment in democracy in Jaffna, borrowing an idea from us - the yellow ribbon campaign for democracy. She was greatly disappointed at the result. She had expected the entire village to hoist yellow flags, because of the esteem in which she was held. But the LTTE had opposed it and only 26 houses had participated. My response was to tell her that she has no cause to be despondent because 26 houses is a big`A0number, given the circumstances. The campaign was not a failure but a success! There is hope even amidst the gloom. Violence cannot hold sway indefinitely. There is a certain despondency spreading within the LTTE - even among the Tamil diaspora living in the west, that the goals of the movement are not realistic. Prabhakaran should have the courage to move away from this false goal. The LTTE captured Elephant Pass. This was a very great military victory. They attacked the Katunayaka Airport, which was also a great victory. If from that point they were unable transform those victories into a solution, then their whole campaign can be deemed to have been unsuccessful. There are no big targets left to attack. If a military campaign goes up to the highest level and then comes down to the level of targeting the cars and jeeps of VIPs, that is a clear indication that their campaign is unsuccessful. They should be able to change tack. They should have the vision to move from the military to the political theatre of action. [island.lk]

By Dushiyanthini Kanagasabapthipillai

“It is bad enough that people are dying of AIDS, but no one should die of ignorance” - Elizabeth Taylor –American Actress

According to the latest figures published on November 21st 2006, by UNAIDS/WHO AIDS Epidemic Update, an estimated 39.5 million people are living with HIV. There were 4.3 million new infections in 2006 with 2.8 million (65%) of these occurring in sub-Saharan Africa and important increases in Eastern Europe, and Central Asia, where there are some indications that infection rates have risen by 50% since 2004. In 2006, 2.9 million people died of AIDS-related illnesses.

An estimated 8.6 million (6.0 million-13.0 million) people were living with HIV in Asia in 2006, including 960,000 (640,000- 2.5 million) who became newly infected in the past year. Approximately 630,000 (430,000- 900,000) died from AIDS-related illnesses in 2006. The number of people receiving antiretroviral therapy has increased more than threefold since 2003, and reached an estimated 235,000 (180,000- 290,000) by June 2006. This represents about 16% of the total number of people in need of antiretroviral treatment in Asia, according to the UNAIDS/WHO AIDS Epidemic Update December 2006.Only Thailand has succeeded in providing treatment to at least to 50% of people needing it according to UNAIDS/WHO 2006.

“Poverty and war are the biggest factors for HIV/AIDS in the developing countries. If a country is poorer or facing a war situation, it is inevitable that HIV/AIDS spread faster in this country than other countries. Poverty and war lead the developing countries to be more vulnerable” says Dr. Veerakathy Harindra FRCP, FRCP (Glasg) Clinical Director, Department of Genito Urinary Medicine, St. Mary’s Hospital, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.

[Dr. Veerakathy Harindra FRCP, FRCP (Glasg)]

He delivered speeches on “Responding to the Challenge of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) and AIDS”, and “Advances in HIV prevention” at the annual scientific session of the College of Venerologists of Sri Lanka in October 2006.

The following are the excerpts of an interview with Dr. Veerakathy Harindra FRCP, FRCP (Glasg) Clinical Director, Department of Genito Urinary Medicine, St. Mary’s Hospital, Portsmouth, United Kingdom:

Q: How do you compare the HIV/AIDS situation now with twenty five years ago?

A: Twenty five years into the global HIV/AIDS epidemic HIV infection rates are alarmingly high. The rate of new HIV infections continues to climb every year, with an estimated 4.9 million people having been infected during 2004. There is no “magic bullet” for HIV prevention. None of the new prevention methods currently being tested is likely to be 100% effective and all will need to be used in combination with existing approaches. Greater access to existing HIV prevention tools could avert half of the new infections projected to occur over the next decade.

A wide range of HIV prevention approaches are available. Behaviour therapy, condom use, voluntary HIV testing and treatment of sexually transmitted infections are proven methods of HIV prevention. A number of promising HIV prevention approaches are in late stage clinical trials.

Male circumcision:
Countries with higher rates of male circumcision have lower rates of HIV infection. The first randomised trial in South Africa showed that circumcised men were 60% less likely to become infected with HIV compared to uncircumcised men. Removal of HIV target cells from the foreskin, keratinisation of skin surface and reduction of STIs are the key factors associated with this reduction. Further 3 trials are on going in Kenya and Uganda.

Microbicides:
Microbicide is a chemical product applied in the vagina to prevent HIV. Anal application is also been studied. Currently five first generation vaginal microbicide candidates are in late stage clinical trials. They act as a physical barrier, maintain vagina flora, and prevent STIs (Sexually Transmitted Infection). In addition a number of second generation microbicide candidates including Tenofovir containing microbicide are in earlier stages of research.

Cervical barrier:
cervical barriers such as diaphragms may help protect women from HIV and others STIs Sexually Transmitted Infection). An efficacy trail of the diaphragm for HIV prevention is nearing completion in south Africa and Zimbabwe.

Herpes suppression:
Genital herpes simplex infection increases the risk of HIV acquisition as well as risk of transmission to others significantly. Trials are being conducted in Africa and the US to test the efficacy of suppression of herpes with acyclovir to lower HIV risk.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis with antiretrovirals: Efficacy trials in the use of Tenofovir and Truvada are being conducted in Botswana, Thailand and Peru. This approach has being successfully used in the prevention of mother to child transmission of HIV. A significant disadvantage to this approach could be the development of drug resistance.

HIV Vaccine:
The aim of the vaccine is to induce either neutralising antibody or T cell response or both. But for more than 25 years scientists have struggled to develop an HIV vaccine. Genetic diversity of HIV, infecting cells of the immune system, spreading from cell to cell and integration of the viral genome have been the key stumbling block in the development of a effective HIV vaccine. Currently 30 HIV vaccine candidates are in clinical trials.

These promising new HIV prevention approaches have the potential to dramatically reduce the burden of HIV/AIDS around the world. Women account for more than half the HIV population globally. They often do not have the social or economic power to refuse sex. Many of these new development provide women with HIV prevention methods that they could initiate.

Q: Why women are more vulnerable than men?

A: Women are biologically vulnerable to HIV than men. Women are increasingly at risk of HIV globally. 10%-20% of the virus is transmitted from person to person. Women are powerless in the developing countries due to socio economic status of their families.

About 40 million people in the world are infected with the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV).More than 16,000 new infections occur,

Approximately 24 million people have died from Acquired ImmunoDeficiency Syndrome (AIDS). About 90% are due to sexual contact, highlighting the need for prevention of HIV transmission.

A recent study conducted by the London school of Hygiene & tropical Medicine estimated that a microbicide that reduced the risk of infection by 40% & that was used by 30% of women at risk in low-income countries – would avert more than 2 million HIV infections a year & save $ 1-billion annually in health care cost.

“Empowering women to protect themselves seems so elemental, and yet when I hear people pontificating against AIDS and acting as if we can do everything through abstinence, I think they don’t know what most women are up against in too many parts of the world today.” - Bill Clinton, Former President of United States of America, and the head of Clinton Foundation, which provide technical and financial assistance to developing countries to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS around the world.

Q: What more should be done in the developing countries to prevent HIV/AIDS?

A: The developing countries need to have a better infrastructure for heath care. HIV/AIDS is the biggest problem in Africa and India. HIV/AIDS is a growing problem in China .

The majority of the doctors in Thailand, and in India are being trained in HIV/AIDS. They have better knowledge about HIV/AIDS compared to twenty five years ago. People Living With HIV/AIDS (PLWHAs) are treated with love and care in Thailand.

The doctors in Sri Lanka are also undergoing training on HIV/AIDS. Awareness on HIV/AIDS is being created among the various sections of the society in Sri Lanka. It’s a positive start to make towards the prevention of HIV/AIDS in Sri Lanka.

Source: humanityashore

Contact: Dushi.Pillai@gmail.com

By Dushiyanthini Kanagasabapathipillai

Dr. Kamalika Abeyratne campaigned tirelessly to create awareness about HIV/AIDS, and stood for the rights of People Living With HIV/AIDS (PLWHA’s) in Sri Lanka. She campaigned vigorously against stigma and discrimination faced by People Living With HIV/AIDS (PLWHA’s). Further she advocated to make the drugs free of charge for the People Living With HIV/AIDS (PLWHA’s) in Sri Lanka. Under the circumstances the pediatrician Dr. Kamalika Abeyratne was subjected to HIV infection

We have gone to the top of information technological revolution. But the fear of the deadly disease is staggering. Though the rate of AIDS, which is due to the HIV infection, is much less in Sri Lanka, yet many are unable to get rid of the fear of the disease. Those who are infected with HIV do not like to reveal it. If revealed many fear there would be no treatment for it and would be ostracized from the society.

A National award was conferred on Late Dr. Kamalika Abeyartne by the former President Mrs. Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga in 2005.Dr.Kamalika Abeyratne was honoured by the then President Mrs. Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga for the medical service, she rendered to the society on the International Women’s Day in 2000.She was hounoured with an award by AIDS Coalition for Care, Education, and Support Services (ACCESS) in 1999, for her dedicated service to create awareness about HIV/AIDS in Sri Lanka. And Zonta Club recognized her with an award in 2000.

Late Dr. Kamalika Abeyratne’s father was a well known Professor George Wickramasuriya. She was a role model for the People Living With HIV/AIDS. She was a cheerful soul with a charming smile always.

Dr. Kamalika Abeyratne passed away on December 10th 2004.

The following intervie was published in Sunday Thinakkual of June 03 rd 2001. It’s been reproduced here to pay tribute to Late Dr.Kamalika Abeyratne on World AIDS Day, which falls on December 01st 2006:

Q: How are you helping those who are infected with HIV/AIDS?

A: Due to the social structure, one who is infected with HIV is relevant to get the blood test done, or fear to tell, or hesitate to tell outside that he or she is infected to HIV. Under these circumstances it is difficult to tell exactly how many are infected with this virus. Yet you have to say that HIV is fast spreading. During the last several years, one who is infected with HIV infection there is no sign of AIDS liable to spread it to others. So it is a very dangerous disease.

Further more, one who is infected with HIV has to reveal that he or she is infected with HIV. If he or she accepts and says that he or she is infected with HIV, then we can help him or her.

In the meantime, some of those who were in Sahara House, the non governmental organization in New Delhi, the capital of India, called us on telephone and asked us to collect all information about those who were affected by HIV/AIDS. We told them to contact the Mind and Heart centre and get all the information. About 10 -15 of them contacted us. We asked them to come on a particular date to a particular place. We expected them and made all arrangements to meet them. But out of those who contacted us on phone not a single person turned up. This is very unfortunate. It is very regrettable and disappointing. Under these circumstance how can we help them?

Q:How do you compare the HIV/AIDS status in Sri Lanka with our neighbouring countries in the region?

A:When we look at our neighboring countries, our country is the one that is the least affected by HIV/AIDS spreading rate in the region. But in countries like India and Philippines, those who are affected by infectious disease get together and form organization to improve their conditions. But in our country there is no cooperation to our efforts. In the school syllabus, the health education regarding reproduction be included forth withy. We do not like to have a healthy discussion about sex, or sexuality in our society.

During the international conference held in Chennai, in India, some mantras shouted saying “Where are the protective sheaths?”, “We have not been supplied with productive sheaths”, “We do not have sufficient productive sheaths”. This matter is being talked about freely to this extent in India. They are also taking measure to prevent HIV/AIDS.

An Irish woman who owns a small industry, has given worth opportunities to those who are infected with HIV –Aids. These girls attend school and study. They are also given opportunity to earn. It has to be mentioned that the bags made by these girls are being sold in a big shop, that sells attractive things like “Body shop” you can also see “sex is fun, but stay with one” printed in those bags.

Q:How are you treated by the society?

A:It is very unfortunate that I got an infectious disease like HIV.This is very unfortunate and vexatious. Because of my love for children I started practicing as a pediatrician from the time I passed out in 1959, from the medical college. I started practicing in the historic city of Anuradhapura, and Gampaha. From 1968 I worked for two decades at the Lady Ridgeway Hospital in Colombo. Further from 1980 my husband Michael who is also a pediatrician, and I were attending to the medical needs of the needy people in the remote villages in Sri Lanka. After some years we went to Saudi Arabia and served for five years at King Fahd Specialist Hospital in Al Gassim, Saudi Arabia from 1990-1994 and worked as a Senior Consultant Pediatrician, and returned to serve in the country.

In 1995 when we were going to Tangalle to serve the medical needs for “Nawajeevana”, the home based rehabilitation programme for the handicapped, we met with a fatal car accident. Due to the serious injuries, which left Dr. Kamalika Abeyratne with HIV positive after a blood transfusion at Karapitiya Hospital. The blood belonged to one who was infected with HIV due to this I was also infected with HIV. It was the beginning of the end of my life.

The President of Sri Lanka Mrs. Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaramatunga has taken action to supply me with the necessary medicine for five years. I am very much obliged to her. She ordered a helicopter to bring us back from Tangalle to Colombo. But due to the bad weather the helicopter could not land in Tangalle. We came to Koggala airstrip, and from there we were flown to Colombo.

The news started to spread like wild fire immediately, when I was found HIV positive. Thus started our trauma. The nursing homes refused to admit me, except Asiri Nursing Home, and Oasis Nuring Home later. Then I went to London for further treatment.

I had my family’s fullest support and care with love along with my friends, and colleagues. But other People Living With HIV/AIDS (PLWHA’s) have to undergo more trauma than I have gone through. Because our social set up is such. They have to face stigma and discrimination, which lead to several problems. The society is not in anyway uniting them or comforting them. We should take care of People Living With HIV/AIDS (PLWHA’s) without any discrimination. We should treat them as equal citizens of the country.

Source: humanityashore

Contact: Dushi.Pillai@gmail.com