tw news-features

Statement on the peace process by Professor G. L. Peiris on behalf UNP

It is evident that the country is today in the throes of a grave crisis. At the core of this is the acute anxiety caused in the minds of the public by the virtual collapse of the peace process. This has brought about the most serious consequences in every aspect of the life of the nation.

The United National Party, as the largest political party in the Opposition, was convinced that a Government elected to office with a fresh mandate is entitled to the benefit of every opportunity to translate its mandate into concrete action. It is for this reason that our Party, with a due sense of responsibility, refrained during the last seven months from any course of action which could aggravate the problems of the Government in pursuing the goal of a just and durable peace.

At this time, however, the dangerously deteriorating security situation has demonstrated beyond any doubt that the Government’s approach to the peace process is fundamentally flawed.

We consider it our duty, therefore, in an objective and dispassionate spirit to point out to the Government and the public the infirmities and anomalies inherent in the Government’s approach to the pursuit of peace in our country. In doing so, we are strengthened by the belief that there is still an opportunity to redeem a dismal situation if only we have the courage and the wisdom to seize it.

We offer the following constructive suggestions in the hope that this opportunity will not elude our nation which surely deserves better than the predicament in which it now stands with regard to even the basic requisites of a secure and orderly life.

1. The Government which assumed office after the Presidential Election of 17th November 2005, inherited from the previous Administration a coherent and self-contained peace process. Its principal elements were the Ceasefire Agreement, the resolve of the parties to explore a political solution within the framework identified in the Oslo Communiqu`E9 of December 2002, the function of the Royal Norwegian Government as facilitator, the role of the Co-Chairs signifying the robust involvement of the international community, and the elements incorporated in the Tokyo Declaration of June 2003, which gave the fullest expression to values anchored in pluralism, democracy, and the entrenchment of human rights of all communities.

The new Government is in no way constrained by any of these elements. It has the undisputed right, and indeed the duty, in keeping with its mandate, to modify, refine, reconstruct or even totally reject any or all of the components of the pre-existing process if, in its own judgment, such action is necessary. The widest possible spectrum of choice is at the disposal of the new Government. But it has to make decisions. It cannot abdicate this responsibility, seeking refuge in policies which it has professedly disowned. The primary cause of the present stagnation is the absence of conscious and deliberate decision making. Competing factors and alternatives have to be assessed, and a clear stand taken.

This is, quite obviously, the need of the hour. It has been long overdue. Acceptance of responsibility and the making of decisions by the Government in power cannot be postponed any longer except at the greatest peril to the nation.

If the Government decides after careful reflection that the existing peace process should remain substantially intact and that it is the Government’s intention to implement this process without material change, it should do so with conviction. If, on the other hand, the Government decides that it cannot, in all conscience, subscribe to the underpinnings of the process, then, it must substitute, for the present process, a distinct and separate process which reflects its own outlook and policy. It is hardly fair by the nation for the Government indefinitely to continue doing neither; the current condition of drift is the inevitable consequence of this state of things.

2. The most explicit gap in the Government’s handling of the peace process is the total absence of any effective political component.

The peace process in Sri Lanka, admittedly, has had a chequered history. Hope and expectation, dominant during some periods, have given way to despair and dejection at other times. But, throughout successive phases of the peace process, during all its travails, there has been an unbroken thread. This consisted of clearly formulated proposals for the sharing of power as the basis of a negotiated political settlement. The form and degree of devolution, and the character of the structures by which it was sought to be accomplished, naturally varied from one formulation to another. Nevertheless, the constant factor was the commitment of different governments, whatever their political complexion, to a series of structured proposals for power sharing as the cornerstone of the suggested solution.

The lacuna at present lies in the reality that, at this time, there is no indication whatever, even in barest outline, of any scheme for power sharing which the Government holds itself prepared to adopt and promote as its own. This is without parallel in our contemporary history.

The unique nature of this lapse, and the gravity of its implications, are immediately apparent. The defence of the nation’s sovereignty and its territorial integrity represents, of course, a paramount concern. But there has not been, at any time, under any regime in Sri Lanka, military action bereft of a firm political initiative placed alongside it. During the period of former President J R Jayewardene the presence of the Indian Peace Keeping Force on the Island was complemented by the introduction of the Thirteenth Amendment establishing for the first time constitutionally empowered regional bodies, into the public law of Sri Lanka. Similarly, during the first People’s Alliance Government from 1994 to 2000, side by side with sporadic military initiatives there was an elaborate scheme for devolution of power which formed the centrepiece of the draft Constitution presented to Parliament on 3rd August 2000.

In vivid contrast to this pattern, the absence of even a basic document containing the barebones of a political proposal today is a grave deficiency. This lapse, unless it is immediately rectified, cannot but impact adversely on the substance and credibility of the peace process and cause serious erosion of goodwill in the international community at a decisive moment.

3. The preparation of a document of this kind is necessarily dependent on political ownership and direction. This cannot possibly be dispensed with.

For this reason it seems to us that the task of formulating a framework for the devolution of power cannot be entrusted appropriately to an Advisory Committee consisting of experts drawn from different disciplines and professional backgrounds. Even though the officials appointed have undoubted competence and stature, they can be expected to address their daunting task successfully only if they are provided at least with guidelines indicative of the parameters within which devolution is acceptable to the Government as a matter of policy.

Officials cannot produce a blueprint for power sharing in a political vacuum. Their contribution, however valuable, has necessarily to be preceded by clear-cut decisions of an essentially political nature which only the Government in power is entitled to make. These decisions will involve such issues as the structural framework of the State, the unit of devolution, the line of demarcation between functions of the central government and regional bodies, the acceptability or otherwise of shared competencies embedded at present in the Concurrent List, and an informed choice between symmetrical and asymmetrical approaches to the devolution of power.

Without the benefit of political guidance on these crucial issues, it is our view that a Committee of Experts is not, by any means, a viable instrument for accomplishment of the task which has been assigned to it.

4. The range and focus of the current discourse on issues relating to the peace process suffer from a regrettable distortion.

The point of departure for a healthy discourse at this critical moment requires a broadening, not a narrowing, of the subject matter of the discussion; and yet, the opposite is happening at present, with irreparable damage inflicted on the peace process.

The stagnant condition of the peace process cannot, in our view, be reversed without restoration of the emphasis on substantive political issues. These were the matters of overriding concern at several rounds of talks held by the United National Front Government with the LTTE from September 2002 until March 2003.

Unfortunately, however, in recent months there has been exclusive preoccupation with matters pertaining to the fragility of the Ceasefire Agreement. But, it seems to us, the Ceasefire Agreement is bound to be vulnerable in the circumstances which prevail at present. A ceasefire agreement, by its very nature, is not a permanent solution but merely a means of bringing about an atmosphere in which the substantive issues can be addressed by the parties with minimal strain or tension. In the absence of any realistic prospect of resuming the substantive political dialogue between the parties in the foreseeable future, increasing fragility of the ceasefire agreement is unavoidable. It is, therefore, a matter of the utmost priority to try to expand the frontiers of the discourse with a view to including, and concentrating on, political issues; but this is, unhappily, going by default.

In fact, the present position is even more unsatisfactory. This is because the current focus is not even on the Ceasefire Agreement, in all its aspects, but on one particular feature of it - namely, the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission.

This surprising, and highly damaging, aberration has the effect that, although forward movement with the peace process clearly calls for a significant opening out of frontiers, the area selected for coverage (intentionally or otherwise) is becoming progressively more restricted. This has served as a powerful impetus for the hardening of attitudes and a degree of polarisation which entails great jeopardy to the continuity of the peace process, even at the basic level.

5. We would identify the ad hoc nature of the Government’s approach to the peace process as a source of considerable weakness.

The Sri Lankan peace process comprises a variety of facets straddling political, economic, social, humanitarian and foreign relations issues, all of which are inextricably intertwined. We do not observe any consistent attempt by the Government to deal with all these issues within a properly integrated and comprehensive format.

A symptom of this is the tendency to assail and thereby weaken some elements of the process without adequately appreciating their origins or relevant avenues of development. For instance, many recent actions of the Government clearly demonstrate incomplete understanding that the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord constitutes the foundation of a process which has been carried forward for twenty years, with strips and layers added to it for the purpose of accommodating subsequent developments. It does not require much imagination to realise that such landmarks in the peace process as the Oslo Communiqu`E9 and the Tokyo Declaration, in terms of the principles and values they encapsulate, are linked logically to the seminal concepts contained in the provisions of the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord crafted by former President J R Jayewardene and former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. We are convinced that the Indian political and constitutional experience is even more directly relevant to us now than it was then.

This is why it is a matter of importance to the leadership of the United National Party to work assiduously to nurture and consolidate the relationship with India, in all its ramifications. This effort is rooted in depth of conviction that the goodwill and support of India are indispensable in achieving a durable political solution to the Island’s ethnic conflict.

6. We are of opinion that lack of clarity in demarcating the scope of the functions of the Peace Secretariat, in relation to other agencies and functionaries of the Government, has unwittingly debilitated several useful initiatives by the Peace Secretariat.

There has been widespread comment in recent weeks that many statements issued, and a host of matters handled, by the Peace Secretariat ought more appropriately to fall within the sphere of responsibility of other officials or departments of the Government. Especially at this time, the focus and identity of the Peace Secretariat must be undiluted. A minimum condition of the potential for success is that the work of the Peace Secretariat must at all times have an orientation conducive to its essential peace building function. While security related matters often call for communication with the public, these issues are best dealt with by officials belonging to the defence establishment.

It is a matter of the utmost urgency at this time to address in earnest the shortcomings of the peace process and to put in place suitable remedies before irretrievable harm is done to the security and wellbeing of the nation.

By K. Godage

The Co-Chairs have met in Oslo last Friday but have not been able to take the peace process forward and this is not for a lack of effort on their part, neither does it come as a surprise. The composition of the Co-Chairs has as much to do with it as the fact that the LTTE has another agenda far removed from that of the Co-Chairs or the government of Sri Lanka.

The perceptive and perhaps the best analyst of Indian Foreign Policy Raja Mohan states, in an article titled “India must take the lead in South Asia” (and I do agree with him entirely) “Part of the responsibility for the collapsing peace process in Sri Lanka must be laid at India’s door. New Delhi’s reluctance to lead the peace process has emboldened the LTTE to violate the Ceasefire Agreement with impunity. For the LTTE now fears nothing from India” Raja Mohan could not have said a truer word.

Raja Mohan has also stated “the disturbing reality is that India does not seem to have got its regional security act together. At a time when the world is looking at Delhi to take charge of the region India is dropping the ball”. He also refers to the fact that in the past two years during which our leaders have gone to Delhi perhaps ten times, the Indian PM has not found the time to reciprocate even once; that by itself shows the importance he places on relations with the countries of the region and of giving leadership. Since he is an Economist and a technocrat it appears that he does not have a feel for that which is essentially political. When the LTTE took out Rajiv they certainly did India and the region great harm.

I have myself stated time and again that if there be one single reason for the situation that has arisen in this country today it is because India has shirked her responsibility as the regional power. India which armed and trained the Tamil militants and allowed them to destabilize this country and prevented us from ending the insurrection in March of 1987 by threatening to invade this country and subsequently circumscribed our sovereignty today takes a ‘hands off’ attitude claiming, as one of her recent Foreign Ministers, who probably suffered from acute amnesia did, that this was an “internal problem” of Sri Lanka”. We wish they were that enlightened in 1987. Despite this attitude of India our leaders keep running to Delhi to keep them informed of every move we make. A PTI report filed from Delhi dated 30th April states that the government of Sri Lanka is sending a senior Minister to seek India’s support to revive the peace process. It would, like all other such visits nay pilgrimages to India for the same purpose, including the visit of the President himself, be a complete waste of time. Incidentally I have it from authority that the UNP government of Ranil Wickremesinghe cleared the Solheim-Balasingham crafted pro LTTE CFA with the Indians and to be precise with Birjesh Mishra! (what did he know or care ? has he ever visited this country?). The CFA was not seen leave alone cleared with our Service Chiefs or our Executive President but with India! We never learn so we live to repeat our mistakes.

Today the LTTE is militarily twice as strong as they were before, having exploited and violated the ceasefire agreement with impunity. The most disturbing news in recent times is that they are in possession of nerve gas and other lethal chemical weapons! It is a known fact that the LTTE used mustard gas in 1985. India meanwhile chooses to sit back and say that have no wish to get involved in this “messy situation” –how rich! And to think that our foolish politicians keep running to Delhi to keep them informed, for what purpose I ask? After their acts of commission we now have their acts of omission, which as Raja Mohan also states has placed us in this predicament or to use their own words created this “messy situation”.

The Co-Chairs have failed to rein in the LTTE. This is primarily because the Co-Chairs have very little clout with the LTTE. This would not have been the situation had India agreed to join the Co-Chairs, which was the minimum request of the government of Sri Lanka. The LTTE has shown utter contempt for the Co-Chairs and spat at the entire international community by their continued violations of the CFA and the killing of our servicemen with impunity twice immediately after the Co-Chairs most recent statement in Brussels, before the meeting in Geneva and after that meeting and now the attempt to assassinate the Army chief. Surely this culture of impunity must be ended.

Ours must be the only country on the planet where its President and five Ministers including the Foreign Minister and the Navy Commander have been assassinated and a second President and its Army Commander have escaped assassination and the known culprits have suffered no punishment whatsoever leave alone being brought to book. Ours appears to be a soft society. This is indeed the land of the lotus eaters. Should we not be thoroughly ashamed of ourselves?

Considering the fact that there has been very little that Norway and the Co-Chairs could do to stop the killings and to head-off a war which now seems almost inevitable particularly because India is sitting it out and does not wish to get involved for domestic political reasons (trapped by domestic political considerations) reneging on her obligations by this country, may I suggest to the Co-Chairs that they in the first instance make an unbiased assessment of how the two parties have sought to comply with the CFA and then consider reporting the matter to the Security Council, for non-compliance by the LTTE has led to a deterioration in the security situation and is fast becoming a threat to regional peace and security. Yes insurgent groups in the region are linking up and networking, as has been reported by Intelligence Agencies, presenting a threat not only to regional peace and security but to the very integrity of sovereign states. The Co Chairs should next call for a UN sponsored Peace-Enforcement Force from countries of the region to be stationed in the North in particular and in the districts of Trincomalee and Batticaloa in the east to enforce the CFA. We would then be rid of the Moronic Monitoring Mission that has done much harm to this country and never have to suffer the likes of Telefssen and Haukland ever again. The UN has in recent years sent multi- national armed forces to Haiti, Cambodia, Dafur and elsewhere. This initiative should have the support of all the political parties in the south if it is to be supported in the UN. The UN could then negotiate an agreement between the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE on a phased, balanced and verifiable de-escalation, de-militarization and normalization process and at the same time undertake a Dayton type process to arrive at a political settlement. The government of Sri Lanka along with Norway and the Co Chairs must solicit the assistance of the UN to head off the impending disaster for the LTTE will definitely resume the war after the elections in Tamil Nadu are over in May for theirs is a one point agenda—- Eelam ! and thousand will die as a consequence. [Source: Daily Mirror]

[The writer is a former Diplomat]

By S.Chandrasekharan

With the attack on the Sri Lankan Army Chief by a suspected LTTE suicide bomber on the 25th , followed by attack on the Naval crafts of Sri Lankan Navy and the retaliatory air strikes in the Sampoor area off Trincomalee by the Sri Lankan Air force, the question arises whether the Cease-fire agreement brokered by Norway four years ago is coming apart?

It looks to be, unless the international donor body, India and other well meaning countries urge both the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government to go back to the negotiating table and resume the talks in Geneva that has been indefinitely postponed.

It is said that in any militant movement, cold logic and analysis defy some of the actions of the militants. The recent suicide attack in Colombo which had all the signatures of LTTE’s involvement in the attack on the Sri Lankan Army Commander is one such example that defies all logic. At one stroke, all efforts made by the LTTE to legitimise itself internationally have gone up in smoke and it is a question of time before others like the European Union follows Canada which not only declared the LTTE a terrorist outfit but followed it up quickly with raids by the Royal Canadian Police on some of the offices of Sri Lankan Tamil expatriates.

These developments have come at a very inconvenient time for India, where the elections to the state assembly in May in Tamil Nadu are due. Besides a call of support to President Rajapakse, the immediate response of the Indian government was to condemn the attack and a formal carefully worded statement that said “violence is not the answer to any problem and that political dialogue is the way to resolve outstanding issues.”

The Incident:

On 25th April, a female suicide bomber dressing herself as a pregnant woman managed to enter the high security area of Army Headquarters and waited at the gate of the Army Hospital where many others were also waiting to attend the clinic. When the Army commander’s convoy passed the gate of the hospital, the suicide bomber threw herself on to the convoy. Eight persons including an Army major and two army motor cycle riders died in the blast and over 27 persons including many civilians were injured.

The Army Commander who was critically injured in the attack is said to be out of danger now after being operated for many hours.

It is said that a few hours after the incident, a naval craft was attacked near Sampoor area in Trincomalee area by suspected militants. This is however being denied by the LTTE.

The same evening, Sampoor area including Mutur was bombarded by Kfir fighters of Sri Lankan Air force on suspected LTTE positions. Mutur has also been hit by artillery fire and Naval gunboats. There are no reports of LTTE casualties, but independent sources say that at least ten civilians have been killed.

While Sri Lanka has declared that the air strikes would continue as a deterrent, it is the Sri Lankan Monitoring Mission which has been placed in a difficult situation. The Swedish Major. Gen. Ulf Henricsson of SLMM has said that if air strikes continued, peace talks would become difficult.

It looks that the Sri Lankan President had no choice but to go ahead with retaliatory action. What is important is that he ensures that there is no Sinhala backlash as is already happening in Trincomalee. In his nation wide broadcast, President Rajapakse said “This country belongs to all its citizens….. who live here. Today’s crisis cannot be resolved by dividing this country.” It is not only his party, but also the JVP and the JHU that need to go an extra length to prevent attacks on Tamils. In the aftermath of a blast at the market place in Trincomalee, over 100 houses and business establishments of the Tamils have been destroyed leaving 3000 persons home less. This is just the beginning but more could follow if the situation is not brought under control.

It is unclear what made the LTTE choose a high level target which they knew would jeopardize not only the peace talks but the cease fire agreement itself. On their behalf it is said that the Govt. of Sri Lanka has been engaging in activities to put a noose round the LTTE, by openly going round the capitals of the world to prosecute the LTTE and stop their fund raising and that President Rajapakse has embarked on punitive measures against the Tamil community to bolster his own political position with other extreme forces in the south.

The attack on the Army chief would have required meticulous preparations and would have taken months to prepare. It is just a chance that the Chief survived. It is also likely that the LTTE has many more such projects and it is only hoped that it desists from such acts which would not only bring international wrath, but would make other few countries that are left to declare them as a “terrorist outfit”.

The LTTE has not yet understood that reviving the hostilities will not take them anywhere. There is no doubt that they have nothing to show to the people as peace dividend after almost four years of cease-fire. There is also the potential danger of more Karunas emerging. It looks that east is lost to the LTTE and any revival of hostility would only confirm that position!

There is no military solution for the LTTE and there could be none either for the Sri Lankan government. The Cease fire has to be continued. Sooner or later both sides will have to go into substantive talks. They will have to step back from their rigid positions and help Norway continue with the cease fire process.
[Source: SAAG]

By M.S.Shah Jahan

War is like a fire- if you do not put it out , it will burn itself out “ – The Art of War.

While Mr. Geneva II is slipped into the Bay of Geneva from the boat ‘S.L.Northeast’, here the much talked about or criticized Hon. CFA, the Minister in charge of enforcing peace in the country, is admitted into the intensive care unit of ill- equipped Kilinochchi Hospital. Not surgery, but God only could save him. We pray.

The ‘New Reds’ and the ‘Holy Men’ say, his abrogation is the mandate MR received on the 17th November 2005. But the ruling alliance says it is not the mandate they received on the 30th March 2006. What is a mandate ? A mandate is an authorization given to act to a representative of the people.

Well, an election is fought on various core issues and all the parties give limitless promises, especially on the cost of living. Even bread at Rs.3.50 was jarring on the ears of some but nothing happened. Fortunately this is not Calcutta. Otherwise all the ladies would have come onto the middle of the road to ‘ghero’ the traffic.

Can you remember, the political party that promised to bring rice from the moon, but ultimately it only gave policemen the additional job of arresting the people for eating rice on Tuesdays and Thursdays. If bread and rice were covered by a mandate,wasn’t the failure to do so, against the ‘mandate’ ? What punishment should have been meted out ?

Electoral victories can never be taken as affirmatives for a single cause. Therefore there is no validity in the argument that the ‘Chinthanaya’ is for war. Further, the Chinthanaya never said that it would increase the price of consumer goods. So why do the prices go up ? But what else can you do when the petrol price goes above $70 a barrel ? From whose father’s house you can bring money to run the country ? His party has no experience in robbing with masked faces banks at gun point .

But, what is a plebiscite? A plebiscite is a vote by which the people of an entire country express an opinion for or against - an yes or no, on a single issue or proposal. For example,‘ Should we ban the consumption of liquor ?. ‘Can the life of parliament be extended without an election?’ People could decide in whichever way they want to. You can call it the will of people, and it should be executed. Unfortunately today the character of a plebiscite is wrongly used for a mandate. It is like the difference between a pony and a horse.

Besides, Norway is not a decision- making field umpire, not even a third umpire, but a marriage broker whose task is to tie two together in nuptials. Therefore, the middle man has to do many gimmicksto turn around one party with opposite views . But a section of our people want Norway to be divorced for excessive or illicit courtship with the Tigers. At an angle the accusation would look right, but the argument is wrong. Who wants peace, the government or militants? When a sinner enters a church, naturally he draws attention.

After dismissing this broker, what are we to do? Do we have any other or, are there any other suitors for our girl? No, no one is there in sight. She is not only the most beautiful in town, but also she is frequently accused of insincerity. It is not one country Norway that we deal with, but also a team of donors who stands behind invincibly. We have an unpalatable situation with them too, but must bear it, because if there is no Norway, then there is no way for us for peace.

Analysts feel it is the spoils of Geneva I that caused the present impasse. First and foremost, agreeing to the mission impossible of disarming paramilitaries has turned out to be Lanka’s Waterloo. Legal interpretations and counter interpretations, have drifted the two parties instead of bringing them closer.

Big people should be magnanimous in words and deeds, not petty in attitudes and comments, to say like, ‘only one speaks English’, ‘he is of a lower caste,that of cutting and dressing hair and shaving and trimming beards’. Had they happened to deal with Losif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili , would they have remarked that his father was a cobbler and mother did laundry and house cleaning for Jews? He being a mighty Soviet leader, would have reacted in a different way. Napoleon was not a born French but he became the first French Emperor. His one time commanders also happened to serve under his orders. It is one’s present position that is counted.

The North at one time, produced the largest number of English educated people. That is why they could serve beyond Sri Lanka in various capacities. Eminent professionals who shine today in the ‘New World’ and ‘Down Under’ should think, whether they could have reached such heights if they had been taught in their mother tongue? Who took away English ? Why ? Because the Tamils were more proficient than the rest, in the Queen’s language.

Peace today looks illusive even though Norway is in the middle.

The way the situation is deteriorating in the Northeast makes people think that war is at their door .If our leaders decide that a military solution, not a tiger hunt, is the only answer to this problem, let us go ahead for a war with the LTTE within a time frame of two years or so. Because it would mean an end to the suffering of Tamil, Sinhala and Muslim people, within our period, rather than passing it to the next generation. But war and love are easy to start, hard to stop. The world has seen wars, not at the drop of a hat, but as the last resort after every thing else failed.

A war brings untold misery. A country in war will have to make a number of sacrifices. What kind of sacrifices will the people of this country undertake, as they have no war experience ?. The price of consumer goods will go up. The energy cost will escalate further and reach $100 a barrel before 2010, once Condoleezza Rice gets into the ring in Tehran to wrestle with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The treasury will be crunched and everything will be rationed except sunlight and air. Some workers will lose their jobs, others will will have salary cuts and also worklonger hours. Will they do it? Will the Comrades be able to convince the brigade?

Let me put a straight question to you. While China has only five days off, Sri Lanka tops the world with the highest number of holidays. What right or eligibility, has a Third World country like ours, to have a 5 day week ? In 1972 the price of crude oil was about $3.00 per barrel at Rs.10 a US$ but by the end of 1974 the price of oil had quadrupled to over $12.00.The Saturday half working day was scrapped by Madam Sirimao’s government to cushion the blow of ‘Oil Shoku’. Today the oil price is 6 times more. We did not give 6 more half day holidays but went on swimming against the tide with the sharks, and survived.

Recently in Japan when the government wanted to scrap Saturday as a working day, the labour unions refused to accept the holiday. Here should not we give up this Saturday off and work more days of the week ? How many of us are prepared to campaign for Saturday work without extra stipend ? Does shouting before Hilton Hotel only express one’s patriotism ? May I, through this column, ask the President to declare Saturday a full working day ?.

Further who is going to fight the war, the poor lads from villages ? What contribution will the people who opt for war offer?. How many recruits can they provide from their sources ? What war service will these leaders perform?

When Lalith Athulathmudali called for one we could see youngsters standing for a mile on the Galle Face Centre Road. Is not the situation different now ?

How about the affluent guys living or studying in the West ?

More than everything, else why can’t the groups clamouring for war introduce immediately a legislation for compulsory national service for a year or so for youths of 18 years old ? Which leader will offer his children first?

Besides, the provincial councils were created to give greater power to the Northeast only. When they do not have them, can one ask in what way are the PCs necessary for the others? Is not it too much of polity and waste of public funds?

Finally, like the Iranian Ambassador Gholamreza Ansari was quoted by Russian news agencies “One way to avert war is to be prepared for any war,” Let us too prepare for war, and avert war, as common people of the South and Northeast detest war, but love peace. [Source: Daily Mirror]

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Professor Philip Alston, today called on the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) to take urgent measures to end political killings and to strengthen protection for human rights as conflict looked set to spiral out of control.

‘The current impasse in negotiations is no excuse for either side not taking immediate steps to end political killings and protect human rights,” he said. “The dangerous escalation of the conflict in recent days is a direct consequence of killings being allowed to run unchecked.”

The Special Rapporteur has recently released the final report of his fact-finding mission to Sri Lanka in December 2005. His report draws on visits and interviews undertaken in Ampara, Batticaloa, Colombo and Kilinochchi with Government officials, representatives of the LTTE, the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM), representatives of the diplomatic community, witnesses of extrajudicial killings and relatives of those killed, representatives of various political parties, and members of Sri Lankan civil society.

The Special Rapporteur expressed deep concern about the widespread killings and violence that has continued to spiral since his visit, culminating in a suicide bomb attack on the army chief in Colombo and retaliatory military strikes on 25 April. These included the assassination of Tamil National Alliance MP Joseph Parajasingham while attending church on Christmas Eve 2005; the apparent extra-judicial execution by security forces of five students in Trincomalee on 2 January; and the killing of a prominent Tamil community leader in Trincomalee, Mr J Vigneswaran, on 7 April. The victims also include members of the Sinhalese and Muslim communities, including transport workers, business people and government officials. During the same period, there have been numerous claymore mine and other attacks on police and security forces.

Alston observed that “Every such killing represents a major setback to the peace process, and every retaliatory death plays into the hands of those whose interests do not lie in the restoration of peace. In responding to the situation, the Government must give primacy to protecting civilian lives.”

The Special Rapporteur noted the difficulties in attributing responsibility for many attacks in the absence of effective investigation by Sri Lanka’s law enforcement bodies or the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission that oversees the ceasefire. Both parties appear to be exploiting the ambiguities presented by the ceasefire agreement and the weakness of its monitoring mission to consolidate and advance their position. He noted also that the national Human Rights Commission currently had its hands tied due to the Government’s failure to appoint new members through the Constitutional Council.

The Special Rapporteur found the LTTE’s denials of responsibility for many attacks unconvincing, and warned that itsapparent use of surrogate groups to attack the security forces represented a dangerous escalation of the conflict. He also noted that the LTTE’s characterization of its political opponents within the Tamil community as paramilitaries is a gross oversimplification of a complex situation.

At the same time, the Special Rapporteur reported a dangerous indifference on the part of the Government to other armed elements responsible for attacks, including the Karuna group. While he found no clear evidence of official collusion during his visit, he reported strong circumstancial evidence of at least informal cooperation between Government forces and these factions.

The Special Rapporteur noted the Government had failed to effectively investigate most political killings. Few suspects are pursued or identified, let alone apprehended. In many cases, the police act as if the ceasefire agreement itself prevented them from fulfilling their law enforcement functions. Even where arrests have been made, witnesses face threats and prosecutions rarely proceed. The Special Rapporteur expressed special concern about serious threats made in recent weeks to Dr Manohoran, the father of one of five students killed in Trincomalee on 2 January who had given eyewitness testimony, and urged the authorities to expedite this case while ensuring full protection to the witnesses and families. He was also disturbed by the re-emergence of reports of deaths in custody and disappearances at the hands of the security forces, problems that have wracked Sri Lanka in the past.

At the same time, the Special Rapporteur noted that the SLMM has taken an overly narrow view of its mandate as excluding investigation, making it appear simply as a recording agency. While the SLMM has made an invaluable contribution over the past four years, the time has come to reinforce its work. He urged the parties to accord the SLMM a stronger and better-equipped role to enable it to carry out more in-depth monitoring of killings and to publicly report its findings of the facts in different cases. This would build public confidence and help quell the claims, counter-claims and rumours that were only fuelling the cycle of retaliation and conflict.

Longer term, the Special Rapporteur said a broader human rights framework and more comprehensive international monitoring mechanism is needed to address the many human rights issues that went beyond the ceasefire. He commended to the parties the options presented in this regard by their human rights advisor, Mr Ian Martin.

In his report, the Special Rapporteur also stressed the need for reforms to the criminal justice system as a whole to improve law enforcement, prevent problems of torture and deaths in custody, and better safeguard the human rights of all Sri Lankans.

[Full Report]

Professor Alston is an independent expert appointed by the Commission on Human Rights to investigate these issues worldwide. He was invited by the Government of Sri Lanka to make a fact finding visit to the country.

by K. Arvind

The euphoria generated in Geneva in February predictably came under siege from the twin evils of pseudo-patriotism and religious fanaticsm. Both extremes intensely resist any power-sharing arrangements with the Tamils—ironically, the only consistent feature in Sri Lankan politics across Sinhala party lines since 1956. If the international community in general and the Norwegians in particular are laughing at our amazing level of indecision we must only blame ourselves. One day we genuflect before the Norwegians to help us to get the LTTE to sit for talks. And then we ask them to clear out. Even before they land in Oslo, we plead with them on bended knees to come back and help us talk—again. The pendulum is about to swing back once more as the anti-Tamil twins of Lankan contemporary politics heat up their Get-Out-Norway campaign.

The long-awaited Geneva talks finally took place in February and both sides agreed to concede on a few things asked by the other side and to meet again in Geneva in April. This certainly is a positive move and so the country rejoiced. Unfortunately, even the small gains of Geneva are now under attack. There is pure venom generated by the Sinhala extremists aiming to torpedo the next round of talks. A former Secretary of Defence and another recognised political lecturer—also believed to be an advisor to the President—have both dismissed the claim of some government men “an amendment, in fact, is another agreement” theory—as “irresponsible”.

The lessons of Thimpu should not be ignored. Romesh Bandari commented after Thimpu that yet another peace prospect was destroyed at the altar of legal trivia. The LTTE, believing that the South is at last interested in peace, would have expected the government delegation to return to Colombo and to work pronto on acting on its Geneva promises. Shocked and infuriated by negative post-Geneva developments here, they blame the government for the heat generated and threaten they will go to Geneva in April only if the GoSL pledges in February are honoured.

The LTTE points out that since the CFA was signed four years ago there have been four meetings on foreign soil between the GoSL and LTTE —in all of which progress of the Agreement was naturally discussed. Some loose ends in interpretation and context were tied up at these meetings in the spirit of carrying the talks forward. The CFA, signed by two parties, with the mutually requested aid of a facilitator and prepared after months of work, at any rate, is a fait accompli. The LTTE charge that playing politics within Sri Lanka and winning elections; misleading the Sinhala people by false interpretations and pledges; is the worry of the Sinhala side over which they (LTTE) have neither interest nor control. And, the LTTE further charge that Rajapakse’s regime after winning the elections on contradictions, reckless and impractible promises to the majority are now trying to chose the platform of Geneva to play to the Sinhala electorate. It is well known that the present ruling side—prior to and after the Presidential Elections—claimed “the CFA was unconstitutional and bad in law. The first thing we will do is to change it entirely, once we come to power”. This is what the GoSL delegation tried to do in Geneva initially and were forced to give up. They later praised its usefulness in the official communiques. The “hue and cry” since the February Geneva talks is believed to be designed for local consumption.

Does the poor showing of the JVP-JHU in the March 31 local polls indicate a fresh re-thinking on the part of the Sinhala voter? Had the Sinhala voter eventually decided that a hard anti-Tamil line will in no way usher in peace? The rejection of the JVP by the voters of Trincomalee UC to return even a single Sinhala representative is yet another significant lesson whose import should be understood in perspective. The national mandate Mahinda has received must be utilised to forge the structures of a united nation. Inspite of the lack-lustre leadership of Ranil Wickremesinghe and mass cross-overs of UNP party cadres and some seniors, the party emerged second best on March 31. The international community and the Buddhist religious hierarchy have called for a common front between the two leading Sinhala majority parties as a panacea for the hitherto unsolvable national question. Anton Balasingham, who would hardly want to get involved in a subject as peace-centric as this, sings the same refrain. No doubt with the Wanni nod.

It is also time the masses in the Sinhala electorate understood the limitations of the JVP leadership. They certainly had entre to political power—with several high-profile Cabinet Posts and Deputy Ministerships for quite a while. The following was expected of them (1) bring down the Cost of Living (2) invigorate the economy (3) bring down the price of fish and help increase the catch-capacity of the fishing industry (4) improve on agricultural performance (5) create more jobs to accommodate the unemployed and unemployed graduates. CBK entrusted these to them on the basis of their lofty claims that they have the methodology and know-how to deliver all. They failed badly. The JVP are not equipped to rule on a national scale. Their strength is clearly in agitating and creating mass unrest, in the process of which State property is destroyed, as they did more than once earlier. The JVP, now caught in a strategy-trap, is in the process of disintegration. SWRD’s predicament in 1956 was no dissimilar. The JHU, not wishing to play second fiddle, is now openly seeking political power. The present political climate contains within it several dangers. The life of the government certainly is threatened as the JVP and JHU—integral parts of the government—openly indulge in severe anti-government bashing. The President, taking in all defecting UNP parliamentarians and perhaps working to cause the cross-over, is making his own preparations to insure the survival of his regime in the event of a JVP and/or JHU pull-out. Signalling that the Mahinda-JVP romance is turning sour Weerawansa and Anura Dissanayake hoarsely scream “let Mahinda Rajapakse not forget the JVP placed him in power.” This is not the language of an ally. This is the hate-filled language of someone vowing to bring you down. 1956 bore similarities of the political climate of today. The radical monks, expected to give spiritual guidance and leadership to the people - are today working in the reverse.

They entered Parliament assuring the Buddhist majority they do so symbolically to eradicate bribery and corruption from the political system and to show the way to righteous governance. The people believed them and voted them in. What is the situation today? The Cost of Living is unbearable even to the middle class, crime has never been higher, consumption of narcotics is on the rise, foreign prostitutes openly roam our streets day in and day out, gambling casinos have sprung up everywhere, people of means live in fear inside their homes in the suburbs and rural homes, armed bank robbery is not uncommon, owners of Pajeros and similar high-priced vehicles live in fear - some of them killed. Sri Lanka is featured in the Internet as a haven for paedophiles, incest is many times higher. These are all areas in which the activist heterodox Buddhist clergy could have helped eradicate and save the fair name of the country if their played their traditional role. Apparently, their focus is elsewhere. They are not satisfied with a symbolic role with small numbers in Parliament. They now want outright political dominance all over the apparatus of political power. I use the word “activist” to distinguish the political variety from the thousands of orthodox Buddhist priests who live a simple life by the precepts and continue to enjoy their venerated place in society. They refuse to be seduced by the beckoning of political power. There are many highly learned priests who enjoy the respect of a wide circle of non-Sinhala students and academics who go to learn of Buddhist philosophy from them regularly. There are several Tamil-speaking Buddhist priests whose preachings on TV are listened to with keen interest by Tamils all over -the country on Poya days. The performance of the JHU since they came to Parliament saw them as equally susceptible as lay men in all the negatives of the dirty side of democracy - lure of lucre, rackets in the illegal sale of expensive vehicle permits, questionable land deals, consorting with Parliamentarians with a history of rowdism and connections to the criminal underworld - and many other. Sri Lanka has in recent years seen many signs of religious intolerance and bigotry committed by secret societies. The Catholic and Christian churches that were desecrated in many parts of the country know who caused the meticulously planned attacks against them under the very nose of the guardians of the law. Yet, they are unwilling to share this knowledge with the authorities as they fear this will take them nowhere. There is no guarantee they have seen the end of these shameful acts of vandalism committed against them - Sinhalese themselves; only for the sin of professing another religious faith. In such a poisoned atmosphere what justice and fair-play can the Tamil people expect? Tamils both here and overseas have from 1956 seen little by way of change in the majority Sinhalese mind-set to suggest there can be a future in which they can live as equals. They cannot be faulted if they continue to suspect the Sinhala political and religious leaders will never agree to share power with them peacefully - even at limited provincial level. The trail of aborted agreements with leaders of governments in Colombo extending to a half a century bear adequate witness to this. Does Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva suggest a new beginning when he assured in Geneve to “look at issues from a fresh perspective?” In recent times we have seen the minds of the unsuspecting Sinhala people being fed with illusionary bogeys of “ISGA” “P-Toms” “Interim Agreement” and many more. This is a continuation of a process that began 60 years ago - “Federalism” “B-C Pact” “Dudley-Chelva Pact” “District Councils” and now the CFA. It is more than a coincidence whenever an agreement to solve the Tamil issue is about to materialize, a fearsome bogey is let loose throughout the land with high intensity publicity and with vocal sections of the Buddhist clergy and related interests spearheading the campaign. I am reminded of what President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad’ said recently - referring to an alleged conspiracy by some Western powers to place Iran in bad light. “They will introduce an imagined enemy of the West and link your name with that Al Qaeda, J.I. and whatever. If there is no such enemy they will invent one for you. In case of Iran earlier, it was the Ayatollas and the fear of export of the Islamic revolution. Today it is a conspiracy set against us to prevent our right to produce nuclear energy for non-military purposes”. So it is with the players in the Sri Lankan side. The question of Tamil rights and justice to them is always linked with some element engaging majority Sinhala apprehension and prejudice. No won-der most Sinhalese think, in the parrot-like cry of a notorious convoluted political pole-vaulter and lawyer “all LTTEJTigers are Tamils and, there fore, all Tamils are LTTEITigers.” Meanwhile, significant political developments are taking place in adjoining Tamilnadu, which those who counsel the President on Indian affairs - and particularly the more relevant Tamilnadu affairs - should keep him informed in perspective. Trying to meet the Tamilnadu Chief Minister at short notice, against established protocol and prior to a crucial Assembly election there where the Sri Lankan Tamil issue can be dynamite, are indications of amateurism on the part of the President’s advisors. Today, we have the situation where Vaiko of the MDMK - a high-profile LTTE supporter often referred to as the “Voice of the Tamil Tigers in India” - has joined hands with Tamilrtadu Chief Minister Jayalalitha in the forthcoming TN Assembly Elections due on May 08. In the 234 seat TN Assembly by giving Vaiko/MDMK 35 seat allocations Jayalalitha has won him over Karunanidhi/DMK who refused to consider more. than 25 seats. It was only recently Vaiko emerged from long incarceration - courtesy Jayalalitha under the POTA Act - cousin of our PTA. Jayalalitha’s dislike of the LTTE is all too well known. She often complains of a 24-hour threat to her life from the LTTE. The Vaiko-Jayalalitha new found “kiss-and-forget-it-all honeymoon” can change the New Delhi equation with Colombo against us unless handled by GoSL properly. Vaiko is quite capable of changing inter alia Jayalalitha’s anti-LTTE posture for a quid pro quo on the alleged LTTE threat on her life. The international news channels report this week Vaiko’s MDMK has asked New Delhi not to support the Sri Lankan government in any manner to strengthen her armed services military capability which, Vaiko warns will be used against civilian Tamils. The scenario still can be changed from Chennai if our men there handle matters with finesse and professionalism. Colombo lacks the right quality in our representation in Chennai where a career man is in charge. In the changing political scenario, Chennai should ideally be manned by a politically-savvy Tamil-speaking official with established connections with the political, social and commercial elites there. Although the unassuming Sumith Nakalagama is carrying out his Consular duties satisfactorily the political results expected out of his office may well be beyond him. Experts and India-watchers have called on the Sri Lanka government on many occasions to man our Chennai office with men who can change the equation there in Sri Lanka’s favour and it is hoped the President will give this matter his most urgent consideration.

President Rajapakse has much work to do if he is to deliver on the long- awaited peace the country voted him for. He must have realized by now the Bard’s wise words “Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown.” As that giant cut-out of his at Kollupitiya Junction called him “a fearless man of action.” This is the time to justify that faith in him and not to go by the cynical broadside of CBK “Rajapakse Incorporated knows no direction and will take this country to ruin and division.” Like SWRD in his time President Rajapakse is surrounded by contradictory political forces armed with diametrically opposed radical programmes - to all of which the President appears to have nodded as quid pro quo for votes in the Presidential Elections last November that catapulted him into power.

Critical I have been so far and realize I must share with the President what I think he ought to do to gain a breakthrough. Ideally, he should (1) “look at issues from a fresh perspective to find the sustainable solution to the conflict.” He must display the courage to steer out of fixed positions and show greater political savvy. Insisting on the safer course and path of least resistance - the much contested concept of a Unitary State - will only take you to war and separation, as S.B. Dissanayake - that messiah who was expected to save and ressurect the UNP warned in his come-back trail until he chose hibernation in Kangarooland (2) “demonstrate unwavering commitment to ensure substantial and sustainable economic development to the North- East Provinces (3) “‘invest in tsunami affected areas of the North-East to enable these areas to expeditiously recover from the devastation of the conflict and the tsunami.” Invoking the Courts on legal trivia under the guise of technicalities to deny the dues of the Tamil areas was rubbing salt in the wounds of the Tamils already brought to their kneea by the tsunami. Take those necessary steps to give without any more delay to the Tamil areas the funds the international community had sent them for purposes of rehabilitation (4) “remove the serious hardships caused to farmers, fishermen and others involved in economic pursuit in the North-East.” This can best be done by releasing some of the houses and agricultural lands seized under the HSZ programme, many of which do not pose any threat to the forces at all.

Neither the spirit of Geneva nor the President’s sincerity to usher in peace appears to be moving sources in the Army, as we learn in a recent meeting between army high-ups and a group of citizens whose properties have been seized by the army. These house-owners have been denied even their request for rent at government rates. While the political hierarchy wants to make amends with the Tamil people, the Army does not yield. It is with concern one learns from Ranil Wickramasinghe he had, in fact, as PM instructed the Army during to release some of these properties to show the good intention of GoSL. But these instructions have been deliberately ignored. Fortunately, there is now a semblance of hope and justice. The Supreme Court is entertaining a HR petition by a HSZ victim and has called for the list of properties affected. One of the risks of militarisation of a civil society is there will come a time for non-submission by uniformed men to political authority. This is a dangerous trend. Elsewhere I have had occasion to refer to the fear if there are, within the forces, elements outside the control of the C-in-C. This instance, the Taraki killing, the Bindunuwewa massacre, the killing recently of the 5 boys in Trincomalee and many others makes one suspect if there indeed are sinister forces in uniform bent on benefiting from the continuation of the war and the ethnic conflict - a danger the President must pay attention to? Though this has been regularly asked of previous C-in-C’s a separate Muslim Unit in the army has always been rejected as a path that would in no way help a national peace solution but, on the other hand, one that would complicate already complex defence matters. Therefore, the choice of creating a new Muslim Unit, already dubbed as the “Jihad Army” by the Tamil side, will only further inflame the North-East. The idea on the part of the decision-makers in uniform may be to eventually get the Muslims and the

Tamils to fight it out amongst themselves in the belief benefits will flow the army way on the basis of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” logic. Such a move, when the GoSL team is about to leave to Geneve can in no way be considered as a confidence building measure and will only go to harden the LTTE’s position. This sensitive development is now being discussed in increasing frequency, though in whispers. For obvious reasons, the media is reluctant to get involved in this ‘hot potato’ but as the old Tamil saying goes you cannot cover an elephant with a rice pan. Diplomats stationed in Colombo and serious students of Lankan affairs in the academia view this matter with much concern due to its potential to endanger our democratic way of life itself.

If the relief listed in the previous para above is given, much of it culled from the GoSL Communique, I think, Tamils will see them as reasons to feel GoSL is sincere in their declared campaign of “winning the hearts and minds of the Tamil people.” Likewise, the LTTE on their part, should honour their obligations made in Geneva and take those necessary steps to change the mass of the Sinhalese to think of them in a different and more acceptable Ught. The -Kalpitiya Dvora incident last week, that took place after preparation of this article, that snuffed out several young lives of both the Navy and LTTE personnel is yet another grim reminder unless bold and historical decisions are made urgently to abort the war, the blood of men on both sides and the tears of their innocent families will continue to haunt our lives. [Source: Island] - [TamilWeek Apr 16, 2006]