Midweek Review
From meeting Pottu, Balraj and Soosai to being Sri Lanka’s top envoy in Canada
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Who could have imagined that the incumbent government would name wartime President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s one-time emissary for talks with the top LTTE leadership, as Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in Ottawa?
Prominent civil society activist Harsha Kumara Navaratne, on Dec 07, 2021 presented his credentials as Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner to the Governor General of Canada Mary May Simon, at a ceremony held at the Rideau Hall in Ottawa. Having rejected the nomination of retired Air Force Commander Air Marshal Sumangala Dias, Ottawa swiftly accepted the appointment of Navaratne. Founding chairperson of the Sevalanka Foundation, Navaratne succeeded career diplomat Asoka Girigagama, who was unceremoniously recalled in the wake of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s triumph at the Nov 2019 presidential election.
Canada, a member of Sri Lanka Co-Chairs at the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), ignored AM Dias receiving unanimous approval of the Parliamentary High Posts Committee, Chaired by Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, On Nov 09, 2020. Following the Nov 2019 presidential election, Navaratne received appointment as a member of the Human Rights Council of Sri Lanka (HRCSL). The HRCSL comprised former lawmaker Dr. Jagath Balasuriya, (Chairperson),– Dr. M.H. Nimal Karunasiri, Dr. Vijitha Nanayakkara, Ms. Anusuya Shanmuganathan and H.K. Navaratne Weraduwa. Under President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the new Board of HRCSL was constituted on Dec 10, 2020. Balasuriya’s appointment drew flak from various quarters, especially from the NGO front. The former lawmaker quit on Oct 31, 2021. He was replaced by retired Supreme Court Judge Rohini Marasinghe. In place of Harsha Kumara Navaratne, the government brought in Ven. Kalupahana Piyarathana, a member of the civil society grouping, Sri Lanka Collective for Consensus (SLCC) engaged in a high profile dialogue with the Rajapaksa government.
However, the SLCC has failed to receive the much required support from other mainly Western-funded prominent civil society groups. The writer dealt with the simmering disputes among the civil society over the government-SLCC relationship in Midweek piece titled ‘Govt-civil society imbroglio’ published on the Dec 15 edition of The Island.
The decision to bring in Navaratne, in place of AM Dias, underscores the readiness on the part of the government to please the Western powers, despite the obvious snub, based on unverified allegations against the victorious Lankan security forces over “the most ruthless terrorist outfit in the world” amidst all odds arrayed against them. Canada is behaving in this arrogant and crass manner at the behest of the US-led West, despite a wealth of fresh evidence against her over committing genocide against its native population. There are instances of, for example, members of its so-called famed Royal Canadian Mounted Police being used by oil and gas companies as a private militia to harass natives and their supporters standing in their way in what is left of their own traditional lands to this day. But bleeding heart prominent liberal outfits funded by the West see nothing of it even though they are ever ready to scream bloody murder in places like Sri Lanka, at the slightest digression.
During his short tenure as a member of the HRCSL, the writer had an opportunity to discuss the accountability issues with Navaratne. By then, t Parliament had confirmed his appointment as Sri Lanka’s top envoy to Ottawa, one of the countries vigorously pursuing accountability agenda against us. Navaratne’s appointment should be examined against the backdrop of the passage of Bill 104 in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario in May 2021. The Bill designated May 18 each year as ‘Tamil Genocide Education Week.’ Sri Lanka couldn’t have sent a better person than Navaratne to convince the Canadians. The civil society activist is one of those who had been in touch with the Colombo-based diplomatic community and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Navaratne had access to the LTTE leaders as senior as the much-feared LTTE Intelligence Chief Shanmugalingam Sivashankar aka ‘Pottu Amman, Balasegaram Kandiah alias Balraj and Sea Tiger leader Thillaiyampalam Sivanesan aka Soosai. Asked whether he had met Velupillai Prabhakaran, Navaratne said: “No I haven’t talked to him though I saw him at well-attended media conferences in Kilinochchi in the wake of the Feb 2002 Ceasefire Agreement (CFA).
Clandestine meet with Pottu and Balraj
The LTTE triggered a major crisis by stopping the free flow of water from the Mavil-aru anicut. The Mavil-aru crisis gripped the country in the wake of an abortive bid to assassinate the then Army Chief, Lt. Gen. Sarath Fonseka, on April 25, 2006. The country was rapidly hurtling towards Eelam War IV. In between the Mavil-aru crisis (July-August 2006) and the attempt on the life of the Army Chief (late April 2006), the LTTE mounted claymore mine attacks.
In spite of taking a bold public stand, the then President Mahinda Rajapaksa made a desperate bid to prevent the resumption of fighting. The LTTE believed it had the wherewithal to bring large scale offensive operations, both in the Northern and Eastern Provinces,to a successful conclusion, simultaneously. On the other hand, the then political leadership felt the military lacked the sufficient firepower to meet the LTTE threat.
On the instructions of President Rajapaksa, Harsha Kumara Navaratne had accompanied the then Secretary to the President Lalith Weeratunga to meet Pottu Amman and Balraj in KIlinochchi. Navaratne, at that time, appeared to have enjoyed the confidence of the LTTE as his social service organisation Sevalanka was doing a great deal of work in that violent environment both in the North and the South, and received a prompt response despite the LTTE launching a spate of claymore mine attacks in the Jaffna peninsula and Mannar as well. Navaratne told the writer how they tried to convince the LTTE to ease pressure on the military in the North. President Mahinda Rajapaksa had summoned Navaratne for a meeting at his official residence and instructed him to arrange for an urgent meeting with the LTTE. However, they had to return empty handed as Pottu and Balraj ruled out giving up their renewed violent strategy.
However, C.A. Chandraprema, in his widely led ‘Gota’s war: The Crushing of Tamil Tiger Terrorism in Sri Lanka’ published in 2012, asserted that Weeratunga met an LTTE representative named Poovannam at Arippu, Mannar. Chandraprema, one time Sunday Island political correspondent now our Permanent Representative in Geneva, Chandraprema referred to Weeratunga reaching the destination in a Sevalanka vehicle though no reference was made to Navaratne. Now both Chandrapema and Navaratne hold key diplomatic appointments in Geneva and Ottawa, respectively. They cannot absolve themselves of their responsibility to set the record straight. But that depends on the incumbent government’s strategy.
Then Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa sought Navaratne’s help once again when the LTTE triggered the Mavil-aru crisis in the East. On the instructions of President Rajapaksa, Navaratne had taken the then Minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle for a clandestine meeting with the LTTE leadership. Soosai had represented the LTTE and the meeting had taken place in an extremely hostile environment in KIlinochchi. Navaratne told the writer that Jeyaraj couldn’t convince Soosai to de-escalate Mavil-aru. Obviously, the LTTE believed, at that time it had the wherewithal to overwhelm the military and force a stalemate, regardless of the consequences.
However, the then Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa thought otherwise. ‘Evaluation of Norwegian peace efforts in Sri Lanka 1997-2009’ launched in Nov 2011 revealed the then Defence Secretary’s response. Let me reproduce the relevant section verbatim. “On April 06, 2006, Hanssen-Bauer and Brattskar had a tense meeting with Defene Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa. In response to a question about whether the ethnic and political problems in Sri Lanka could be solved by military means Gotabaya answers ‘yes’”.
In the second week of August 2006, the LTTE mounted simultaneous offensives in the North and the East. Navaratne said that former editor of Ravaya, Victor Ivan, in a brief article following the assassination of Minister Fernandopulle quite appropriately dealt with the meetings in Kilinochchi, arranged by him on President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s request. The LTTE assassinated Fernandopulle on the morning of April 06, 2008 at Weliweriya. Victor Ivan’s article appeared in a book titled ‘Jeyaraj’ published by Cyril Ederamulla in 2011. Ivan made the revelation as regards secret talks sought by President Mahinda Rajapaksa on the thebasis of a discussion TNA leader R. Sampanthan, then lawmakers, Mavai Senathiraja and Suresh Premachandran, Harsha Kumara Navaratne and himself had at the residence of Dr. Kumar Rupesinghe several months after Fernandopulle’s assassination.
Navaratne had revealed determined efforts made by President Rajapaksa to prevent war when one of the TNA lawmakers therein accused the President of not making an attempt to solve the conflict through negotiations. Ivan conveniently refrained from naming the TNA MP but obviously the accuser had been one among Sampanthan, Mavai Senathiraja or Suresh Premachandran.
Based on what Navaratne had told the gathering, Ivan asserted that Fernandopulle’s equally aggressive response to Soosai at the Kilinochchi meet had influenced the decision to assassinate the Minister. But by the time, the LTTE carried out the Weliweriya assassination, the LTTE was retreating on the Vanni front after having lost the battles in the Eastern Province. The military brought the war to a successful conclusion in May 2009, less than one and half years after Fernandopulle’s assassination.
It would be pertinent to mention that the LTTE operative, known as Morris, who played a significant role in Fernandopulle assassination, also planned the suicide attack on Lt. Gen. Fonseka. Fonseka recently declared in Parliament that Morris should be released along with others held under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).
According to Ivan, in his presence at the Finance Ministry, Fernandopulle, in 1994 requested the then Prime Minister Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga to include him in the government delegation for talks with the LTTE. This was immediately after Kumaratunga took oaths as the Prime Minister following parliamentary polls in August 1994. In spite of Fernandopulle asserting himself a place in the delegation due to his ability to converse in three languages, in addition to his knowledge of the national issue, Kumaratunga rejected the proposal. Ivan said that Kumaratunga expressed the view that inclusion of Ministers weren’t suitable. Interestingly, Ivan revealed that following the 1995 peace negotiations and the resumption of war, Kumaratunga sent him to Jaffna to meet the LTTE, unofficially. This should be examined against the backdrop of Ivan’s claim that though he had been invited by Kumaratunga to be a member of her delegation for talks with the LTTE, he was not included.
New HC’s responsibilities
There is no harm in the government seeking a consensus with the civil society as regards the post-war reconciliation process. However, the government cannot turn a blind eye to sharp differences among civil society members over the SLCC dialogue with the incumbent dispensation. In addition, the government should pay attention to the high profile joint Global Tamil Forum (GTF) and the Tamil National Alliance campaign meant to pressure Sri Lanka on the human rights front. For some strange reason, the government continues to refrain from setting the record straight in Geneva. There is absolutely no point in only educating the public by way of presentations, articles and statements. The newly set up Strategic Communication Unit (SCU) of the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute of International Relations and Strategic Studies has so far dealt with some issues at hand. Waruni Kumarasinghe and Dinithi Dharmapala countered lies in a well compiled article headlined ‘AI report on Sri Lanka: Far from the truth.’ Subsequently, attorney-at-law Dharshan Weerasekera, an SCU consultant, in an article titled ‘Ontario’s Bill 104: Tamil Genocide Education or Mis-education Week?’ discussed the absurdity in the Canadian action. But, would that be enough to overcome the challenge faced by Sri Lanka. Due to utterly irresponsible, sluggish and treacherous response on the part of the Foreign Ministry of Sri Lanka, the Western powers had no difficulty in including the war-winning country on the Geneva agenda ON THE BASIS OF UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATIONS.
The following are the issues that needed government attention without further delay. (1) Dismissal of war crimes accusations by war time US Defence Attaché Lt. Col. Lawrence Smith in Colombo. Smith did so at the May-June 2011 first post-war defence seminar in Colombo. The State Department disputed the official’s right to represent the US at the forum though it refrained from challenging the statement. (2) Examine the US statement along with Lord Naseby’s Oct 2017 disclosure based on the then British Defence advisor here Lt. Colonel Anthony Gash’s cables to London during the war. (3) Wikileaks revelations that dealt with the Sri Lanka war. A high profile Norwegian study on its role in the Sri Lanka conflict examined some of these cables. However, the Norwegian process never strengthened Sri Lanka’s defence. Instead, Norway merely sought to disown its culpability in the events leading to the annihilation of the LTTE. One of the most important Wikileaks revelations disputed the oft-repeated narrative against Sri Lanka of deliberately targeting civilians. The cable proved that ground forces took heavy losses by taking the civilian factor into consideration. (4) Wide discrepancies in loss of civilian lives claimed by the UN and various other interested parties. The UN estimated the figure at 40,000 (March 2011) whereas Amnesty International (Sept 2011) placed the number at 10,000 and a member of the UK Parliament (Sept 2011) estimated the death toll at 100,000. (5) Disgraceful attempt made by Geneva to exploit so called Mannar mass graves during the Yahapalana administration. The Foreign Ministry remained silent as was often the case on the Mannar graves, while Western diplomats played politics only to be proved utterly wrong. Acting at the interest of those hell-bent on blaming Sri Lanka, Geneva too faulted Sri Lanka before the conclusion of the investigation. The then Northern Province Governor C.V. Wigneswaran rejected scientific findings of Beta Analytic Institute of Florida, USA, in respect of samples of skeletal remains sent from the Mannar mass grave site. Human Rights Commissioner Michelle Bachelet went to the extent of commenting on the Mannar mass grave in her report that dealt with the period from Oct 2015 to January 2019. We come to wonder whether she was actually a victim of Gen. Pinochet or a mere manufactured victim. (Now, Wigneswaran as the leader of a Northern Province political party representing the current Parliament continues to propagate war crimes accusations. Other political parties never properly challenged Wigneswaran’s lies. They should be ashamed and take remedial measures at least now.) Had the US lab issued a report to suit their strategy, would they have accepted fresh tests in case the government of Sri Lanka requested? The following is the relevant section bearing No 23 from Bachelet’s report: “On May 29, 2018, human skeletal remains were discovered at a construction site in Mannar (Northern Province), Excavations conducted in support of the Office on Missing Persons, revealed a mass grave from which more than 300 skeletons were discovered. It was the second mass grave found in Mannar following the discovery of a site in 2014. Given that other mass graves might be expected to be found in the future, systematic access to grave sites by the Office as an observer is crucial for it to fully discharge its mandate, particularly with regard to the investigation and identification of remains, it is imperative that the proposed reforms on the law relating to inquests, and relevant protocols to operationalise the law be adopted. The capacity of the forensic sector must also be strengthened, including in areas of forensic anthropology, forensic archaeology and genetics, and its coordination with the Office of Missing Persons must be ensured.”
(6) Wigneswaran, in his capacity as the then Northern Province Chief Minister in August 2016 accused the Army of killing over 100 LTTE cadres held in rehabilitation facilities. Wigneswaran claimed the detainees had been given poisonous injections resulting in deaths of 104 persons. The unprecedented accusation made by the retired Supreme Court judge had been timed to attract international attention. Wignewaran is on record as having said a US medical team visiting Jaffna at that time would examine the former rehabilitated LTTE cadres, who he alleged had fallen sick because they were injected with poisonous substances at government detention or rehabilitation centres.
Sri Lanka paid a very heavy price for its pathetic failure to counter a web of lies fashioned by interested parties, both local and foreign and well-funded by the West to coerce the country to adopt a new Constitution to the liking of its long time agenda here. The previous government played a key part in this strategy. Their strategy remained simple. A new Constitution meant to do away with Sri Lanka’s unitary status to address STILL unsubstantiated war crimes allegations. The previous government reached agreement with Geneva regarding a new Constitution as part of the overall deal that could have been executed successfully if not for the UNP causing a massive crisis by way of Feb 27, 2015 Treasury bond scam at the onset of the yahapalana administration.
Over two years after the last presidential election, the government is yet to take tangible measures to counter specific lies. That should be a key part of overall strategy to convince the world and the Tamil speaking people here that eradication of the LTTE was certainly not a war waged against them though the group, almost 100 percent comprised Tamils.