Connect with us

Midweek Review

Formidable New Year Challenges

Published

on

President Gotabaya Rajapaksa gestures during a recent meeting at Rawanakanda, a village at Imbulpe, Balangoda. Senior Advisor to President Lalith Weeratunga looks on (Pic by Jeevan Chandimal/PMD)

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Last Monday’s briefing at the Presidential Secretariat (old parliament) on the status of the war-winning armed forces revealed the pathetic state of affairs during the yahapalana administration. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa chaired the Defence Ministry review which lasted several hours. After Defence Secretary Maj. Gen. Kamal Gunaratne addressed the gathering, respective service chiefs explained the crisis experienced by the armed forces during the 2015 to 2019 period.

Navy Chief VA Nishantha Ulugetenne and Airforce Chief AVM Sudarshana Pathirana explained how they were deprived of the required support to maintain available assets. There hadn’t been a similar meeting since the change of government in Nov 2019. The then government allowed the armed forces to deteriorate. The rapid deterioration had been all part of the yahapalana strategy meant to undermine the armed forces. Downsizing the Army had been one crucial aspect and certainly not the only issue at that time.

The evaluation revealed that since Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s departure from the Defence Ministry in January 2015 the new government held up even the basic projects. Having won the January 8, 2015 presidential election, Sirisena named one-time environment and renewable energy Secretary B.M.U.D. Basnayake as Secretary to the Ministry of Defence (11.01.2015 – 08.09.2015). Subsequently, Karunasena Hettiarachchi (09.09.2015 – 05.07.2015), Kapila Waidyaratne (06.07.2017 – 30.10.2018), Hemasiri Fernando (30.10.2018 – 25.04.2019) and Gen. Shantha Kottegoda (24.04.2019 – 19-11.2019) received appointment as the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence, amidst the massive turmoil caused by the Easter carnage.

If not for the Easter carnage, President Sirisena, now an SLPP lawmaker (Polonnaruwa district) wouldn’t have named a retired military officer as Secretary Defence. The yahapalana administration appointed a retired DIG as the Chief of National Intelligence (CNI) – a special post created by President Mahinda Rajapaksa, in late 2006, on the advice of the then Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, to oversee all intelligence services, including the SIS (State Intelligence Service).

The Rajapaksas created the post of CNI, by way of a cabinet paper, especially for Maj. Gen. Kapila Hendavitharana, in the wake of his retirement. Hendavitharana, who had been deeply involved in clandestine operations against terrorists, knew what was going on in the war zone, elimination of high profile LTTE targets, or overall attempts to intercept LTTE arms shipments on the high seas et al. Even after the successful conclusion of the war, in May 2009, the CNI continued to play a significant role in the previous Rajapaksa government’s security strategy.

 The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe duo weakened the security setup. Those who held high positions felt no great desire for sustaining higher level of security. One-time Defence Secretary, Austin Fernando, told the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (P CoI) probing the Easter Sunday carnage that security of a country did not depend on its Defence Secretary. There were various structures and it was a matter of collective action, Fernando, served as the Defence Secretary when Ranil Wickremesinghe managed a highly flawed ceasefire agreement arranged by the Norwegians said.

Fernando further said: “It is not mandatory for the Defence Secretary to have an intimate knowledge of the role played by the Ministry. If that is the case, a fisherman should be the Secretary to the Ministry of Fisheries, and the Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture should be a farmer.”

The yahapalana leadership crippled the armed forces. The Geneva betrayal in early Oct 2015 stunned the victorious armed forces with some senior officers denied the opportunity to visit some countries. Denial of visas was part of international measures taken against Sri Lanka. That particular line of action culminated with the US imposing a travel ban in Feb 2020 on Army Chief Lt. Gen. Shavendra Silva.

Sri Lanka faces a daunting task in managing human rights issue in the New Year. With Geneva sessions scheduled for Feb-March next year, the government will have to work hard on a strategy to meet the threat. Successive governments obviously neglected Geneva for different reasons.

If yahapalanaya continued the national security would have suffered irreparable damage. The results would have been catastrophic and everlasting. In spite of severe economic difficulties caused by the rampaging corona pandemic, the government will have to sustain the armed forces in readiness to face any eventuality. The end of the war over a decade ago shouldn’t be a reason to weaken the armed forces or allow their capabilities to deteriorate.

 

A dubious ‘paniya’ to contain rampaging corona that made politicos laughing stocks

 The government’s primary concern should be tackling coronavirus, now threatening to overwhelm the national economy. Failure to bring the epidemic under control early this year can be quite disastrous as the economy is already in dire straits. Cabinet Minister Pavithra Wanniarachchi and State Minister Dr. Sudarshini Fernandopulle spearheaded government efforts to contain the epidemic whereas a easily gullible section of the government promoted an ayurveda ‘paniya’ or syrup, allegedly prepared by using some secret ingredients, in addition to nutmeg and bees honey, thereby prompting foolish Sri Lankans in their thousands to beat a path to its producer’s abode in search of the much touted miracle concoction, causing chaos in the area.

The government went to the extent of allowing the Kapurala-turned Ayurveda practitioner Dhammika Bandara to hand over bottles of ‘paniya’ to several lawmakers, including the Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, in Parliament. Recent scenes at Hettimulla in Kegalle where people gathered outside the kapurala’s abode to collect a bottle of the ‘paniya’ being touted by him as a cure for the deadly coronavirus were hilarious, if not for the grand irony of desperate people seeking a miracle.

Wanniarachchi was among those politicians who merrily consumed spoonfuls of the dubious syrup. Many eyebrows were raised several weeks ago when she, accompanied by two ministers, Prasanna Ranatunga and Udaya Gammanpila, threw pots of water into the Kalu Ganga as an occult cure. Dhammika Bandara wasn’t the only Ayurveda practitioner to exploit gullible public.

 With the total number of corona positive cases fast approaching 38,000 and deaths nearly 180, the government will have to ensure propaganda or foolish efforts didn’t further deteriorate the situation. To Dr. Fernandopulle’s credit, she never hesitated to plainly explain the risks involved in such dubious projects.

 

Hijaz, Mahara riots; corona cremations

The government can expect stepped up international pressure, egged on by interested parties over its decision to cremate bodies of all corona victims. Already the UN intervened in a purely internal matter of Sri Lanka several weeks ago with its Resident Representative Hanaa Singer in a much publicised act drawing the attention of Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa of the need to allow the Muslims to bury their dead. We wonder whether any UN official will dare try such a stunt with a country like India for example. With Muslim parliamentarians except Mohammed Muzammil of the National Freedom Front (NFF) taking a common stand on the issue at hand, the international community with its primary agenda to humiliate this country is likely to intensify pressure on Sri Lanka.

The International Criminal Court in The Hague recently ruled in a 180 page tome that British troops committed war crimes in Iraq. It determined that Iraqi detainees in the custody of British were tortured, killed and even raped by UK troops. But the icing on the cake is that ICC will not prosecute any of the culprits! So while the self-appointed international community and the entrenched UN establishment are ever ready to whip a country like Sri Lanka on even mere trumped up charges, they allow countries like the US, the UK, Australia or even their new darling India to break through that law net they have woven for their own advantage

The SJB and National Movement for Social Justice (NMSJ) led by former Speaker Karu Jayasuriya want Muslims allowed burying their victims of coronavirus.

The government can also expect some sections of the international community to take up the continuing detention of Attorney-at-Law Hijaz Hizbullah over his alleged involvement in the Easter Sunday attacks as well as the recent Mahara Prison riots that claimed the lives of 11 remand prisoners and caused injuries to over 100 others. Contrary to Prisons Minister Lohan Ratwatte’s claim, the post mortems revealed some indeed died as a result of gunshot injuries.

Sri Lanka Core Group raised Hizbullah’s detention last September. The issue is expected to be raised at the forthcoming Geneva sessions in Feb-March 2021 unless the government granted him bail before the Geneva session.

The controversy was caused several weeks ago when Riyaj Bathiudeen, brother of All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) leader Rishad Bathiudeen, arrested along with Hizbullah also in connection with the same case received bail under controversial circumstances. Media furore led to the Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC, calling for internal investigation into the conduct of the CID officers, including DIG, CID and Director, CID as regards the release of Riyaj before the high profile vote on the 20th Amendment to the Constitution.

Unlike any previous AG, De Livera received unprecedented media coverage due to his style of doing things. Having captured media attention during the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (P CoI) that dealt with Treasury bond scams perpetrated in 2015 and 2016, De Livera succeeded AG Jayantha Jayasuriya about a week after the 2019 Easter attacks. Jayasuriya served as the AG from Feb 10, 2016 to April 29, 2019.

Now the AG’s Department is under the scrutiny of P CoI probing the Easter attacks with President’s Counsel de Livera’s stand on two law officers accused of negligence in respect of TID (Terrorist Investigation Department) probe on Zahran Hashim questioned by Shavendra Silva, PC, on behalf of Deputy Solicitor General Azard Navavi. The question is whether Zahran’s murderous project could have been thwarted if the AG’s Department acted swiftly on the TID file received in early June 2017. Instead, the department sat on it until the Zahran-led National Thowheed Jamaat (NTJ) carried out the suicide bombing campaign. AG’s Coordinating Officer State Counsel Nishara Jayaratne, who had been in the media limelight, has been hauled up before the P CoI over the matter with questions being raised as regards the AG’s opinion on police investigations. There had never been a case like this that really dealt with the AG’s department.

 

An extraordinary tiff

The political leadership should keep an eye on the situation involving the AG’s Department and the Police. In fact, newly appointed Public Security Minister retired Rear Admiral Sarath Weerasekera should be deeply concerned about the recent developments, particularly the AG’s high profile accusations in respect of IGP C.D. Wickremeratne’s culpability in respect of the Mahara Prison riots.

The relations between the AG’s Department and the police turned for the worse after the former intervened in an inquiry following accusations over the Police Narcotics Bureau (PNB) dealing in heroin. Retired Maj. Gen. Jagath Alwis, who, in his capacity as the Chief of National Intelligence (CNI) participated in a meeting chaired by De Livera, also attended by the then Acting IGP Wickremeratne at the AG’s office, where instructions were issued to expedite the investigations. Alwis recently received appointment as Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security.

The AG accused the IGP of turning a blind eye to specific instructions he issued in April 2020 to address congestion in prisons. The accusation was made in the presence of Justice Minister Sabry and CJ Jayasuriya at the recent event at Hulftsdorp. However, this accusation should be examined against the backdrop of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa having squarely faulted the Government Analyst, the Attorney General and the Police for congestion in prisons and therefore the Mahara riots.

The government’s efforts to improve law and order primarily depend on the AG and the police working together, closely. The recent meetings between Public Security Minister Weerasekera and Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith followed by the Minister and AG De Livera as regards the status of Easter Sunday investigation highlighted the absurdity of the situation. The AG’s Department and the police responsible for the successful conclusion of the Easter Sunday probe are under scrutiny for their own lapses. The issue at hand is whether Easter Sunday carnage could have been averted if the AG’s Department acted on Zahran’s file received in June 2017. And also even if the AG blundered, whether the NTJ plan could have been thwarted if Chief of State Intelligence Service Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardena took meaningful measures after having received specific intelligence on April 4, 2019 regarding the impending NTJ attack.

 

Absence of political stability and unbridled corruption

The continuing absence of political stability is certainly a matter for serious concern. In spite of the passage of the 20th Amendment that was touted as the panacea for instability blamed on the 19th enacted in 2015, the situation is dicey. The ruling coalition effected some changes to the original 20th Amendment following protests by some members though the government retained provision to enable dual citizens to enter parliament. Now a fresh controversy has erupted in the wake of obvious disagreement among government partners, both in and outside parliament over the push for Provincial Council polls ahead of agreed formulation of a new Constitution.

A section of the government and those in the Pohottuwa Camp believe the PC polls should be conducted even under the old system without further delay whereas others want polls on hold until a new Constitution is in place. A nine-member expert committee headed by Romesh de Silva, PC tasked with formulating a new draft Constitution before Sinhala and Tamil New Year is worried about the government going ahead with PC polls. The committee is of the view early PC polls can be detrimental to its efforts. The government will have to decide soon on this matter without allowing further controversy.

 

Growing economic challenge and Parliament’s continuing failure

 Press statements issued by the Communication Department of Parliament pertaining to COPE (Committee on Public Enterprises) and COPA (Committee on Public Enterprises) during Nov-Dec 2020 budget debate revealed the sheer negligence on the part of the House to ensure financial transparency and stability. COPE and COPA inquiries revealed how cash strapped successive governments allowed unbridled waste, corruption and irregularities. Parliament, as an institution, should least now review its primary responsibilities pertaining to public finance and introduction of new laws. The failure on its part to act on forensic reports on Treasury bond scams and also to conduct much delayed debate on the P CoI report on the same received in January 2018.

With the economy in dire straits, Parliament now in the hands of the SLPP should accept responsibility for restoring financial integrity in the public sector as well as public-private ventures. It should be of pivotal importance against the backdrop of growing international pressure on the country and the country experiencing a sharp drop in revenue by way of garment exports, tourism and foreign remittance.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Midweek Review

Batalanda and complexities of paramilitary operations

Published

on

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent combative ‘Head-to-Head’ interview with British-American Mehdi Hasan on Al Jazeera has opened a can of worms. As to why Hasan raised the Batalanda Presidential Commission report, during a 49-minute interview conducted at the London’s Conway Hall, with a clearly pro LTTE audience, remains a mystery. This must be yet another notorious way to show how even-handed they are as in the case of its coverage of Russia, China, Palestine or Ukraine for their gullible viewers.

Recorded in February and aired in March 2025, the interview is definitely the most controversial the UNP leader, who is also an Attorney-at-Law, ever faced during his political career; always used to getting kid glove treatment, especially after taking over the party in 1994.

The continuing public discourse on Batalanda should provoke a wider discussion on Sri Lanka’s response to separatist Tamil terrorism, since the cold blooded murder of Jaffna SLFP Mayor Alfred Duriappah, which signalled the beginning of the LTTE terror campaign that ended in May 2009 with the crushing military defeat of the Tigers on the banks of the Nathikadal lagoon, as well as two southern insurgencies in 1971 and 1987-1990.

As Nandana Gunatilleke (one time JVP General Secretary and ex-MP), Dr. Wasantha Bandara (ex-JVPer and close associate of the slain JVP leader Rohana Wijeweera), Indrananda de Silva (ex-JVPer, incumbent Central Committee member of Frontline Socialist Party [FSP] and ex-military photographer) and Uvindu Wijeweera (Rohana Wijeweera’s son and leader of Dewana Parapura) agreed during the recent Hiru ‘Balaya’ discussion, conducted by Madushan de Silva, the Batalanda operation was in line with the overall counter-terrorist/insurgency strategy of the then government.

The issues at hand cannot be discussed at all without taking into consideration the JVP terrorism that, at one-time, almost overwhelmed the UNP’s unbroken rule, since 1977, carried out while openly brushing aside most of the universally accepted genuine parliamentary norms. The country’s second Republican constitution, promulgated by the UNP regime with a 5/6 majority in Parliament, in 1978, had been amended no less than 13 times by the time they were finally ousted in 1995. This was mainly to facilitate their continuous rule. Unfortunately, all stakeholders have sought to take advantage of Batalanda, thereby preventing a proper dialogue. Quite surprisingly, none of the guests, nor the interviewer, bothered, at least, to make a reference to the JVP bid on President J.R. Jayewardene’s life in Parliament on the morning of July 18, 1987. At the time, JVPer Ajith Kumara, working in the House as a minor employee, hurled two hand grenades towards JRJ, with the then Prime Minister Ranasinghe Premadasa seated next to JRJ. While one government MP lost his life, several others suffered injuries, including then National Security Minister Lalith Athulathmudali, whose spleen had to be removed.

At one point, Gunatilleke declared that they assassinated UNP MP for Tangalle Jinadasa Weerasinghe on July 3, 1987, in response to the government killing well over 100 people, in Colombo, protesting against the signing of the Indo-Lanka accord on July 29, 1987. The parliamentarian was killed near the Barawakumbuka-Welangahawela bridge on the Colombo-Rathnapura-Embilipitiya Road. The UNPer was killed on his way home after having declined Premier Premadasa’s offer to make an SLAF chopper available for him to reach home safely.

Against the backdrop of MP Weerasinghe’s assassination and the grenade attack on the UNP parliamentary group that claimed the life of Keethi Abeywickrema (MP for Deniyaya), the government had no option but to respond likewise. The operation, established at the Batalanda Housing scheme of the State Fertiliser Corporation, constituted part of the counter-insurgency strategy pursued by the UNP.

Those who called Batalanda complex Batalanda torture camp/ wadakagaraya conveniently forgot during the second JVP inspired insurgency, the military had to utilize many public buildings, including schools, as makeshift accommodation for troops. Of course the UNP established Batalanda under different circumstances with the then Industries Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe providing political authority. Batalanda had been an exclusive police operation though the Army had access to it whenever a requirement arose.

Those who had been suddenly withdrawn from the Northern and Eastern Provinces, to meet the rapidly evolving security threat in the South, required accommodation. FSP CC member Indrananada de Silva had received unhindered access to Batalanda in his capacity as a military photographer and the rest is history.

As to why Indrananda de Silva switched his allegiance to the FSP should be examined, taking into consideration his previous role as a trusted military photographer, formerly a Lance Corporal of the Military Police. An influential section of the JVP, led by Kumar Gunaratnam, formed the FSP in April 2012 though it didn’t receive the much anticipated public support. Both Indrananda de Silva and Nandana Gunatilleke, who aligned himself with the UNP, found fault with the JVP-led National People’s Power (NPP) over its handling of the Batalanada issue.

Paramilitary operations

Paramilitary operations had been an integral part of the overall counter-insurgency campaign, directed at the JVP responsible for approximately 6,600 killings. Among those death squads were PRRA primarily drawn from the SLMP (Sri Lanka Mahajana Party) and SRRA (the socialist Revolutionary Red Army). PRRA had close links with the Independent Student Union (ISU) whose leader Daya Pathirana was slain by the JVP. The vast majority of people do not remember that Daya Pathirana, who led the ISU during the turbulent 1985-1986 period, was killed mid-Dec. 1989. The second insurgency hadn’t started at that time though the JVP propagated the lie that they took up arms against the UNP government following the signing of the Indo-Lanka peace accord on July 29, 1987.

In addition to PRRA and SRRA, the government made use of paramilitary groups, namely Kalu balallu, Ukkusso, Rajaliyo, Kaha balallu, Kola koti, Rathu Makaru, Mapila, Gonussa, Nee, Keshara Sinhayo, Le-mappillu and Kalu koti.

The UNP also involved some elements of Indian trained Tamil groups (not of the LTTE) in paramilitary operations. Such operations, that had been backed by respective Cabinet Ministers, were supervised by local law enforcement authorities. Paramilitary operations had been in line with psychological warfare that was meant to cause fear among the JVP, as well as the general population. Military operations that had been combined with paramilitary actions received the blessings of the political leadership at the highest level. In the case of Batalanda (1988-1990) President J.R. Jayewardene and Ranasinghe Premadasa knew of its existence.

Even after the eradication of the top JVP leadership, by Nov. 1989, police, military and paramilitary operations continued unabated. Former JVPers appearing on ‘Balaya’ agreed that counter-insurgency operations were actually brought to an end only after D.B. Wijetunga succeeded President Ranasinghe Premadasa after the latter’s assassination on May Day 1993.

After the LTTE resumed war in June 1990, just a couple of months after the withdrawal of the Indian Army (July 1987-March1990), the UNP authorized paramilitary operations in the northern and eastern areas. Members of TELO, PLOTE, EPRLF as well as EPDP were made part of the overall government security strategy. They operated in large groups. Some paramilitary units were deployed in the Jaffna islands as well. And these groups were represented in Parliament. They enjoyed privileged status not only in the northern and eastern regions but Colombo as well. The government allowed them to carry weapons in the city and its suburbs.

These groups operated armed units in Colombo. The writer had the opportunity to visit EPDP and PLOTE safe houses in Colombo and its suburbs soon after they reached an understanding with President Ranasinghe Premadasa. Overnight at the behest of President Premadasa, the Election Department granted these Tamil groups political recognition. In other words, armed groups were made political parties. The Premadasa government accepted their right to carry weapons while being represented in Parliament.

It would be pertinent to mention that thousands of Tamil paramilitary personnel served the government during that period. There had been many confrontations between them and the LTTE over the years and the latter sought to eliminate key paramilitary personnel. Let me remind you of the circumstances, the EPRLF’s number 02 Thambirajah Subathiran alias Robert was sniped to death in June 2003. Robert was engaged in routine morning exercises on the top floor of the two-storeyed EPRLF office, on the hospital road, Jaffna, when an LTTE sniper took him out from the nearby Vembadi Girls’ high school. The operation of the Norway managed Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) made no difference as the LTTE removed Robert who led the party here in the absence of leader Varatharaja Perumal, the first and the only Chief Minister of the North-Eastern Province.

In terms of the CFA that had been signed by Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe and LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran, in Feb. 2002, the government agreed to disarm all paramilitary personnel. Many wouldn’t remember now that during Premadasa’s honeymoon with the LTTE, the Army facilitated the LTTE onslaught on paramilitary groups in selected areas.

Muthaliff’s role

During the ‘Balaya’ discussion, the contentious issue of who shot JVP leader Rohana Wijeweera came up. Nandana Gunatilleke, who contested the 1999 Dec. presidential election. as the JVP candidate, pointing to an article carried in the party organ that dealt with Wijeweera’s assassination said that he wrongly named Gaffoor as one of the persons who shot their leader whereas the actual shooter was Muthaliff. The headline named Thoradeniya and Gaffoor as the perpetrators.

Declaring that he personally wrote that article on the basis of information provided by Indrananda de Silva, Gunatilleke named Asoka Thoradeniya and Tuan Nizam Muthaliff of the Army as the perpetrators of the crime. Thoradeniya served as Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in the Maldives during the Yahapalana administration, while Muthaliff was killed by the LTTE in Colombo in late May 2005. The shooting took place at Polhengoda junction, Narahenpita. Muthaliff was on his way from Manning town, Narahenpita, to the Kotelawala Defence University.

The programme was told that the JVP had over the years developed close relationship with Thoradeniya while Indrananda de Silva accused Dr. Wasantha Bandara of duplicity regarding Muthaliff. How could you recognize Muthaliff, slain by the LTTE, as a war hero as he was actually one of the persons who shot Rohana Wijeweera, the latter asked.

At the time of his assassination, Muthaliff served as the Commanding Officer, 1 st Regiment Sri Lanka Military Intelligence Corps. The then parliamentarian Wimal Weerawansa was among those who paid last respects to Maj. Muthaliff.

At the time of Rohana Wijeweera’s arrest, Muthaliff served as Lieutenant while Thoradeniya was a Major. Indrananda de Silva strongly stressed that atrocities perpetrated by the police and military in the South or in the northern and eastern regions must be dealt with regardless of whom they were conducting operations against. The former JVPer recalled the Army massacre in the east in retaliation for the landmine blast that claimed the lives of Northern Commander Maj. Gen. Denzil Kobbekaduwa and a group of senior officers, including Brigadier Wijaya Wimalaratne, in early Aug. 1990 in Kayts.

Dr. Wasantha Bandara warned of the Western powers taking advantage of what he called false narrative to push for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

It would be pertinent to mention that the LTTE also used the underworld as well as some corrupt Army personnel in planning high profile assassinations. Investigations into the assassination of Muthaliff, as well as Maj. Gen. Parami Kulatunga, killed in a suicide attack at Pannipitiya, in June 2006, revealed the direct involvement of military personnel with the LTTE.

Indrananda de Silva disclosed that soon after Anura Kumara Dissanayake won the presidential election last September, the FSP, in writing, requested the JVP leader to inquire into killings during that period, including that of Rohana Wijeweera. The FSPer alleged that President Dissanayake refrained from even acknowledging their letter. Indrananda de Silva emphasized that Al Jazeera never disclosed anything new as regards Batalanda as he exposed the truth years ago. The former JVPer ridiculed the ruling party tabling the Batalanda Commission report in the wake of Wickremesinghe’s Al Jazeera interview whereas the matter was in the public domain for quite some time.

Indrananda de Silva and Nandana Gunatilleke exchanged words over the latter’s declaration that the JVP, too, was subjected to investigation for violence unleashed during the 1987-1990 period. While the FSPer repeatedly declared that those who carried out directives issued by the party were arrested and in some cases killed, Nandana Gunatilleke took up the position that the party should be held accountable for crimes perpetrated during that period.

The interviewer posed Nandana Gunatilleke the question whether he was betraying his former comrades after joining the UNP. Nandana Gunatilleke shot back that he joined the UNP in 2015 whereas the JVP joined UNP as far back as 2009 to promote retired Army Chef Sarath Fonseka’s presidential ambition even though he wiped out the JVP presence in Trincomalee region during the second insurgency.

JVP’s accountability

Nandana Gunatilleke is adamant that the party should accept responsibility for the killings carried out at that time. The former JVPer declared that Vijaya Kumaratunga (Feb. 16, 1988), first Vice Chancellor of the Colombo University (March 08, 1989) Dr. Stanley Wijesundera, Ven. Kotikawatte Saddhatissa thera (Aug. 03, 1988) and Chairperson of the State Pharmaceutical Corporation Gladys Jayewardene (Sept. 12, 1989) were among those assassinated by the JVP. SPC Chairperson was killed for importing medicine from India, the former Marxist aligned with the UNP said, while actor-turned-politician Kumaratunga’s assassination was attributed to his dealings with President J.R. Jayewardene.

According to Nandana Gunatilleke, except for a few killings such as General Secretaries of the UNP Harsha Abeywickrema (Dec 23, 1987) and Nandalal Fernando (May 20, 1988), the vast majority of others were ordinary people like grama sevakas killed on mere accusation of being informants. The deaths were ordered on the basis of hearsay, Nandana Gunatilleke said, much to the embarrassment of others who represented the interest of the JVP at that time.

One quite extraordinary moment during the ‘Balaya’ programme was when Nandana Gunatilleke revealed their (JVP’s) direct contact with the Indian High Commission at a time the JVP publicly took an extremely anti-Indian stance. In fact, the JVP propagated a strong anti-Indian line during the insurgency. Turning towards Dr. Wasantha Bandara, Gunatilleke disclosed that both of them had been part of the dialogue with the Indian High Commission.

It reminds me of the late Somawansa Amarasinghe’s first public address delivered at a JVP rally in late Nov. 2001 after returning home from 12 years of self-imposed exile. Of the top JVP leadership, Somawansa Amarasinghe, who had been married to a close relative of powerful UNP Minister Sirisena Cooray, was the only one to survive combined police/military/paramilitary operations.

Amarasinghe didn’t mince his words when he declared at a Kalutara rally that his life was saved by Indian Premier V.P. Singh. Soft spoken Amarasinghe profusely thanked India for saving his life. Unfortunately, those who discuss issues at hand conveniently forget crucial information in the public domain. Such lapses can be both deliberate and due to negligence.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Independent Monitor

Published

on

You may think sloth comes very easy,

To your kingly monitor of the shrinking marsh,

As he lies basking smugly in the morn sun,

But he is organized and alert all the while,

As he awaits his prey with patience infinite,

Free of malice, a professional of a kind,

His cumbrous body not slowing his sprite….

But note, he’s no conspirator spitting guile,

And doesn’t turn nasty unless crossed,

Nor by vengeful plans is he constantly dogged,

Unlike those animals of a more rational kind,

Whose ways have left behind a state so sorry.

By Lynn Ockersz

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Rajiva on Batalanda controversy, govt.’s failure in Geneva and other matters

Published

on

Wickremesinghe responds to Hasan during the controversial interview recorded in London

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent interview with Mehdi Hasan on Al Jazeera’s ‘Head-to-Head’ series has caused controversy, both in and outside Parliament, over the role played by Wickremesinghe in the counter-insurgency campaign in the late’80s.

The National People’s Power (NPP) seeking to exploit the developing story to its advantage has ended up with egg on its face as the ruling party couldn’t disassociate from the violent past of the JVP. The debate on the damning Presidential Commission report on Batalanda, on April 10, will remind the country of the atrocities perpetrated not only by the UNP, but as well as by the JVP.

The Island sought the views of former outspoken parliamentarian and one-time head of the Government Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (SCOPP) Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha on a range of issues, with the focus on Batalanda and the failure on the part of the war-winning country to counter unsubstantiated war crimes accusations.

Q:

The former President and UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s interview with Al Jazeera exposed the pathetic failure on the part of Sri Lanka to address war crimes accusations and accountability issues. In the face of aggressive interviewer Mehdi Hasan on ‘Head-to-Head,’ Wickremesinghe struggled pathetically to counter unsubstantiated accusations. Six-time Premier Wickremesinghe who also served as President (July 2022-Sept. 2024) seemed incapable of defending the war-winning armed forces. However, the situation wouldn’t have deteriorated to such an extent if President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who gave resolute political leadership during that war, ensured a proper defence of our armed forces in its aftermath as well-choreographed LTTE supporters were well in place, with Western backing, to distort and tarnish that victory completely. As wartime Secretary General of the Government’s Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (since June 2007 till the successful conclusion of the war) and Secretary to the Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights (since Jun 2008) what do you think of Wickremesinghe’s performance?

A:

It made him look very foolish, but this is not surprising since he has no proper answers for most of the questions put to him. Least surprising was his performance with regard to the forces, since for years he was part of the assault forces on the successful Army, and expecting him to defend them is like asking a fox to stand guard on chickens.

Q:

In spite of trying to overwhelm Wickremesinghe before a definitely pro-LTTE audience at London’s Conway Hall, Hasan further exposed the hatchet job he was doing by never referring to the fact that the UNP leader, in his capacity as the Yahapalana Premier, co-sponsored the treacherous Geneva Resolution in Oc., 2015, against one’s own victorious armed forces. Hasan, Wickremesinghe and three panelists, namely Frances Harrison, former BBC-Sri Lanka correspondent, Director of International Truth and Justice Project and author of ‘Still Counting the Dead: Survivors of Sri Lanka’s Hidden War,’ Dr. Madura Rasaratnam, Executive Director of PEARL (People for Equality and Relief in Lanka) and former UK and EU MP and Wickremesinghe’s presidential envoy, Niranjan Joseph de Silva Deva Aditya, never even once referred to India’s accountability during the programme recorded in late February but released in March. As a UPFA MP (2010-2015) in addition to have served as Peace Secretariat Chief and Secretary to the Disaster Management and Human Rights Ministry, could we discuss the issues at hand leaving India out?

A:

I would not call the interview a hatchet job since Hasan was basically concerned about Wickremesinghe’s woeful record with regard to human rights. In raising his despicable conduct under Jayewardene, Hasan clearly saw continuity, and Wickremesinghe laid himself open to this in that he nailed his colours to the Rajapaksa mast in order to become President, thus making it impossible for him to revert to his previous stance. Sadly, given how incompetent both Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa were about defending the forces, one cannot expect foreigners to distinguish between them.

Q:

You are one of the many UPFA MPs who backed Maithripala Sirisena’s candidature at the 2015 presidential election. The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe duo perpetrated the despicable act of backing the Geneva Resolution against our armed forces and they should be held responsible for that. Having thrown your weight behind the campaign to defeat Mahinda Rajapaksa’s bid to secure a third term, did you feel betrayed by the Geneva Resolution? And if so, what should have the Yahapalana administration done?

A:

By 2014, given the total failure of the Rajapaksas to deal firmly with critiques of our forces, resolutions against us had started and were getting stronger every year. Mahinda Rajapaksa laid us open by sacking Dayan Jayatilleke who had built up a large majority to support our victory against the Tigers, and appointed someone who intrigued with the Americans. He failed to fulfil his commitments with regard to reforms and reconciliation, and allowed for wholesale plundering, so that I have no regrets about working against him at the 2015 election. But I did not expect Wickremesinghe and his cohorts to plunder, too, and ignore the Sirisena manifesto, which is why I parted company with the Yahapalanaya administration, within a couple of months.

I had expected a Sirisena administration to pursue some of the policies associated with the SLFP, but he was a fool and his mentor Chandrika was concerned only with revenge on the Rajapaksas. You cannot talk about betrayal when there was no faith in the first place. But I also blame the Rajapaksas for messing up the August election by attacking Sirisena and driving him further into Ranil’s arms, so that he was a pawn in his hands.

Q:

Have you advised President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government how to counter unsubstantiated war crimes allegations propagated by various interested parties, particularly the UN, on the basis of the Panel of Experts (PoE) report released in March 2011? Did the government accept your suggestions/recommendations?

A:

Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha

I kept trying, but Mahinda was not interested at all, and had no idea about how to conduct international relations. Sadly, his Foreign Minister was hanging around behind Namal, and proved incapable of independent thought, in his anxiety to gain further promotion. And given that I was about the only person the international community, that was not prejudiced, took seriously – I refer to the ICRC and the Japanese with whom I continued to work, and, indeed, the Americans, until the Ambassador was bullied by her doctrinaire political affairs officer into active undermining of the Rajapaksas – there was much jealousy, so I was shut out from any influence.

But even the admirable effort, headed by Godfrey Gunatilleke, was not properly used. Mahinda Rajapaksa seemed to me more concerned with providing joy rides for people rather than serious counter measures, and representation in Geneva turned into a joke, with him even undermining Tamara Kunanayagam, who, when he supported her, scored a significant victory against the Americans, in September 2011. The Ambassador, who had been intriguing with her predecessor, then told her they would get us in March, and with a little help from their friends here, they succeeded.

Q:

As the writer pointed out in his comment on Wickremesinghe’s controversial Al Jazeera interview, the former Commander-in-Chief failed to mention critically important matters that could have countered Hasan’ s line of questioning meant to humiliate Sri Lanka?

A:

How could you have expected that, since his primary concern has always been himself, not the country, let alone the armed forces?

Q:

Do you agree that Western powers and an influential section of the international media cannot stomach Sri Lanka’s triumph over separatist Tamil terrorism?

A:

There was opposition to our victory from the start, but this was strengthened by the failure to move on reconciliation, creating the impression that the victory against the Tigers was seen by the government as a victory against Tamils. The failure of the Foreign Ministry to work with journalists was lamentable, and the few exceptions – for instance the admirable Vadivel Krishnamoorthy in Chennai or Sashikala Premawardhane in Canberra – received no support at all from the Ministry establishment.

Q:

A couple of months after the 2019 presidential election, Gotabaya Rajapaksa declared his intention to withdraw from the Geneva process. On behalf of Sri Lanka that announcement was made in Geneva by the then Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena, who became the Premier during Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the President. That declaration was meant to hoodwink the Sinhala community and didn’t alter the Geneva process and even today the project is continuing. As a person who had been closely involved in the overall government response to terrorism and related matters, how do you view the measures taken during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s short presidency to counter Geneva?

A:

What measures? I am reminded of the idiocy of the responses to the Darusman report by Basil and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who went on ego trips and produced unreadable volumes trying to get credit for themselves as to issues of little interest to the world. They were planned in response to Darusman, but when I told Gotabaya that his effort was just a narrative of action, he said that responding to Darusman was not his intention. When I said that was necessary, he told me he had asked Chief-of-Staff Roshan Goonetilleke to do that, but Roshan said he had not been asked and had not been given any resources.

My own two short booklets which took the Darusman allegations to pieces were completely ignored by the Foreign Ministry.

Q:

Against the backdrop of the Geneva betrayal in 2015 that involved the late Minister Mangala Samaraweera, how do you view President Wickremesinghe’s response to the Geneva threat?

A: Wickremesinghe did not see Geneva as a threat at all. Who exactly is to blame for the hardening of the resolution, after our Ambassador’s efforts to moderate it, will require a straightforward narrative from the Ambassador, Ravinatha Ariyasinha, who felt badly let down by his superiors. Geneva should not be seen as a threat, since as we have seen follow through is minimal, but we should rather see it as an opportunity to put our own house in order.

Q:

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake recently questioned both the loyalty and professionalism of our armed forces credited with defeating Northern and Southern terrorism. There hadn’t been a previous occasion, a President or a Premier, under any circumstances, questioned the armed forces’ loyalty or professionalism. We cannot also forget the fact that President Dissanayake is the leader of the once proscribed JVP responsible for death and destruction during 1971 and 1987-1990 terror campaigns. Let us know of your opinion on President Dissanayake’s contentious comments on the armed forces?

A: I do not see them as contentious, I think what is seen as generalizations was critiques of elements in the forces. There have been problems, as we saw from the very different approach of Sarath Fonseka and Daya Ratnayake, with regard to civilian casualties, the latter having planned a campaign in the East which led to hardly any civilian deaths. But having monitored every day, while I headed the Peace Secretariat, all allegations, and obtained explanations of what happened from the forces, I could have proved that they were more disciplined than other forces in similar circumstances.

The violence of the JVP and the LTTE and other such groups was met with violence, but the forces observed some rules which I believe the police, much more ruthlessly politicized by Jayewardene, failed to do. The difference in behaviour between the squads led for instance by Gamini Hettiarachchi and Ronnie Goonesinghe makes this clear.

Q:

Mehdi Hasan also strenuously questioned Wickremesinghe on his role in the UNP’s counter-terror campaign during the 1987-1990 period. The British-American journalists of Indian origins attacked Wickremesinghe over the Batalanda Commission report that had dealt with extra-judicial operations carried out by police, acting on the political leadership given by Wickremesinghe. What is your position?

A:

Wickremesinghe’s use of thugs’ right through his political career is well known. I still recall my disappointment, having thought better of him, when a senior member of the UNP, who disapproved thoroughly of what Jayewardene had done to his party, told me that Wickremesinghe was not honest because he used thugs. In ‘My Fair Lady,’ the heroine talks about someone to whom gin was mother’s milk, and for Wickremesinghe violence is mother’s milk, as can be seen by the horrors he associated with.

The latest revelations about Deshabandu Tennakoon, whom he appointed IGP despite his record, makes clear his approval for extra-judicial operations.

Q:

Finally, will you explain how to counter war crimes accusations as well as allegations with regard to the counter-terror campaign in the’80s?

A:

I do not think it is possible to counter allegations about the counter-terror campaign of the eighties, since many of those allegations, starting with the Welikada Prison massacre, which Wickremesinghe’s father admitted to me the government had engendered, are quite accurate. And I should stress that the worst excesses, such as the torture and murder of Wijeyedasa Liyanaarachchi, happened under Jayewardene, since there is a tendency amongst the elite to blame Premadasa. He, to give him his due, was genuine about a ceasefire, which the JVP ignored, foolishly in my view though they may have had doubts about Ranjan Wijeratne’s bona fides.

With regard to war crimes accusations, I have shown how, in my ‘Hard Talk’ interview, which you failed to mention in describing Wickeremesinghe’s failure to respond coherently to Hasan. The speeches Dayan Jayatilleke and I made in Geneva make clear what needed and still needs to be done, but clear sighted arguments based on a moral perspective that is more focused than the meanderings, and the frequent hypocrisy, of critics will not now be easy for the country to furnish.

 

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Continue Reading

Trending