Midweek Review
Himalayan Declaration triggers intense debate, divides civil society

Ambassador Julie Chung declared that the US welcomed the laudable GTF-SBSL initiative to expand cross-community understanding and seek lasting reconciliation. She was among the diplomatic community that met the delegation. Others included India, UK, Switzerland, Japan, Australia, South Africa, France, Canada, ICRC, and UN. In addition to President Wickremesinghe and diplomats , the delegation was received by Opposition Leader and Leader of SJB Sajith Premadasa, Leader of NPP Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Leader of SLPP and former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Leader of the TNA R. Sampanthan, Leader of SLFP and former President Maithiripala Sirisena, former President Chandrika Banadaranaike Kumarathunge, Leader of the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress Rauf Hakeem, General Secretary of Ceylon Workers Congress Jeevan Thondaman, Leader of Tamil Progressive Alliance & Democratic People’s Front Mano Ganesan, former Speaker of Parliament Karu Jayasuriya, current Speaker of Parliament Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe and more than 35 MPs from various parties who attended the meeting held in the parliament complex with the delegation. The GTF claimed that they were all supportive and shared words of encouragement for the process. They also engaged with several important civil society members from North, East and South, representatives from the ‘Aragalaya’ and key media institutions and personnel from all three languages.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
The former President of Global Tamil Forum (GTF) Rev. Dr. S.J. Emmanuel now lives in Sri Lanka. Recently, the Jaffna-based priest, who had served as the President of the UK headquartered grouping, since its inception in Feb 2009, received a delegation from GTF, accompanied by several Buddhist monks. The latter represented hitherto unheard of organization called Sangha for Better Sri Lanka (SBSL), and could it be another shocker like the “peaceful’ Aragalaya that turned out overnight into a Trojan horse. We would caution people to be mindful of globetrotting clergy, while not accusing all, but some are obviously compromised.
The Diaspora delegation consisted of Dr. Elias Jeyarajah (US), Dr. Shanthini Jeyarajah (US), Raj Thavaratnasingham (UK, though currently based in India), Suren Surendiran (UK), Prakash Rajasunderam (Australia) and Dr. Kannaappar Mukunthan. They arrived in Colombo, separately and left the same way.
Some of the members again visited the East, Mannar and Jaffna before leaving the country. The entire delegation was out of the country before Christmas. The official engagements took place between Dec 7 and 15.
President Ranil Wickremesinghe received the delegation at the Presidential Secretariat on the evening of Dec 07. Surendiran formally presented a copy of the Joint Himalayan Declaration meant to facilitate the grouping’s engagement and advocacy efforts among different communities here.
It would be pertinent to name the entire group of monks who accompanied the GTF delegation invited to meet President Wickremesinghe. They are Ven. Dr. Madampagama Assaji Tissa Thera, Anu Nayaka of the Ambagahapitiya Chapter, Amarapura Nikya, Ven. Siyambalagaswewa Wimalasara Thera, Chief Sanganayaka of the Northern and Eastern Provinces, Malwatta Chapter of Siam Nikaya, Ven. Kithalagama Hemasara Nayaka Thera, General Secretary, Siri Dharmarakshitha Chapter, and Chief Sanga Nayaka of the Western Province, Ven. Prof. Pallekande Rathnasara Thera, Acting Mahanayaka of Vajirawansa Chapter of Amarapura Nikaya, Ven. Kalupahana Piyaratana Thera, former Member of Human Rights Council and Chairperson of Human Development Edification Centre, Ven. Narampanawe Dhammaloka Thera, Chief Sanganayaka of Pathadumbara, Central Province, Asgiriya Chapter of Siam Nikaya and Ven. Wadduwe Dhammawansa Thera, Deputy General Secretary, Ramagngna Nikaya.
Responding to a query posed by The Island, Surendiran described the talks here as a continuation of their productive dialogue in Nagarkot, Nepal, in April 2023.
Asked for the circumstances of his return to Sri Lanka, Rev Emmanuel said that President Maithripala Sirisena extended him an invitation to return to Sri Lanka when they met at London Hilton in early 2015. The late Mangala Samaraweera, the then Foreign Minister, who had been in close touch with the GTF, was there. The GTF delegation included Surendiran.
That was soon after the change of government and two years after the President’s request, Rev. Emmanuel had returned home where he lived quietly. “With my return to Jaffna, I ceased as the GTF President,” the academic said, declaring his support to the GTF-SBSL initiative. Rev. Emmanuel accompanied the joint delegation that met the Bishop of Jaffna Justin Gnanapragasam on Dec 09, two days after their meeting with President Wickremesinghe.
Immediately after the GTF delegation concluded a lengthy breakfast meeting with President Sirisena, the writer had an exclusive meeting with Rev Emmanuel, Surendiran and another member at the same hotel. The writer had accompanied the government group led by President Sirisena who was on his first overseas visit after the treacherous 2014/2015 constitutional coup.
The GTF that had been established with the blessings of the UK political parties, strongly expressed its desire and the need to engage the Sri Lankan leadership at the highest level. The GTF’s stand should be examined taking into consideration its alliance with the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) after the security forces crushed the LTTE’s formidable conventional military capability. The GTF came into being as the LTTE was losing the war, once considered unthinkable, and spearheaded a high profile campaign, leading to the Yahapalana government co-sponsorship of an accountability resolution in Oct 2015 in Geneva. That was nothing but a treacherous act on the part of the then government headed by President Maithripala Sirisena, who was clueless as it was beyond his obvious capacity, while then Premier Wickremesinghe ran the deceitful show, both of which was unpardonable, under any circumstances.
Having established direct contact with Surendiran at the Geneva Human Rights Council, in early 2012, three years after the conclusion of the war, The Island provided significant coverage over a turbulent period to the GTF at a time it was considered a hostile organization.
Guided by LLRC recommendations

Jagath Dias, Dr. Gunadasa Amarasekera, Ambika Satkunanathan
In June 2015, Mangala Samaraweera set the record straight in respect of talks with the GTF and the TNA. Lawmaker Samaraweera addressed the issue in Parliament in his capacity as the Foreign Minister when he responded to several questions raised by Opposition member Nimal Siripala de Silva. The Badulla District MP raised the issue – the Samaraweera’s powwow in London with GTF and TNA representatives.
The late Samaraweera’s explanation is still valid and should be carefully examined against the backdrop of growing opposition to the Joint Himalayan Declaration from both sides of the divide. Interestingly, an influential section of the Tamil community, and some prominent nationalist organizations, have rejected the Joint Himalayan Declaration for totally different reasons.
Pointing out that the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) that had been appointed by the war-winning Mahinda Rajapaksa government, on May 15, 2010, in its report tabled in Parliament on Dec 16, 2011, recommended tangible measures to reach a consensus with the Tamil Diaspora, regardless of their attitude towards the government during the war, Samaraweera stressed the the Yahapalana administration adopted the LLRC strategy.
Samaraweera found fault with the Rajapaksa administration for not heeding recommendations that had been made by its own Commission. A former Attorney General, the late C.R. de Silva, chaired the LLRC.
Among those who had been involved in the London talks were representatives of the South African and Swiss governments and wartime Norwegian Ambassador in Colombo Tore Hattrem (2007-2010). Hattrem, at the time of the London talks, served as State Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Had Samaraweera been alive today, he would have been very happy to see the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government making a fresh effort to reach out to the Diaspora.
The Rajapaksa government never explained why it disregarded some crucial recommendations made by the LLRC, particularly pertaining to the Tamil Diaspora. However, there had been efforts made both during Mahinda Rajapaksa’s reign (after the conclusion of the war) and at the onset of the Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s administration, though they failed to achieve the desired results.
The latest initiative seemed to have taken those who oppose the GTF-led approach by surprise though some of them appeared to be aware of the Nagarkot meeting and moves made at the highest levels to arrange a meeting with President Wickremesinghe.
President Wickremesinghe’s visit to the Jaffna peninsula, where he met a cross section of people, should be examined against the backdrop of the forthcoming national election – presidential or parliamentary later this year. The UNP leader seems to be directly appealing to the northerners, regardless of the TNPF (Tamil National People’s Front) leading the protests against his visit.
Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam’s TNPF refused to meet the GTF-SBSL delegation. Subsequently, the outspoken Jaffna District lawmaker suggested that the Tamil community should boycott the presidential poll. The MP’s call reminded us of the LTTE engineered boycott of the 2005 presidential poll that deprived Wickremesinghe of certain victory. The TNA accepted the LTTE directive, thereby facilitating Mahinda Rajapaksa’s victory at the Nov 2005 election by demanding and ensuring the boycott of the poll by the Tamils of the North and East. Wickremesinghe lost the contest by less than 200,000 votes. Just four years later, the once formidable LTTE conventional fighting power ,which some experts considered invincible, was eradicated.
Five years later, the LTTE’s cat’s paw the TNA joined hands with the UNP and the JVP in support of General Sarath Fonseka, who comfortably won all the northern and eastern electorates but lost the presidential contest by a staggering 1.8 mn votes.
Tamil Diaspora and other stakeholders must realize that though Fonseka lost the election badly, his superlative performance in the Northern and Eastern Provinces proved one thing – that the Tamils wanted the man who destroyed the LTTE in battle. True, in actual fact the people of the North merely bowed to the will of the Tigers as the LTTE brooked no nonsense beyond its dictate. Maybe that artificial outcome of Tamils voting for the southern war hero, who brought the LTTE to its knees, should have been used to bring about a post-war reconciliation by thinking out of the box.
Had they been really uncompromising, especially less than one year after the end of war and General Fonseka’s Army accused of war crimes, voters would have kept away from polling booths. But, they didn’t. The civilians probably felt that the LTTE and its international backers, including the Tamil Diaspora, squandered opportunities to negotiate a settlement. The LTTE received its best chance in Feb 2002 when Wickremesinghe risked his political career to enter into a one sided ceasefire agreement with them. But, they quit the negotiating table in April 2003 and engaged in a deadly game with the military thereby creating an environment conducive for the then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga to take political advantage. What she really didn’t anticipate was her having to pick Mahinda Rajapaksa as their presidential candidate. The rest is history.
General Dias issues warning
Retired General Jagath Dias issued a warning against supporting the Himalayan Declaration. Referring to the GTF-led initiative as an invasion, the former General Officer Commanding (GOC) of the 57 Division urged the people to pressure parliamentarians not to support it.
The Gajaba Regiment veteran said so addressing the media at the N.M. Perera Centre, at Punchi Borella, on January 02. The warning was issued in support of Dr. Gunadasa Amarasekera’s appeal to members of Parliament not to support the Office for National Unity and Reconciliation Bill (Second Reading) on January 09. The debate on this vital Bill is scheduled to be taken up on that day between 10:30 am and 5 pm.
Dr. Amarasekera who had been always at the forefront of patriotic campaigns, in his capacity as the convenor of the Federation of National Organizations (FNO) asked parliamentarians not to back the Bill. Obviously, the FNO’s appeal was meant for those who represented the ruling Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) and the main Opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB). Both parties were represented when Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena recently received a joint GTF-SBSL delegation at the Parliament complex.
General Dias and Dr. Amarasekera warned that the new Bill betrayed the war-winning military and strengthened the process that was being advanced in terms of Sri Lanka’s co-sponsorship of an accountability resolution at the Geneva Human Rights Council on Oct 01, 2015. There hadn’t been any such previous resolution that targeted the military of the co-sponsor thereby paving the way for action against selected members as well as entire fighting formations.
General Dias and Dr. Amarasekera expressed the view that the Bill was in line with what they called Himalayan agenda.
In his letter dated Dec 26, 2023, addressed to parliamentarians, Dr. Amarasekera alleged that seven monks who backed the GTF initiative did so for personal gain. The prominent nationalist referred to their strategy meant to (1) recommence devolution talks between the Diaspora and the government. (2) cause a strategic rift among the Buddhist clergy.
Dr. Amarasekera has explained that a fresh round of structured talks would give the Tamil Diaspora the initiative to regain lost ground after the eradication of the LTTE’s conventional military capability whereas a split among the Buddhist clergy would help them control public protest campaigns.
Perhaps, the FNO should explain whether the grouping raised the vital issue with SLPP leader Mahinda Rajapaksa as the fate of the Bill entirely depend on his stand. Dr. Amarasekera cannot, under any circumstances, forget that the FNO backed Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s candidature at the 2019 presidential poll, as well as the SLPP, at the parliamentary election the following year.
Having elected Wickremesinghe as the President in July 2022 to complete the remainder of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s term, the SLPP, regardless of some concerns, fully backed the UNP’s leader’s strategy throughout this period. The SLPP overwhelmingly voted for the 2024 Budget at its Third Reading on Dec 13, 2023, thereby ensuring the continuation of the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa administration. Therefore, the party is most likely to throw its weight behind the controversial Office for National Unity and Reconciliation Bill. (This piece was done four days before the debate).
It would be interesting to examine the stand taken by parliamentarians representing the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) that remained sort of silent on the GTF initiative, though it aided the project. The position of the entirely Jaffna based TNPF as well as the Tamil People’s National Alliance, also known as the Thamizh Makkal Tesiya Kootani (TMTK) represented by retired Supreme Court Justice C.V. Wigneswaran, too, should be carefully studied.
What would Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan aka Pilleyan’s (formerly of the LTTE and one-time sidekick of Vinayagamurthy Muralitharan aka Karuna) stand be? Would EPDP leader Douglas Devananda, who had been leading EPDP (one of the former militant organizations sponsored by India), throw his weight behind the initiative? The position of Tamil politicians representing electoral districts outside the Northern and Eastern Provinces, particularly the Upcountry region, would be of significant interest.
Civil society divided
The high profile GTF-led initiative divided the civil society, with a section alleging that the project is meant to protect the Sri Lankan government facing accountability accusations.
In a lengthy statement, issued from London on Dec 20, five days after the conclusion of the talks here, the GTF listed Jaffna District TNA MP M.A. Sumanthiran as one of the persons who could be contacted for clarification regarding the comprehensive report.
Responding to this particular allegation, the GTF declared Sri Lanka would be kept under international scrutiny for its past and present human rights and international and local law violations. Unfortunately, the GTF quite conveniently refrained from commenting on violations committed by the Tamil community and the government of India. The GTF lacked the strength to acknowledge the accountability on the part of the Tamil community and the victims of the mindless violence perpetrated by them.
The GTF and SBSL owed an explanation if they really intended to address accountability issues. None of those demanding accountability on the part of Sri Lanka seem to be interested in examining the culpability of India that brazenly sponsored terrorism here and those who perpetrated terrorism. Some of them served as parliamentarians whereas others continued to do so.
Have you ever heard of anyone demanding accountability on the part of the TNA for directly being involved with the LTTE? No less than the European Union, way back in 2004, declared the nexus between the LTTE and the TNA and how the latter won the lion’s share of seats in the Northern and Eastern Provinces at the 2004 general election with the LTTE stuffing ballot boxes on the former’s favour. But, the government feared to take tangible measures against the TNA that served the LTTE proxy until the very end – the day the Army put a bullet through Velupillai Prabhakaran’s head at Nanthikadal, Mullaithivu during a final exchange of fire.
Former HRC member, lawyer and prominent civil society activist Ambika Satkunanathan, in an article carried in the Daily FT on January 02, 2024 comprehensively dealt with the GTF spearheaded initiative which she claimed is facilitated by the Association of War Affected Women and funded by the Swiss Government. Satkunanathan didn’t mince her words when she declared the project has earned the ire of the Tamil community, both in Sri Lanka and abroad. Satkunanathan’s piece is a must read (https://www.ft.lk/columns/How-to-evade-justice-Reconciliation-without-accountability/4-756911).
Against the backdrop of such criticism, the TNA leader R. Sampanthan’s stand on the issue cannot be disregarded. The GTF statement quoted Sampanthan as having said: “We should have done this many years ago” The GTF declared the Trincomalee district MP repeated the same at least three times.
Regardless of concerns by various stakeholders, an influential section of the Colombo-based diplomatic community declared its support for the latest reconciliation effort. That is a significant development as those countries backed the 2015 Geneva resolution.
Midweek Review
Canada plays politics with Sri Lanka again ahead of its national election

UK Premier Keir Starmer reiterated his Government’s commitment to addressing justice, accountability of reconciliation in Sri Lanka and issues faced by Tamils, including advocating for human rights and justice for Tamil victims.
The often repeated declaration was made at the Thai Pongal celebration at 10 Downing Street on 20th January. The Indian High Commissioner in the UK Vikram Doraiswami was among those present. Perhaps Starmer hadn’t considered India’s culpability as the regional sponsor of a terror project in Sri Lanka that claimed the lives of as many as 70,000 combatants and civilians. Among the dead were former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and over 1,300 Indian soldiers.
Doraiswami joined the Indian Foreign Service in 1992, the year after the LTTE assassinated Gandhi at Sriperumbudur in Tamil Nadu. Would Starmer dare to raise India’s accountability and also look into the UK role in bolstering Tamil terrorism? The UK allowed a free hand to the LTTE with the group’s International Secretariat functioning from London without any restrictions. The LTTE wouldn’t have achieved status as a major terrorist organization if UK didn’t facilitate its operations. The writer’s assessment is that the British backing for Tamil terrorism was much more than that of Canada.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Over 17 years after the decimation of the terrorist group, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), with a conventional fighting might militarily by our security forces, Canada and the UK are still seeking to punish Sri Lanka for pulling off that most unlikely victory against their deadly pet that they nurtured covertly.
Both the British and Canadian governments alike play politics at Sri Lanka’s expense. Canadian Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre recently stated that he would lead the world in seeking prosecutions in international courts of the Rajapaksas and other “criminals” who have persecuted the Tamil people. Influential groups of Sri Lankans of Tamil origin are represented in both the UK and Canadian parliaments.
Poilievre, whose party is widely expected to win the election, was speaking at the ‘Harvest of Hope’ event in Toronto on 18 January, marking Thai Pongal and Tamil Heritage Month. Obviously, the Conservative Party leader seems to be confident that he could win over Canadians of predominantly Sri Lankan Tamil origin at the October parliamentary elections.
Poilievre sought to appease the Tamil Canadians close on the heels of Premier Justin Trudeau’s announcement that he would resign after a successor is chosen. Rightwing Poilievre, early last year, declared he would seek to prosecute Sri Lanka at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and appoint lawyers to pursue charges against Lankan “war criminals” in international criminal courts.
However, the Conservative Party wouldn’t find it easy to entice Tamil Canadians as during Trudeau’s 10-year premiership, when Canada went out of its way to attack Sri Lanka. The Liberal Party, under Trudeau’s leadership, humiliated war-winning Sri Lanka at any given opportunity.
Recently, the Canadian media quoted Trudeau as having said: “I intend to resign as party leader, as Prime Minister, after the party selects its next leader through a robust nationwide competitive process.” Whoever replaces Trudeau will continue hostile policy towards Sri Lanka. One-time central banker Mark Carney and former Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland are in the fray. The Liberal Party is scheduled to announce the winner on 09 March.
All political parties represented in the Canadian Parliament, in May 2022, unanimously and arrogantly agreed that Sri Lanka perpetrated genocide during the war against the LTTE. On the basis of that unsubstantiated decision that had been endorsed by both Liberal and Conservative Parties, the Canadian Parliament recognized 18 May as the Tamil Genocide Remembrance Day. These overwhelmingly white accusers, however, forget the fact that like all of Americas, Canada, too, was established by committing numerous acts of genocide against its first citizens. And, to this day, they continue to perpetrate such acts with impunity. Such pale faces, with so much innocent blood on their hands, have the audacity to accuse small countries, like Sri Lanka, that refused to yield to terrorists, who were subtly supported by them, the same way they back even Islamic terrorists when it suits them as we clearly saw in Syria for example.
Sri Lanka brought the war to a successful conclusion on May 18, 2009 though LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran was only killed on the banks of the Nanthikadal lagoon at the dawn of the following day as his surviving band tried to breakthrough security forces lines.
What the Conservative Party Leader Poilievre could do to outdo Trudeau who had glorified Prabhakaran’s macabre project by targeting some Sri Lankan leaders responsible for eradicating the LTTE terrorism?
Over the years, those who had received Canadian citizenship, as well as others awaiting same, funded the LTTE as it killed and maimed thousands of Sri Lankans. Obviously, both Liberals and Conservatives, as well as other political parties, represented in Canadian Parliament, have conveniently forgotten thousands of Tamils killed by the LTTE. Canadian political parties are also silent on the origins of terrorism in Sri Lanka that may have claimed the lives of as many as 70,000 people. The dead included 1,300 Indian soldiers, members of rival Tamil terrorist groups, several dozens of politicians, like President Ranasinghe Premadasa as well as one-time Indian Premier Rajiv Gandhi, among many others.
Canadian political parties have bent backwards to appease Tamil Canadian voters. With their eyes on the still growing significant number of Tamil Canadian votes, they haven’t at least bothered to examine why Sri Lanka took on the separatist conventional military challenge. Canada never realized the need for a negotiated political settlement in Sri Lanka as long as the LTTE wielded conventional military power. Had the LTTE overwhelmed Sri Lankan military, Canada would have been one of the first countries to congratulate the triumph of terrorism here. That is the reality.
Fortunately, by the time Trudeau received the Liberal Party leadership in 2013, and became the Premier in late 2015, more than four years after Sri Lanka brought the LTTE to its knees, called “the deadliest terrorist group” even by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, was not in a position to resurrect its military. In other words, once considered invincible by so-called experts, had been truly defeated. Canada, like many other like-minded countries, responded with shock and dismay at the way the LTTE collapsed after having vowed to defeat the military.
Sri Lanka created history by eradicating the LTTE militarily. Sri Lanka’s triumph dispelled the myth spread by interested parties that our armed forces were incapable of defeating a major terrorist group with conventional fighting means, like the Tigers.
Tamil electorate on a new path
Eradication of the LTTE is no longer a major issue at national or lower level elections in Sri Lanka. Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s superlative performance in the Northern and Eastern regions, at the last presidential and parliamentary elections in Sept. and Nov., last year, respectively, proved that predominantly Tamil electorates couldn’t be significantly influenced by post-war issues.
Regardless of much touted accountability issues and assurances to pursue the Geneva agenda, Tamil parties failed to garner the required support of the Tamil electorate. They overwhelmingly voted for Tamil candidates fielded by the National People’s Front (NPP) at the general election and thereby inflicted unprecedented defeat on the Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK).
Finally, the JVP-led NPP won all the Northern and Eastern electoral districts. The Tamil-speaking people declared beyond doubt that they wanted to move ahead and not be entrapped in the past. They obviously realized that a politically motivated high profile Western campaign against Sri Lanka is not meant to help restore their shattered lives but play politics with an issue. Those who cannot stomach Sri Lanka’s triumph over terrorism still want to haul up the war-winning country before international criminal courts. However, ITAK, and smaller Tamil political parties, have now realized that accountability issues do not attract voters. Over 17 years after the end of the war, young voters, in no uncertain terms, had indicated that they aren’t interested in pursuing a political agenda, based on accountability issues.
Earlier, the ITAK-led Tamil National Alliance (TNA) wholeheartedly represented the LTTE interests.
Perhaps, the NPP, too, has realized that its often repeated promise to release political prisoners is irrelevant. Even if the NPP wanted to release some to deceive the people, no such prisoners are held by the government. There are only a handful of Tamil convicts and few others held in terms of the PTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act). The convicts are responsible for major attacks and high profile assassinations. Actually political prisoners are nothing but a non-issue and those demanding their release from detention are only fooling themselves.
It is high time Tamil political parties give up their primary strategy revolving around accountability issues. Having received the LTTE’s backing both in and out of Parliament at the outset of Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s second term, the ITAK is now struggling to come to terms with unfavourable situations in the North.
Failure on the part of M.A. Sumanthiran, PC, to retain his Jaffna district seat, meant that the ground situation had changed drastically. That was nothing but a severe warning issued not only to Sumanthiran but to all Tamil politicians who have been essentially advancing an accountability agenda like a beggar’s wound. However, Canada appeared to have failed to recognize the changing situation on the ground. Perhaps, the Canadian High Commission (CHC) should re-examine post-national election developments closely. The CHC should wait till the conclusion of the Local Government polls early this year to carry out reassessment as at least a section of the Tamil electorate may switch their allegiance back to the ITAK.
But, the writer is of the view that dynamics have changed and those genuinely concerned about the wellbeing of the Tamil people shouldn’t depend on accountability issues to promote political agenda. In fact, having played ball with the LTTE throughout the war and backed Prabhakaran’s decision to indiscriminately use hapless Tamil civilian human shields on the Vanni east front, the ITAK should be investigated for its culpability for war crimes. The ITAK had no shame at all as it fully cooperated with the LTTE’s despicable strategies. Today, the ITAK wouldn’t dare to mention that it recognized the LTTE in 2001 as the sole representative of the Tamil speaking people. Of course that was done at gunpoint. The late R. Sampanthan had no choice but to cooperate with Prabhakaran’s strategy meant to build a political front subservient to them.
Canada had no qualms in mollycoddling the ITAK in spite of that political party endorsing recruitment of child soldiers. The highpoint of the LTTE-ITAK/TNA relationship was the engineering of Ranil Wickremesinghe’s defeat at the 2005 Nov. presidential election that paved the way for Mahinda Rajapaksa’s victory, resumption of war in August 2006 by the LTTE and its decimation militarily by the armed forces.
Canada seeks Tamil Canadians support
Against the backdrop of the 2015, 01 Oct. Geneva Resolution that had been treacherously backed by the then Sri Lankan government, headed by Maithripala Sirisena, and Ranil Wickremesinghe as the President and Prime Minister, Canada took a series of measures to step up pressure on the war-winning country. In May 2022 Canada publicly announced that Sri Lanka perpetrated genocide. Trudeau dismissed Sri Lanka’s protests though Ottawa didn’t have absolutely anything to back its extremely politically motivated claims. Shame on Canada and its Premier.
It would be pertinent to mention that Premier Stephen Harper’s Conservative government, too, couldn’t stomach Sri Lanka’s triumph over terrorism. In fact, both Conservatives and Liberals competed with each other to censure Sri Lanka. They felt Canadians of Sri Lankan origin could be easily won over by censuring Sri Lanka.
In May 2014, the Canadian High Commission in Colombo asked the writer whether The Island could publish a hard-hitting statement issued by the then High Commissioner Shelley Whiting prominently ahead of Sri Lanka’s Victory Day parade. The writer, in his capacity as the News Editor of The Island, gave the HC an assurance that regardless of what Whiting had to say it would receive front-page coverage. The HC wanted to know whether any sections would be deleted. Assurance was given that it would be carried, sans any alterations. As promised The Island carried the Whiting’s statement that challenged President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s decision to celebrate the country’s triumph over terrorism.
Whiting, who had served at their Kabul mission prior to being posted to Colombo, declared that Canada wouldn’t be represented at the Victory Day parade that was to be held in Matara on May 18, 2014. In spite of proscribing the LTTE and the World Tamil Movement in 2006 and 2008, respectively, funds flowed to the LTTE. The LTTE couldn’t have sustained conventional fighting for over two decades without uninterrupted funding from the West. Canada remained a major source of funding until the very end when the Sri Lankan military decimated the LTTE militarily in a series of operations on the Vanni east front.
Having won the 2015 presidential election, Maithripala Sirisena, in consultation with Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe, cancelled the Victory Day parade. Canada must have been thrilled. Whiting’s condemnation of the military celebration was the only instance a foreign government called for the ending of the annual event held to mark a worthy victory clinched against so many odds.
In Oct. 2015, treacherous Yahapalana leadership (UNP-SLFP combine) co-sponsored a US-led accountability resolution against the Sri Lankan military. There hadn’t been a previous instance of any country moving/backing a resolution targeting its own armed forces and political leadership at the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).
In May 2022 Canada declared Sri Lanka perpetrated genocide. In early January 2023, Ottawa sanctioned former presidents Mahinda Rajapaksa, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Staff Sergeant Sunil Ratnayake and Lieutenant Commander Chandana Prasad Hettiarachchi. Both Ratnayake and Hettiarachchi had been earlier sanctioned by the US, one of the worst human rights offenders, for committing what it called serious crimes.
Interestingly, no Western government has so far sanctioned war-winning Army Chief Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka though a number of senior officers, including General Shavendra Silva (US) and Maj. Gen. Chagie Gallage (Australia). The US threw its weight behind Fonseka at the 2010 presidential election. Having accused Fonseka’s Army of murdering thousands of Tamils, the LTTE proxy Tamil National Alliance (TNA) formed an alliance with the UNP and the JVP to defeat Mahinda Rajapaksa. Their project failed pathetically as the electorate inflicted a massive defeat on the celebrated Sinha Regiment hero. The drubbing was such Mahinda Rajapaksa polled over 1.8 mn votes more than Fonseka.
In the absence of cohesive policy on the part of Sri Lanka in countering unsubstantiated war crimes accusations, Western powers pursued an agenda inimical to Sri Lanka. The idea was to push Sri Lanka to offer a political package that addressed Tamils’ aspirations. In other words, Western powers wanted Sri Lanka to grant what the LTTE couldn’t secure through terrorism driven war.
Midweek Review
It reeks in the Palk Bay!

A shooting involving Indian fishermen and Sri Lanka Navy personnel within the island’s territorial waters, and injuries sustained in apprehending the poachers is in the news, yet again. And as is often the case in these countless and never-ending confrontations and competing claims and counter claims in state rituals, we have two versions of the event. But one thing is indisputable: Indian fishermen had entered Sri Lankan waters illegally and thereby came within the jurisdiction of the island nation’s laws and legal apparatuses including interventions by its navy.
Naval action followed by competing statements by India and Sri Lanka are mere state rituals that have not been able to address long-standing practices that pre-existed the formation of nation-states. For the longest time, when national identities, citizenship, and maritime borders did not exist in the legal sense we understand them today, what we now call Sri Lankan and Indian fishermen waded undeterred into each other’s waters and engaged in fishing to their hearts’ content. They even lingered for extended periods of time in each other’s lands during specific fishing periods. I recall engaging in a conversation at the turn of the century with one such fisherman from South India who had decided to settle in Chilaw long ago. In his case and that of many of his comrades at the time, it was a matter of marrying into the Sinhala speaking fisher families. Over time, these people blended into local communities. At the height of these activities and even after both India and Sri Lanka gained independence, the long arm of the nation-states’ laws and national interests did not intervene in such activities beyond a point. But this changed as nation-states evolved into what Ashish Nandi has called ’garrison states’, militarised borders were drawn and bodies of laws developed governing cross-border travel.
Notwithstanding national borders and the associated practices of statecraft and competing nationalisms, fishermen in the two neighbouring countries have continued to wade into each other’s waters consciously disregarding what is known as the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) due to its invisibility. Such border violations are often deliberate and a matter of routine because fishermen often get away with this infringement. However, the kind of intrusion followed by violence now in the news is not the norm, but the exception.
In a statement issued on 28 January 2025, India’s Ministry of External Affairs noted that “an incident of firing by the Sri Lankan Navy during the apprehension of 13 Indian fishermen in the proximity of Delft Island was reported in the early hours of this morning.” It further noted, that “out of the 13 fishermen who were on board the fishing vessel, two have sustained serious injuries and are currently receiving treatment at the Jaffna Teaching Hospital.” But the statement from the Sri Lanka Navy differs in important details. It notes that Sri Lanka’s “Northern Naval Command observed a cluster of Indian fishing boats poaching in the Sri Lankan waters off Valvettithurai, Jaffna in the dark hours of 27 Jan 25.” This location is much closer to the Sri Lankan coast than what the Indian statement claims, yet it is evident from both statements that the incident took place well within Sri Lanka’s territorial waters. This discrepancy in the statements is intriguing as the two locations are approximately 62.4 km apart. Interestingly, the contested island of Kachchatheevu is 22.4 km from Delft, the location given in the Indian statement, and 84.7 km from Valvettithurai. Therefore, a careful reader may not be faulted in wondering if locating the scene closer to Kachchatheevu is deliberate, given that the island is a bone of contention between the two countries.
The Navy statement further states, “subsequently, the Northern Naval Command mounted a special operation to send away those fishing boats from the island waters, deploying naval craft. During this operation, the Navy seized an Indian fishing boat [that] continued to remain in Sri Lankan waters, while marshalling illegal fishing activities and collecting the fishing harvest. The operation also led to the apprehension of 13 Indian fishermen aboard the fishing boat.”
For Sri Lanka, this is not merely an accident that can be wished away as the somewhat clinical Indian statement does. It goes beyond protecting the maritime borders of the country, to preserving a crucial source of livelihood of many people in northern Sri Lanka and other parts of the island. It is both a bread-and-butter issue as it is a matter of national interest. Therefore, the Sri Lanka Navy has acted precisely in the manner that it should, as is expected and is within its mandate. Is it also not ironic that the bleeding hearts of southern Indian politicians who are up in arms about the so-called discrimination and abuse of their Tamil brethren in Sri Lanka by its government, seem to turn bone dry when their constituent fishermen callously plunder the resource-rich fertile waters of Sri Lanka, thereby remorselessly depriving their Tamil brothers and sisters of their livelihood.
The Sri Lankan statement further notes, “the Sri Lanka Navy boarding team was compelled to conduct noncompliance boarding as the Indian fishing boat continued to maneuver aggressively, without complying with the Navy’s lawful orders and its duty, during the process of taking the boat into custody. On this occasion, the Indian fishermen have acted aggressively, maneuvering their fishing boat in a hostile manner and behaving confrontationally with the Navy. However, while boarding the fishing boat in accordance with the authority vested in the Navy, the Indian fishermen, as an organized group, have attempted to assault naval personnel and made an attempt to snatch a firearm from a naval officer, endangering the lives of the naval personnel. In the process, an accidental fire has taken place, causing slight injuries to two Indian fishermen.” So unlike in the Indian statement which refers to ‘serious injuries’ the Sri Lankan statement refers to ‘slight injuries.’
What is seen here is not a deliberate act of shooting as the Indian statement and much of the Indian reporting on the incident insinuates, but an accident that has occurred due to the aggression and unlawful behaviour of Indian fishermen in a location in the sovereign territory of another country, they had no business of being in, in the first place. Intriguingly, none of these details are present in the Indian statement. It merely says that in addition to lodging a ‘strong’ complaint against the incident with the Acting High Commissioner in Delhi and the Sri Lankan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “government of India has always emphasized the need to treat issues pertaining to fishermen in a humane and humanitarian manner, keeping in mind livelihood concerns. The use of force is not acceptable under any circumstances whatsoever. Existing understandings between the two Governments in this regard must be strictly observed.”
India’s Ministry of Externa Affairs lodging a complaint with our Acting Hish Commissioner in Delhi and a similar complaint being made by its High Commission to our Foreign Ministry is the height of absurdity. While our Foreign Ministry and missions may be numb to such action, we should be mindful that the main infraction — Indian poaching — happened in our waters and therefore comes under the jurisdiction of Sri Lankan laws, in the dispensation of which accidents can also happen.
In any case, this statement itself may seem well articulated in the lofty corridors of performative and orchestrated diplomacy and the Indian Ocean conference circuit. But it makes little sense beyond as an example of excessive verbosity in the real world of cross-border poaching and naval action in the darkness of the night involving aggressive culprits and the threatened livelihoods of citizens of a sovereign country. Besides, it was just over six months ago that a young Sri Lankan sailor brutally met his end because of the aggressive manoeuvering of an Indian trawler in Sri Lankan waters. Therefore, these statements are naught but mere rhetoric, of no use to the Sri Lankan fishermen who — through no fault of their own — have to bear the brunt of Indian infractions and incursions into their bread-basket.
What is obvious in these rituals of statecraft is the woeful absence of proactive action on the part of Sri Lanka. If India can summon our Acting High Commissioner to their Ministry of External Affairs and lodge a ‘strong’ complaint over an accident stemming from an illegal Indian activity that took place in our waters, did our Foreign Ministry summon the Indian High Commissioner to protest against his compatriots illegally and perpetually entering our waters, behaving aggressively towards our navy and depriving a section of our citizens of their only livelihood? Did our Foreign Ministry ask him why they have opted to report basic facts wrong in their statement? Silence in such situations is not only extremely dangerous but also smacks of pusillanimity. This kind of institutionalized timidity on the part of Sri Lanka does not augur well for the country at the time we are celebrating our supposed ‘Independence,’ and is also counterintuitive to the notion of national interest.
This general lack of intent towards meaningful action is also evident in the Joint Statement of 16 December 2024, issued during President Anura Kumara Dissanayaka’s visit to India which states that “acknowledging the issues faced by fishermen on both sides and factoring in the livelihood concerns, the leaders agreed on the need to continue to address these in a humanitarian manner. In this regard, they also underscored the need to take measures to avoid any aggressive behaviour or violence. They welcomed the recent conclusion of the 6th Joint Working Group Meeting on Fisheries in Colombo. The leaders expressed confidence that through dialogue and constructive engagements a long-lasting and mutually acceptable solution could be achieved. Given the special relationship between India and Sri Lanka, they instructed officials to continue their engagement to address these issues.” Here, the omission of any reference to the destructive bottom-trawling fishing method is conspicuous by its stark absence. It is indeed unfathomable that the Sri Lankan team did not insist on the inclusion of this critical reference in the statement.
Rampantly used by Indian fishermen, bottom-trawling disrupts the seabed, marine ecosystem and biodiversity of the Palk Bay, while boosting India’s seafood exports and yielding high profits while destroying the Sri Lankan fishermen’s livelihoods. For this reason, Sri Lanka banned bottom-trawling in 2017. However, none of these are in the Joint Statement of 16 December 2024 or the Sri Lanka Navy statement of 28 January 2025, and have also not been taken up with the Indian High Commissioner in Colombo. This is not only a failure of Sri Lankan foreign policy in action but also a complete compromise of our country’s national interest.
In this context, the real culprits in the failure to resolve the problem definitively are the leaders of the Indian and Sri Lankan states — politicians and bureaucrats alike. Why has technology not been resorted to more thoughtfully in this situation where the required technology actually exists? For the longest time, both sides have been waxing eloquent about attaching non-tamperable and permanently switched-on transponders to fishing boats which will inform the Navies or Coast Guards of the two countries when maritime border violations take place. As a technologically advanced country, India has the higher capacity to produce the required innovative mechanisms and tools for this purpose that can be used in both countries for mutual benefit. Bilateral collaboration of this nature can actually bear fruit rather than the hollow discourses of rhetorical diplomacy and statecraft.
For India, these issues are important only insofar as they resonate with Tamil Nadu politics and therefore possible vote banks. In reality, it is never about the lives or livelihoods of poor South Indian fishermen or their confiscated properties. For Sri Lanka, it is a matter of ill-defined sovereignty and the livelihood of a significant section of the people in the north. At the same time, this unfolds in a situation where the Sri Lankan Navy is unable to patrol the country’s maritime borders effectively, a known fact which Indian fishermen exploit as a matter of routine.
If both countries are adequately serious beyond issuing mere statements after the fact, these incursions are easily stoppable. However, once the technology is put in place as a matter of law, both countries must enforce them to the letter, and patrol the borders more effectively. But, pending the fruition of such law, Indian fishermen, cannot be allowed to plunder Sri Lankan resources. It is also high time, the Sri Lankan government, with the kind of overwhelming mandate it has received from the people, make it very clear to the Indian state that endless incursions into our territorial waters and ravishing of the country’s natural resources can no longer be tolerated. And if legitimate deterrence is to be used in protecting our borders and resources as do all sovereign states including India, so be it. This is the minimum we expect from our government in its pursuit of our national interest.
Midweek Review
The Teen Mum Question

By Lynn Ockersz
Into the shadows of shame,
Is the Teen Mum slinking,
Now that the seed in her womb,
Which she didn’t aim at planting,
Is almost close to ripening,
Rendering her heavy with child,
But judge her not in haste,
And go for the First Stone,
For, she’s a hapless victim,
Of an education needing updating,
With a knowledge of do’s and don’ts,
On the question of human mating,
And going into ‘proud independence’,
May this issue be taken up for discussing.
-
News7 days ago
New Bangalore-Jaffna flights in the works
-
News5 days ago
CID questions top official over releasing of 323 containers
-
News2 days ago
Musk reveals ‘crazy waste’ of USAID funds in Sri Lanka
-
News7 days ago
Cardinal says ‘dark forces’ behind Easter bombs will soon be exposed
-
Features6 days ago
A singular modern Lankan mentor – Part II
-
News7 days ago
HRCL reports on Rohingya asylum seekers
-
Features6 days ago
Bharath Rang Mahothsav Parallel Festival in Colombo
-
News7 days ago
Ishadi Amanda makes history as First Runner-Up at 40th Mrs. World Pageant