Connect with us

Midweek Review

Missed opportunities!

Published

on

By Shamindra Ferdinando

UN Resident Coordinator in Colombo Hanna Singer-Hamdy paid a courtesy call on Defence Secretary (retd.) Gen. Kamal Gunaratne on Sept. 23 at the Defence Headquarters Complex, Sri Jayewardenepura, Kotte. The Egyptian was accompanied by the head of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) Alan Cole, formerly of the British Royal Navy.

The discussion covered Sri Lanka’s high profile ongoing campaign against narcotics trade and the government’s response to the raging Covid-19 epidemic.

A brief press release issued by Lt. Col. Nalin Herath, Officiating Director, Army Media Centre, in Sinhala, Tamil and English didn’t make reference to any other issue. Therefore, the writer rationally ascertained that no other matter had been taken up at the discussion.

Against the backdrop of the 48th session of the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and the 76th session of the UNGA in New York, the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) government could have used the Sept. 23 meet to brief the UN Resident Coordinator Singer as regards the accountability process.

The Defence Secretary, on behalf of the government, could have handed over a comprehensive report to the top UN official in Sri Lanka, in response to one-sided and high-handed the war crimes agenda pursued by the UNHRC against the country. Unfortunately, the government didn’t. The failure on the part of the government to do so underscored the absence of a cohesive mechanism to counter the campaign targeting Sri Lanka. Shoddy handling of the accountability process is an affront to the war-winning military that sacrificed so much to fight and defeat, militarily, ‘the world’s worst terrorist outfit’. More than 12 years after the eradication of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Sri Lanka remains under the UNHRC microscope, while many other countries, that caused death and misery to millions by launching false pretext wars or through illegal regime change actions are allowed to go scot-free.

For some strange reason, most probably for lack of competence at the Foreign Ministry, the government is reluctant to properly present Sri Lanka’s case before the international community. Let us hope that with Prof. G.L. Peiris, the eminent former law academic at the helm of the Foreign Ministry, we can mount a relentless diplomatic campaign to have the country cleared from such blatant accusations. In the process, it could even go to the extent of exposing, particularly our main accusers, who despite having plenty of innocent blood in their hands are pursuing this vendetta against us due to geo-political agendas.

The wartime General Officer Commanding (GoC) the elite 53 Division, the then Maj. Gen. Gunaratne could have meticulously briefed the UN Chief here, who, too, has had the audacity to make public comments on the country’s internal affairs and get away with such behaviour.

The author of ‘Road to Nanthikadal’, Gunaratne commanded one of the two fighting Divisions, the other being the 58 Division commanded by the present Army Commander, General Shavendra Silva, involved in the final phase of the offensive. It would be pertinent to mention that a battalion (4 Vijayabahu Infantry Regiment) that had been under the overall command of the then Maj. Gen. Gunaratne killed Prabhakaran. The 53 Division had been involved in the unprecedented Anandapuram battle (late March-early April 2009) along with 58 Division and Task Force 8 that dealt a massive blow to the LTTE.

Why didn’t the government exploit the Sept. 23 meet that took place the day after President Rajapaksa addressed the 76th session of the UNGA in New York?

Sri Lanka’s continuing failure to set the record straight should be examined taking into consideration UNHRC Chief Michelle Bachelet’s latest oral update on the situation in Sri Lanka (on Sept. 13), Foreign Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris’ response by Zoom to the former twice Chilean President Bachelet on the following day, President Rajapaksa’s meet with UNSG Antonio Guterres (on Sept. 19), President Rajapaksa’s address to the UNGA (Sept. 20) and three meetings Foreign Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris had with Commonwealth Secretary General Patricia Scotland, Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne and Indian Foreign Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar also in New York.

The Defence Secretary is the ideal person to discuss the accountability issue. With Sri Lanka firmly on the UN agenda and the issue coming up for scrutiny once again at the 49th session in March 2022, the government cannot turn a blind eye to the developments taking place.

Vanni war compared with Ruwanda et al

Antonio Guterres’s predecessor, Ban Ki-moon once compared the Vanni offensive with that of Ruwanda and Serbia genocides in the 1990s. Gunaratne strongly disputed Ban Ki-moon’s comparison of Vanni offensive with clear cut cases of genocide in those two countries

South Korean Ki-moon played his part to facilitate the Western agenda in spite of his own mission in Colombo contradicting unsubstantiated accusations.

The government owed an explanation why absolutely no attempt was made in Geneva or New York to challenge the unsubstantiated war crimes allegations that paved the way for Western powers and other interested parties to place Sri Lanka on the Geneva agenda.

Instead of setting the record straight, President Rajapaksa assured his readiness to work with domestic stakeholders, international partners, UN, civil society and Tamil expatriate groups, whereas FM Peiris reiterated Sri Lanka’s commitment to some key provisions in the resolution co-sponsored by the then Yahapalana government in 2015 as fait accompli, while strongly rejecting external interventions.

In separate meetings with Aussie Foreign Minister Patricia, Scotland Marise Payne and Indian counterpart Dr. Jaishankar, Prof. Peiris explained ground realities and the hostile approach adopted by interested parties. Prof. Peiris also elucidated to Scotland the wrongness in replacing domestic accountability mechanisms with external bodies, particularly the ad-hoc mechanism approved at the 46th Geneva session.

 Bachelet declared in her Sept. 13 speech that the UNHRC was going ahead with the investigation. Sri Lanka shouldn’t expect Scotland to take a stand favourable to Sri Lanka, under any circumstances, as the organisation Bachelet leads conveniently turned a Nelsonian eye to Indian sponsored terrorism that ravaged Sri Lanka. Did Commonwealth ever take a stand on the destabilisation of the smaller neighbour by the Commonwealth giant?

Prof. G.L. Peiris told his Australian counterpart Marise Payne how Bachelet followed a policy extremely detrimental to Sri Lanka as regards the accountability process. A Foreign Ministry press release quoted Prof. Peiris as having told Payne: “….there is a need to allow local institutions the space and opportunity to carry out their mandates and the establishment of an ad-hoc external mechanism that overrides this work is unnecessary and detrimental. It is premature and inappropriate to have a mechanism selectively targeting Sri Lanka that goes against the very principles of the UN Charter.”

Australia is aware of the Geneva project meant to undermine Sri Lanka. Regardless of close bilateral relations between Australia and Sri Lanka, the former will abide by the US position vis-a-vis Sri Lanka. The Australian policy should be examined, keeping in mind its role in the US-led alliances against China and extremely close relationship between Sri Lanka and China, the emerging world power.

The surprise Australia, the UK and the US (AUKUS) alliance struck recently, at the expense of France, on supplying a nuclear powered submarine fleet to their colonial cousin Australia should be an example of the old adage that blood is thicker than water.

The new three nation Anglo-Saxon alliance suddenly arrayed against China should also serve as a warning to New Delhi that it is already an odd partner, though one of the earliest to sign up for Quad, comprising the US, Japan, India and Australia ranged against China. If they could ditch long standing European ally France without batting an eye lid, Delhi can imagine how they will treat her if they suddenly see India too as a rival like China.

French Foreign Minister Jan-Yves Le Drian went to the extent of alleging US President Joe Biden of stabbing France in the back.

“It’s really a stab in the back. We had established a relationship of trust with Australia, this trust has been betrayed”, Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told France Info radio. “I’m very angry today, and bitter… this is not something allies do to each other”, he said, noting that Australia would now have to explain how it would exit the contract.

A lesson for France

So Sri Lanka should not depend on foreign powers, entirely. It would be Sri Lanka’s responsibility to present its case before the global community. Major Western powers will never take a stand in support of a smaller nation at the expense of their overall strategy and lucrative business interests, the only exception being the case of Israel. There cannot be a better example than Australia going back on an agreement with France for what it considered a much better arrangement for Canberra. Obviously, not only Biden but the British and Australian leaders, too, stabbed France in the back.

In his talks with Dr. Jaishankar, Prof. Peiris declared Sri Lanka couldn’t accept external mechanisms active on the ground whereas the Indian Minister underscored the need for a fair and just resolution of residual issues in the interest of both countries.

Sri Lanka seems trapped in the eneva machinations. India, too, should be wary as its much touted relationship with the US does not mean a thing if one examined the way the US, the British and Australians sprang quite a despicable surprise.

Hope the world hasn’t forgotten how the US discarded Pakistan after having used the country in its proxy war to oust the Soviet Union from Afghanistan and to intimidate India when it was seen as being in Soviet camp. New Delhi remained noncommittal regarding the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

In fact, Indian destabilisation of Sri Lanka, in the 80s, is in line with its overall strategy to counter domestic threats emanating from Tamil Nadu in the backdrop of perceived threat of Sri Lanka being a base for US-Israeli operations.

However, for want of cohesive policy Sri Lanka, at least after the end of the war hadn’t made a genuine effort to set the record straight.

Prof. Peiris during his interactions with foreign dignitaries, has quite clearly explained Sri Lanka’s refusal to accept external mechanisms. President Rajapaksa, too, stressed the importance of domestic mechanisms in achieving reconciliation. Both the President and the Foreign Minister declared Sri Lanka’s readiness to work with domestic stakeholders, including the civil society, Tamil expatriate groups, international partners and the UN to accomplish genuine peace.

Pompeo on Shavendra

However, the incumbent government has so far failed to question the very basis for domestic mechanisms set up by the previous government on the strength of unsubstantiated allegations. The government owed an urgent explanation. There cannot be any excuse for not presenting a proper defense on behalf of the war-winning armed forces. Commander of the Army Gen. Shavendra Silva remains blacklisted by the US on unsubstantiated allegations. Let me reproduce the former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declaration on Feb 14, 2020: “I am designating Shavendra Silva making him ineligible for entry into the U.S. due to his involvement in extrajudicial killings during Sri Lanka’s Civil War. The U.S. will not waver in its pursuit of accountability for those who commit war crimes and violate human rights.”

The US made the announcement after President Gotabaya Rajapaksa named Silva the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS). Another Gajaba Regiment veteran Chagie Gallage highlighted Sri Lanka’s pathetic failure to defend the military when he retired on August 31, 2018.

There had never been a previous instance of a senior officer in his farewell speech questioning the overall failure to counter the foreign project. This happened at Saliyapura, the famed Gajaba Regimental Headquarters.

He said: “Gajaba is engraved in golden letters in the annals of the Sri Lanka Army’s history, if not in the history of Sri Lanka … and I’m certain it will never be reversed by any. So, I’m happy to be retired being a tiny particle of that proud chapter of the history, though designated as a ‘War Criminal”.

About 10 months before Gallage’s retirement, Lord Naseby made a stunning revelation in the House of Lords. On the basis of hitherto confidential dispatches from the British High Commission in Colombo, during January-May 2009, the Conservative politician contradicted the very basis of the three-member Darusman report. This report, released on March 31, 2011, had been the primary reason for the 2015 accountability resolution that faulted the Sri Lanka Army.

The World War 11 fighter pilot fought a near three-year battle with the British administration to secure the confidential dispatches and was finally able to obtain a highly redacted version to contradict the lies in the second week of Oct 2017. Although the then Foreign Minister Tilak Marapana, PC, in his address to the UNHRC made a reference to Lord Naseby’s revelations, Sri Lanka has so far not requested Geneva to examine the British dispatches.

The author of British dispatches Lt. Col. Anthony Gash has never challenged the authenticity of heavily censored dispatches disclosed by Lord Naseby.

Sri Lanka earlier squandered a similar golden opportunity to make a strong case for a revisit of the Darusman report in June 2011. The then US Defence Advisor in Colombo Lt. Col. Lawrence Smith quite convincingly defended the Sri Lanka Army at the 2011 Colombo Defence Seminar. The American contradicted unsubstantiated allegations raised by a retired Indian Major General Ashok K. Metha, formerly of the IPKF. Lt. Col. Smith must have made that declaration, based on information available to the US Embassy in Colombo as well as other dispatches from our war zone. And most importantly, the American officer made the declaration within three months after the releasing of the Darusman report. Sri Lanka is yet to use British and American dispatches in her defence.

Western powers continue to harass Sri Lanka on the basis of unsubstantiated war crimes accusations. Bachelet’s move to further investigate Sri Lanka should be challenged as the previous accusations that led to the 2015 Geneva resolution remained uninvestigated.

According to the Darusman report (paragraph 23: Confidentiality of the Panel’s records), the accusations cannot be examined till 2031. This strange stipulation has a further clause stating that the time bar could be extended for a further period. We must be the only country not allowed to see our accusers or the case against us for so long! But, successive governments never took the entire gamut of issues into consideration before making representations on behalf of the country. The incumbent SLPP is no exception. In spite of repeated vows to defend the armed forces, the SLPP had pathetically failed in its duty and responsibility.

Predicament of former SLAF Chief

As a result of sheer negligence, Sri Lanka has ended up being categorised as a perpetrator of war crimes, and those who had fought for the country are targeted. There cannot be a better example than Air Marshal Sumangala Dias who suffered due to Sri Lanka’s failure. Canada refused to accept Dias as Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner though the former Sri Lanka Air Force Commander is not under human rights scrutiny. Subsequently, the government proposed Dias as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Italy. However, we are yet unaware of Italy’s position. Italy as a member state of the EU, pursuing war crimes accusations against Sri Lanka, may not accept the retired SLAF Chief.

Prominent civil society activist Harsha Kumara Navaratne has quit the Human Rights Commission to take over the country’s mission in Ottawa. The former head of the NGO Seva Lanka, with his experience with the HRC, hopefully would be able to improve Sri Lanka’s image in Canada. The decision to name former minister Mahinda Samarasinghe as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador in Washington, too, is an interesting development. Samarasinghe handled human rights and related matters during Mahinda Rajapaksa’s presidency and was part of Sri Lanka’s delegation to Geneva. Perhaps the government expects missions in Washington (non- career diplomat), Ottawa (non- career diplomat) and London manned by career diplomat Saroja Sirisena to improve the ground situation. New Delhi should be part of the operation. Milinda Moragoda, who had served Ranil Wickremesinghe’s government as a Cabinet minister before switching allegiance to Mahinda Rajapaksa, recently took over the New Delhi mission. So, we now have two former ministers as heads of missions in New Delhi and Washington and prominent civil society activist in Ottawa.

Samarasinghe last served as the Ports and Shipping Minister. Having succeeded Arjuna Ranatunga (UNP), Samarasinghe, who represented the SLFP at that time, signed the 99-year-lease on the Hambantota port. Navaratne quit Seva Lanka chairmanship last month having disengaged from the NGO’s activity, beginning January this year. Navaratne’s appointment is in line with the government entering into a dialogue with the local civil society as well as President Gotabaya Rakapaksa’s declaration in New York his readiness to talk with Tamil expatriate groups. Whatever, the SLPP government does, it should set up a mechanism, without further delay, to counter those propagating lies in support of the Geneva project.

A role for ex-CNI

Perhaps former Chief of National Intelligence (CNI), Maj. Gen. Kapila Hendavitharana can be engaged to work out a proper strategy. Intelligence veteran Hendavitharana can be part of a special team assigned to build a strong case on behalf of the country on the basis of available information.

The information unintentionally made available by those pursuing war crimes probe can be quite useful to Sri Lanka as they are astonishing. Let there be a meticulous study of statements, accusations, documents and reports pertaining to accountability issues. Bachelet rushing to accuse the Sri Lanka Army of being responsible for so-called mass graves in Mannar, discovered in 2019, exposed the irresponsible conduct of the Geneva body, when a reputed US lab determined that those remains belonged to the colonial era.

Bachelet obviously acted on information provided by some Colombo-based diplomatic missions. There is no doubt that the British HC and the German Embassy in Colombo (both members of the self-appointed Sri Lanka Core Group in Geneva) influenced Bachel’s decision.

Due to petty political backbiting, Sri Lanka then lacked the political will to expose the Geneva project. As the simmering controversy over Mannar mass graves erupted during the yahapalana administration, the Foreign Ministry conveniently remained silent. That was nothing but treacherous behaviour and the Ministry, as one of the most important institutions, should be ashamed.

Sri Lanka didn’t have the guts to use Bachelet’s irresponsible conduct to challenge the overall process. Had there been a proper review of facts, since the change of government in Nov 2019, Gen. Gunaratne could have exploited his meeting with Hanaa Singer-Hamdy.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Midweek Review

Govt. in dilemma over anti-terrorism law:

Published

on

Tamil speaking people protest in Batticaloa on Feb 23, 2019 against the PTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act) and the proposed CTA (Counter Terrorism Act). They demanded the abolition of anti-terrorism laws.

No letup in Int’l, civil society pressure

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Under any circumstances, post-war Sri Lanka cannot ignore international concerns as regards the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act (No 48 of 79).

A section of the international community wants Sri Lanka to amend the PTA without further delay. The civil society organisation, One-Text Initiative (OTI) has pointed out repealing the PTA is a necessity underscored by the European Union and the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) as well as by Western-funded civil rights organisations and international agencies. It would be pertinent to mention that the OTI came into being in 2003 in the wake of the Norway arranged Ceasefire Agreement (CFA). The CFA, too, made reference to the PTA. The following is the relevant section 2.12: The parties agree that search operations and arrests under the Prevention of Terrorism Act shall not take place. Arrests shall be conducted under due process of law in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code. Therefore, the public should know the PTA had been an issue for the LTTE, too.

Following the 5th Meeting of the European Union – Sri Lanka Working Group on Good Governance, Rule of Law and Human Rights on Sept. 29, 2021, they issued a comprehensive statement.

Let me reproduce the relevant section verbatim: “Sri Lanka provided an update on the action in process to review the Prevention of Terrorism Act, and reiterated its commitment to bring it in line with international norms and standards within a time bound process. The EU and Sri Lanka agreed to take stock of the progress in this regard by the next meeting of the EU-Sri Lanka Joint Commission in early 2022. The need to uphold international norms and standards of human rights while countering terrorism and violent extremism was also underlined.”

OTI last Monday (25) arranged a discussion on the PTA and its impact with the participation of lawyer Chrishmal Warnasuriya, Dr Paikiasothy Sarawanamuttu, UK-based Amal Abeywardene and the writer. Harindra B Dassanayake moderated the two-hour discussion. All agreed with Dr. Sarawanamuttu’s call for a moratorium of the PTA until the government and those engaged in discussions on the future of the security law reached a consensus. The civil society guru also suggested until consensus could be reached on the issue at hand, the Attorney General should be authorised to facilitate bail to those held under the PTA. That proposal, too, should be seriously considered. OTI raised specific issues relating to the PTA. Why does the reforming/ repealing of PTA matter? , What is the situation now, and what is likely to happen? Are there options for Sri Lanka, and with what consequences? What hinders change? And what paths and steps are recommended? The OTI initiative should be appreciated.

Western powers are eternally interested in accountability issues and related matters here. However, there is no such enthusiasm to correct far worse continuing wrongs in places like Egypt, Israel or for that matter the continuing genocide in Yemen, thanks to Saudi Arabia and UAE or against international drug rings freely operating from capitalist citadels, like Dubai!

Since the end of the war in May 2009, the GoSL (Government of Sri Lanka) has been under tremendous pressure to either abolish the PTA or amend it in line with laws in place in other parts of the world. Do we need anti-terrorism laws? Do they serve any purpose or strengthen Sri Lanka’s response to terrorist challenge? Sri Lanka should have examined how PTA facilitated the country’s overall response to terrorism.

Unfortunately, successive governments conveniently failed to do so just to appease the West fearing a greater orchestrated outcry against the country, thereby contributed to some international efforts to discredit the Sri Lankan military as well as the law enforcement apparatus.

The country experienced two terrorist campaigns in the South in 1971 and 1987-1990 and the 30-year-old war spearheaded by the LTTE. Sri Lanka defeated all three attempts through military means. The country had no option but to deal militarily with terrorism and conventional military challenge, regardless of opposition. Some sections of the international community oppose the PTA. But no one talks about draconian anti-terror laws in place for example in the USA or the UK since 9/11 and thereafter.

They always boast about a rules-based order followed by the international community. What is this international community? It is nothing but a self-appointed handful of countries in the West that earlier plundered much of the world at their will.

Interestingly, almost all those countries demanding abolition or amendments to the PTA provide refuge to those who should have been dealt with in terms of anti-terrorism laws. Those countries swiftly accept accusations that the PTA is used widely and indiscriminately at the expense of public freedom and also against political opponents.

Focus on PTA cases

Let me briefly refer to four recent cases that had attracted international attention due to some of those involved being arrested in terms of the PTA, as well as accusations relating to Sri Lankans seeking political refuge overseas: (i) Arrest of Attorney-at-Law Hejaaz Hizbullah in April 2020 over his alleged involvement in the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage (ii) the recent Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) statement on the arrest and the subsequent release of All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) leader and MP representing the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) Rishad Bathiudeen. The MP was also taken into custody in terms of the PTA over the Easter Sunday attacks blamed on National Thowheed Jamaat. It would be pertinent to mention that the IPU represents altogether nearly 180 Parliaments all over the world (iii) New Zealand police killing Ahamed Adhil Mohamed Samsudeen, 31, who had secured political asylum therein in Dec 2013 on the basis of him being under threat in Sri Lanka. No less a person than New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has admitted how the man from Kattankudy, who knifed several persons in an Auckland shopping mall received inspiration from ISIS (iv) New Zealand granting political asylum to a Sri Lankan wanted in connection with the Easter Sunday attacks. The suspect also wanted under the PTA received New Zealand protection soon after the mayhem in the shopping mall.

Hizbullah’s arrest was also taken up by the UK-led Sri Lanka Core Group at the UNHRC as well as by HRC Michelle Bachelet. In spite of Hizbullah personally knowing two of the Easter bombers and their father, Mohammad Yusuf Ibrahim, he should be considered innocent until found guilty in a court of law.

Hizbullah knew them as he had represented the wealthy family in court and his right as a lawyer to represent anyone should never be questioned whatever the accusations directed at his clients. The UN, foreign government and the civil society, too, should have the right to represent the interests of anyone regardless of the accusations. In the absence of own legal representation or the inability to procure legal services, suspects, whatever the accusations directed at them, reserved the right to obtain legal support from the Attorney General’s Department.

Similarly, the State, in this case the Sri Lanka State shouldn’t give up its right to take security measures deemed necessary to protect the public. The government cannot forfeit its right to defend the public against acts of terrorism. However, every effort should be made to address concerns of the UN and the EU as regards the PTA.

Most importantly, the government should respond to concerns raised by the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) and all other political parties representing the Tamil speaking people as well as the civil society such as the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA).

The incumbent government in June this year appointed a high powered committee chaired by Defence Secretary Gen. Kamal Gunaratne to examine the PTA. The Committee has been asked to recommend whether to suitably amend the current law or introduce new counter-terrorism law.

Prez wants PTA examined

President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s decision to examine the Counter Terrorism Act (CAT) prepared on the instruction of former Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe should be appreciated. Gen. Gunaratne’s committee received specific instructions to study the CAT. The government should be ashamed of its failure to undertake a comprehensive study on the PTA before foreign powers intervened. Having examined the CAT, the writer is quite convinced it addressed concerns of all.

Prepared by the previous government in consultations with the British, French, EU et al, the CAT can be the basis for proposed new law or facilitate required amendments to the existing PTA.

Sri Lanka should seek a guarantee as regards comprehensive cooperation from Western governments to address threats posed by terrorism. They cannot ignore such a request on the basis of their domestic laws. A lot depends on international cooperation to fight terrorism. Western powers no longer can deny their response to terrorism elsewhere, in a way, promoted terrorism on their soil. How many Sri Lankan terrorists received political asylum in those countries, particularly in the UK, Canada and Germany? Sri Lanka cannot forget the fact that Western powers at least do not share information regarding missing persons. How many thousands of those categorised as missing or disappeared Lankans live overseas under different names.

The recent assassination of ruling party British lawmaker David Amess, 69, is a case in point. The police arrested 25-year-old Ali Harbi Ali, British passport holder of Somali origin over the stabbing in a church east of London. Hope the British investigate the circumstances under which the assassin received British nationality. Having declared the MP’s killing an act of terrorism, the British should conduct a no holds barred investigation. The British media reported the suspect has been detained in terms of additional powers under anti-terrorism laws.

In June 2016, another terrorist, who believed in white power, assassinated 41-year-old Jo Cox. She was shot thrice and then stabbed 15 times. The British cannot turn a blind eye to the growing threat posed by terrorism. Perhaps, law enforcement authorities require wider powers to deal with new threats.

Incidents in New Zealand, Norway, France, Germany and other countries must influence governments to take sufficient measures to ensure public protection. The civil society as well as international organisations, such as IPU, too, should be accountable for campaigns they do. They should be mindful of their actions.

The IPU’s right to be concerned over MP Bathiudeen’s detention should be respected. There shouldn’t be any issue over IPU’s response to the Sri Lankan politician’s arrest. Let the IPU closely examine MP Bathiudeen’s case. Perhaps, the IPU should make its position public on the assassination of Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar and clandestine meeting the Norwegian government had with the LTTE’s British advisor Anton Balasingham in the UK to discuss ways and means of managing the fallout.

Those who want Sri Lanka to adhere to international standards in the formulation of anti-terrorism laws should be reminded how Commonwealth heavyweight India destabilised Sri Lanka. The transformation of Sri Lanka’s ceremonial armed forces to one of the best fighting forces in the world should be studied against the backdrop of Indian intervention. Sri Lanka needed the PTA as part of the overall measures against terrorism. Can anyone honestly declare that clandestine LTTE operations in Colombo and its suburbs could have been thwarted without the PTA.? Sri Lanka had no option but to fight back. The PTA had been part of the overall defence. The PTA should be discussed taking into account high profile terrorist operations in the South that resulted in political assassinations. Perhaps, the PTA hadn’t been enough to neutralise the LTTE. They succeeded in assassinating President Ranasinghe Premadasa on May Day 1993, made an abortive bid to assassinate Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga at the final PA rally ahead of the 1999 presidential election, blew up over 50 people, including UNP presidential candidate Gamini Dissanayake in late Oct 1994, suicide attack on the then Lt. Gen. Sarath Fonseka and Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa in April 2006 and Oct 2009, respectively. All those responsible for the above-mentioned terrorist attacks came to the South as innocent civilians until the moment they transformed themselves into human bombs.

Those who demand that the government treat terrorist suspects with respect did nothing when the LTTE blasted civilians outside the war zone while mingling with ordinary people. Interestingly, years before the ISIS influenced terrorists, the LTTE inspired Norway’s worst ever terrorist attack. The far–right Norwegian terrorist who massacred 77 people, including dozens of children, is on record as having explained how LTTE terrorism directed at Muslims inspired him.

International interventions

The EU’s strong push against Sri Lanka’s current anti-terrorism law should be examined taking into consideration its demand to do away with the death penalty.

The EU-Sri Lanka joint statement issued following the Sept. 21, 2021 meeting also dealt with the death penalty, even though the death penalty had not been carried out in the country since the mid-’70s. The relevant section is as follows: “The EU reiterated its opposition to the death penalty in all circumstances. Welcoming the continued moratorium, the EU encouraged Sri Lanka to take steps towards the formal abolition of capital punishment.”

How is it that the EU is so concerned about Sri Lanka’s dormant death penalty, but didn’t lift a finger to spare the life of Saddam Hussein or the cold blooded killing of Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi, both deaths instigated by the West?

The abolition of the PTA or enactment of new anti-terrorism law should be discussed with push for a new Constitution. The successful conclusion of the war over 12 years ago opened up a new front. The Geneva Human Rights Council got involved with the move to draft a new constitution here. Premier Wickremesinghe spearheaded that effort, too, the way he had handled unfinished project to introduce new anti-terrorism law. In fact, co-sponsorship of the 2015 Geneva resolution had been in line with the overall game plan that brought Maithripala Sirisena into power in January 2015. Following the August 2015 general election, Wickremesinghe enjoyed a commanding position in Parliament with which he could have had achieved major political objectives if not for the Treasury bond scams perpetrated in Feb 2015 and March 2016. That is the undeniable truth.

Having lambasted the UNP, both in and outside Parliament, for planning to do away with the PTA at the behest of Western powers, the SLPP is working with the same lot to either amend or introduce new anti-terrorism laws.

The government seems incapable of at least presenting Sri Lanka’s case before the international community properly. Sri Lanka should discuss application of anti-terrorism laws during the deployment of the IPKF (Indian Peace Keeping Force). Did the world care about what really happened in Sri Lanka’s Northern and Eastern provinces during the IPKF deployment? Having destabilised Sri Lanka, India forced the then government to ‘accept’ the IPKF in terms of the Indo-Lanka accord signed on July 29, 1987.

Those who had been detained by the IPKF on suspicion were not handed over to Sri Lanka police for investigations. Therefore, the PTA didn’t matter. The IPKF hadn’t been accountable at all in respect of operations conducted here and those who want Sri Lanka hauled up before foreign judges over alleged war crimes /accountability issues are conveniently silent on the period India had been responsible for Northern and Eastern districts.

Easter Sunday carnage

If not for the Easter Sunday carnage, the UNHRC and the EU would have definitely demanded the abrogation of the PTA. The Western funded civil society, too, would have pushed for the same. Sri Lanka would have found it extremely difficult to justify the need for continuation of anti-terrorism laws. However, the Easter Sunday massacre proved that a country cannot take security for granted. Sri Lanka’s failure to deal with specific intelligence provided by India pertaining to impending terrorist attack, too, should be dealt in terms of the PTA.

Accusations that the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) benefited at the presidential and parliamentary polls, respectively, as a result of the Easter attacks cannot be ignored. No less a person than Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith has repeatedly raised that issue against the backdrop of the incumbent government’s failure to implement recommendations of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) that inquired into the Easter attacks.

Interestingly, the then Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe used the Easter attacks to justify his government’s bid to replace the PTA with a new counter-terrorism law.

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Modern view of the Island’s ancient past

Published

on

Under the guidance and influence of Weliwita Sri Saranankara Thera, King Kirti Sri Raja Singha successfully invited Bhikkus from Siam, led by Upali Thera, to revive the higher ordination of Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka.

Ruminations – II

By Seneka Abeyratne

The Sinhalese refer to themselves as ‘Indo-Aryans’ and to the Tamils as ‘Dravidians’. Implied in this distinction is the notion, conditioned by the ideas of the chauvinists and populists, that ‘Aryan’ blood is somehow superior to ‘Dravidian’ blood. Most historians now agree that the terms ‘Indo-Aryan’ and ‘Dravidian’ refer to a family of ancient languages originating in North India and South India, respectively, and that they have nothing to do with race or its physical attributes, such as complexion, height, build and facial features. Indeed, in terms of physical appearance, it is often difficult to distinguish between a Sinhalese, a Tamil and a South Indian.

When it comes to facial features and complexion, there is as much variety among the Sinhalese as among the Tamils, suggesting that both groups are ethnically far more diverse than is commonly assumed. The same is probably true of the smaller ethnic groups, such as Moslems and Burghers. The traditional view of supposed racial and cultural uniqueness, based on facile one-dimensional theories of migration and pure descent, is no longer considered valid.

It is not implausible to argue that over time the Tamil community, which is mainly of South-Indian origin, absorbed ethnic groups from other parts of India who shared certain cultural affinities with the Tamils, such as religion, caste, food habits, and traditional customs and practices. This may explain why some Ceylon Tamils look more like northern, western or eastern Indians than southern Indians.

The Sinhalese likewise are ethnically diverse. While it may be true that the early settlers came from northwestern or northeastern India, later settlers likely came from other parts of India, including southern India. It is also possible that some synthesis occurred between early settlers and indigenous elements. Since it was common practice for ancient Sinhala kings and noblemen to marry into South Indian dynasties, we could assume that Sri Lanka and South India had close cultural and political ties from a very early age.

Even Vijaya, the purported founder of the Sinhala race, is believed to have married a princess from Madurai. Many of the Sinhala-speaking people in the Vanni region, north of Anuradhapura, are probably descendants of the Vanniyars, who are reputed to have migrated to the island from southern India. The periods 1056-1236 and 1473-1815 correspond to the Polonnaruwa and Kandyan kingdoms, respectively. During the former, there was a significant infusion of Pandyan blood into Sinhala royalty and during the latter, a similar infusion from Madurai.

The last line of kings to rule Kandy was the Tamil-speaking Madurai Nayaks, a Telugu dynasty. Given that Madurai is situated in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu, it is difficult to imagine there was no commingling of Sinhalese and Tamil blood during this time. The Cheras, who came during the Portuguese period, injected a large dose of South-Indian blood into the southern littoral of Sri Lanka. The ethnic links between the Sinhalese and the South Indians are probably far more extensive than is commonly assumed.

Though the subcontinent figures prominently in Sri Lanka’s ethnic equation as per the periodic influx of settlers to the island from various parts of India during the Late Protohistoric to Early Historic Period (600 BCE-300 CE), we should not ignore the fact that the Sri Lankan gene is extremely diverse. There is evidence to suggest that in ancient times, people from Malaya and Indonesia migrated as far as Madagascar and the East African coast. It is therefore plausible to argue that while crossing the Indian Ocean, some of the boats carrying these people would have landed on our shores. Similar migrations would have occurred even in historic times. One has only to note the distinct Malay-Indonesian features of many a Sri Lankan to realise there must have been a continual migration of Southeast Asians to the island during historic and prehistoric times.

Melting Pot

A keen observer strolling through Kandy town, having noticed that some Kandyans resemble Malays or Javanese while others resemble Thais or Burmese, may arrive at the conclusion that Sri Lanka is and has always been a melting pot of different cultures. Some Kandyans also resemble the Burghers in respect of complexion and features. Hence one wonders how much ‘white’ blood seeped into the Sri Lankan gene pool during the four and a half centuries of western colonial rule.

It is a curious phenomenon that, despite its proximity to India, the island has more in common with Southeast Asia than with India in respect of climate and vegetation, as well as certain cultural practices. Duriyan, rambutan and mangosteens are found in Southeast Asia and Sri Lanka but not elsewhere in South Asia. The food habits of Sri Lanka also demonstrate a strong Southeast Asian influence. Sri Lankans cook curries in coconut milk like the Malays and Indonesians and use lemongrass for flavouring certain dishes, as do the Thais. There is also a similarity in the peasant dress of Sri Lanka, Indonesia and Malaysia, especially in respect of females. The Malayo-Polynesian outrigger fishing boat (catamaran) is found in Sri Lanka but nowhere else in South Asia.

The only country practising Theravada Buddhism in South Asia is Sri Lanka but in Southeast Asia, there are many, such as Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia, and Laos. The Buddhist factor figures prominently in the strong cultural and diplomatic ties that have existed between Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia for centuries.

From 1581 to 1591, Kandy was ruled by the Sitawaka king, Rajasinha I, who had converted to Hinduism. During this period Buddhism almost perished in the Kandyan kingdom due to the machinations of the Buddhist-turned-Hindu monarch. From 1591 to 1604 Kandy was ruled by Vimaladharmasuriya I, also known as Konappu Bandara, who succeeded in ousting Rajasinha I and reviving Buddhism with the assistance of ordained Burmese monks.

For the next hundred years or so, the Kandyan monarchs continued to protect and foster the religion. After the reign of Vimaladharmasuriya II ended (1687 to 1707), Buddhism again went into serious decline but was revived by Kirti Sri Rajasinha, who ruled from 1747 to 1782. This time it was a Thai monk named Upali Thera who came to the rescue. The Theravada monastic order known as Siam Nikaya was founded by him in Kandy in 1753 with the full support of the king. The other two main Theravada monastic orders in the island are the Ramanna Nikaya (Payagala) and the Amarapura Nikaya (Balapitiya). Both were founded by Sri Lankan bhikkhus who had been ordained in Myanmar.

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

These games are dangerous

Published

on

By Usvatte-aratchi

The games that the President, his government and the leader of the Opposition play are fraught with grave danger to the wellbeing of our people and to opportunities to change, grow and the preserve this society. Gotabaya Rajapaksa, as a presidential candidate held out the prospect of a land in prosperity – saubhagyaye dekma. His advisors in viyath maga, in their wisdom, saw that as a clear path to victory against a hopelessly divided government in office, poorly led and with no viable plan of action. Neither the SLPP nor the SJB wanted to inform the public of the parlous state of the economy and very bleak prospects for another two years or more. True, that is not the kind of story that a winning party would carry to the electorate. However, there was ample ammunition against the incumbent government on other accounts to knock it down with a feather. The SLPP made a serious error in not revealing the black picture and making the government 2015-2019 completely responsible for the dire situation in the country and in not pointing out the difficulties they would experience in bringing prosperity to the people, all thanks to the ineptitude of the yahapalanaya government. Instead, they were cock-a-hoop that they had ample resources and claimed that the alleged impending scarcity of resources was a fig leaf to cover the incompetence of the yahapalanaya government, so badly bared. They did not use the first opportunity in the new parliament to make a statement on the state of the economy and the deprivations that the public may suffer when policies were adopted to bring back stability. Instead, the SLPP government went on in jubilant fashion until a few weeks ago, when both Minister Bandula Gunawardena and Minister Udaya Gammanpila talked openly about the economic and financial difficulties the government faced.

Gotabaya and the SLPP avoided that trope perhaps because there was the strong possibility that SJB would have come back with the dark history of the creation of a debt problem. The spate of infrastructure projects from roads in the Hambantota district to the column by the Beira was financed mainly with loans from China, some of which jumped out of a Pandora’s Box, as it were.

It is hard to believe that planners in China were so naïve as to erroneously estimate the flow of income from the roads in Hambantota from the column near the Beira and from the Nelum Pokuna theatre in Colombo and believe that they must remain white elephants a decade after the investment began. They are likely to remain so for quite some time with the public obliged to pay back the loans. President Mahinda Rajapaksa and his supporters often said that daily a 100 ships passed our shores and we were failing to collect revenue from them because there was no port in Hambantota. More than hundred ships pass by Hambantota now and we have failed to collect revenue from them. One asset has already been leased back to the lender. The Covid epidemic only aggravated the situation which was ab initio bad, and to argue that the Chinese did not foresee this scenario is to insult their manifest ingenuity.

Consequently, the factors that motivated the investment must be sought elsewhere. The full suite of politicians and public officers that advised Mahinda Rajapaksa government to design and approve those projects and their financing are again fully in charge of economic and financial policy with the advantage of a Minister of Finance, who is as short of relevant experience as his sibling the President of state craft. Everyone, beware: the Greeks are coming with gifts.

The leader of the SJB goes around the country, promising the public that when he forms a government, he will give all sorts of benefits (sahanaya) to the public. This is pie in the sky and a poisonous pie at that. There will be no resources to play those games, for at least five years from now and that not without a heavy load of good luck. Take a lesson from present day Greece. The Opposition, as well as the government, for once, must tell the public the truth about the economic situation. (Everyone, especially ministers of government, had better learn that all and any benefits (sahanaya) that a government can give the public must come out of the income of some section of the taxpayers. Governments in this country do not earn more than three percent of their revenue; the rest is from taxes. (Many here confuse themselves and mislead the public by calling government revenue (labeem) with government income (aadayama). Income is what an enterprise earns from revenue after it meets all its expenses. Government income is what it earns by way of interest, profits and dividends. When a government borrows to give you sahanaya, it is asking yet unborn generations to pay for your benefits now. How fair is that? A politician announced on 17 October, in parliament, “We (pointing to himself) will compensate farmers for any crop losses consequent upon the implementation of the new fertiliser policy’. He, in fact, was announcing that his government would be taxing the public more to compensate farmers for crop losses resulting their unwise policies of his government. Nobody would pay to replace its lost output to the nation.

In the crudest form, our society, over the years, more conspicuously in the years 2005 to 2014, used substantially more resources than it earned. (June Robinson remarked in 1958 that we consumed the fruits before the tree had grown.) The way to do that is to borrow from anyone who is willing to lend. It is no different from a man who spends well beyond his earnings and borrows, even from a money lender, no matter the terms of the loans. A time comes when the lenders say, ‘It is time to pay up chum, and if you do not have cash, I will accept your wife’s jewellery and even the furniture and the house you live in’. This society, through its incompetent and corrupt agent, government, can default payment and become a pariah in capital markets or plead with the people that there is an alternative route to credibility. That route requires this society to cut resources use, undergo austerity.

Many made a bogeyman of the IMF presenting a programme of austerity with assistance to support the balance of payments. What we now live in is austerity, with no balance of payments support. The Minister of Finance promises us an austerity budget. There is already a freeze on completing projects. Many employees clamour for and are on strike seeking wage increases. Prices of essential commodities are rising daily. Prices of most commodities, except labour, have risen and will keep on rising. That is another way of imposing austerity. When your daily wage would buy only two cans of dried milk powder today compared to three last month for the same wage, austerity is imposed on you. (There was once the case of Argentina, where employees asked for their wages to be paid in the morning rather than at the end of the day. They bought cigarettes with their wages in the morning and sold them at a higher price in the evening to buy provisions for the home.)

What you go through now is what an austerity programme the IMF would have put you through. Besides, that programme would have been better articulated and more openly discussed. In our circumstances, budgetary support would have been inevitable. And they would have set up a structure to reschedule debt repayment. The IMF is not the only institution that can function in that manner. Any agency that enjoys international credibility and offers balance of payments support and budgetary support can perform those functions. Our government itself can do it except that it lacks the will to do so and does not enjoy international credibility. There is no escape from the requirement that our society must save (refrain from using all that it produces) and with those savings repay international debt. Leaders of neither the government nor the Opposition can hide those compulsions from the public and yet claim legitimacy. What they do now is far too dangerous a game to play.

Continue Reading

Trending