(July 10, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Prime Minister Ratnasiri Wickramanayaka inaugurated the Fourth SAARC Ministerial Conference on Children at Hilton Colombo on 10 July. Chairman of the SAARC Council of Ministers, Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama was also present at the Inauguration Ceremony.

Addressing the gathering, Prime Minister Wickramanayaka, Chief Guest on the occasion stated that the well-being of the region’s children requires political action at the highest levels and stressed that children’s rights generate obligations and responsibilities that must be respected and honoured by all without compromise.

In this context, the Prime Minister stated that successive governments in Sri Lanka, since Independence, irrespective of different political ideologies, have closely adhered to social pro-child policies to provide free education for both boys and girls and free healthcare including maternal and child health services which have reaped benefits in terms of declining maternal mortality rates, higher literacy rates and declining under-five mortality rates. The Prime Minister also stressed the importance of constant focus on the alleviation of poverty in the region as a means of protecting child rights and ensuring their wellbeing.

Addressing the Ceremony, Minister of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment Sumedha Jayasena said that Sri Lanka offered to host the Fourth SAARC Ministerial Conference on Children in keeping with the vision of President Mahinda Rajapaksa who has recognised that ensuring the protection of the rights of children including the provision of education and health are factors that are essential for the sustainable development of a nation, and a strong region.

Director of the SAARC Secretariat Hassan Shifau addressed the gathering, representing the Secretary General of SAARC. Stating that that wellbeing of children was one of the five original areas of cooperation identified by Member States as they initiated consultations on the establishment of SAARC in early 1981, he said that important milestones have since been achieved, such as ratification and implementation of SAARC Conventions on Combating and Prevention of Trafficking in Women and Children and Regional Arrangements for Promotion of Child Welfare. The SAARC Regional Strategic Framework on Protection, Care and Support of Children affected by HIV/AIDS, he said, is so far the only such regional policy document to be agreed upon by a regional association of nations. The Director also outlined the progress made by the Regional Task Force instituted to monitor progress in implementation of the Conventions on Prevention of Trafficking and Promotion of Child Welfare. Emphasising that the region needs to hasten action towards result-based deliverables in the short-term, based on the long-term vision on Children of South Asia, Mr. Shifau said that this will help address the concern that despite the region’s commitment to meeting timely child-related SAARC Development Goals and Millennium Development Goals, the region might slide behind the expected targets.

The Conference attended by all SAARC Member States will review the status of implementation of the SAARC Decade of the Rights of the Child (2001-2010) and make recommendations on the future course of action. The Ministers will also adopt a Ministerial Statement on Children in South Asia aimed especially at addressing emerging issues relating to children.

The Ministerial Conference which was chaired by Minister of Higher Education Prof. Wiswa Warnapala was preceded by a meeting of Senior Officials chaired by Secretary of the Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment Mrs. M. Sumanadasa on 9 July.

Upon the conclusion of the Ministerial Conference, the visiting SAARC Ministers and Heads of Delegation will call on H.E. the President at Temple Trees.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

(July 10, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) UNP M.P. and Gen. Secretary Tissa Attanayake addressing the media today (10 July) at the UNP media unit said , this is the first time Sri Lanka witnessed a Government which succeeded in breaking the record on promise breaking. Since this Govt. came to power it has been ruthlessly riding on the backs of the people giving false promises at elections time only to be broken at its whims and fancies after winning . It promised daily milk for the children . Now the pail of milk and the Govt. .have toppled over , he added.

Winning elections by foul means and continuing in power even by resorting to unlawful measures are the only aims of the Govt. Even the forthcoming elections , Uva, Jaffna nad Vavuniya are ridden with lawless activities which have already begun . State assets are being used by the Govt. while the UNP are being obstructed from carrying out its campaign freely, by the Govt. restricting free movement to the North. The UNP had met the Elections Commissioner (EC) in this connection . The EC has agreed to look into the complaints , he asserted.

The thrust of the UNP’s election campaign will be the Govt.’s fiscal bungling, corruption and bankruptcy of policies and plans to alleviate the acute sufferings of the masses and development of the country , he noted. Though the Govt. justifies its ruthless actions and the economic breakdown by giving false promises , the actual reason for this unprecedented economic disaster is the raging corruption in the Govt. , unplanned economy, false optimism , wasteful programs and monumental losses in the Govt. sector . The worst part of all these blunders is the Govt.’s failure to take any action to stop the raging lawlessness ,corruption and losses in its sector and Ministries , and trying to recoup these losses through burdening the masses by endless taxation , price hikes on essential goods and tariff increases. As a result , those of its ‘men’ responsible for these misdeeds are further encouraged to commit more anti social and anti national crimes. This has created a vicious spiral, as more crimes are committed , the more the swindlers and corrupt individuals are encouraged, he lamented.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

By Saybhan Samat

(July 10, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Imperialist powers which were compelled to grant independence, have never given up their penchant to dominate their former colonies in order to extract their natural resources, obtain geo-strategic advantages and subjugate their religions and cultures. The greedy imperialists are hell-bent in obtaining markets and promoting a consumerists and materialist society devoid of spiritual values. They are well aware that if a society is without their indigenous cultural and spiritual values it is very easy to make that society do and behave the way that the imperialists want them to do. In other words they are very subtle and with subterfuge enslave and make dependent their former colonies in which they have vested interests.

The imperialist powers of the US and it’s European allies this time used the
opposition protests in the Islamic Republic of Iran of it’s June 12th election to gain control in Iran and effect regime change. They especially the US and Britain had agents in the Islamic Republic of Iran who for long years had done a meticulous programme of work to destabilize Iran. Among these agents were the Mujahideen-E-Khalaq (M.K.O), a terrorist group responsible for killing thousands of Iranian officials and clergy in the aftermath of the victory of the revolution which still operates from France, Britain and Iraq. They are funded by the US and its allies viz France and Britain. The wealthy Iranians of northern Tehran who love western culture and the Nike and Gucci fashions and life styles promoted by the West, who also wanted a regime change. Others who acted as agents were corrupt officials in the government itself, the Iranian diaspora who fled to Western countries on the fall of the shah. In fact thousands of them came to Tehran to support Mousavi to participate in the protests. In addition there were anti-clericals, those Iranians of the middle class who wished for a less austere regime and those who wanted to use their privilege and limit the power of the mosque and state. The disparate opposition over the years had been nurtured by the US and the European powers to overthrow the government which was popular among the poor especially in the villages. It was recently revealed that the US government approved US $400 million to destabilize, Iran.

In Sri Lanka too before and after the war the imperial powers were and are openly interfering in our internal affairs. They are doing this by continuing to surreptiously divide and rule and to exploit our natural resources and more importantly obtain a foot hold on account of the rising geo-strategic importance of Sri Lanka in the Asian continent.

Their open support for the newly formed so called Provisional Transitional Government of the Tamil diaspora and their threat to cut off aid and loans to our government and unnecessarily raise human rights issues forebodes danger. It is very fortunate that President Rajapakse like President Ahamadinejad has established close links with China, Russia, India and Iran, who will likely support him against any diabolical conspiracies by the Western powers. Even so the government and people must be vigilant against the machinations of local agents who are capable of destabilizing our island which has just recovered from a three decade war.

Who knows the Western powers may have by now, started a plan to destabilize Sri Lanka at the next 2010-2011 presidential elections reportedly to be held in January of the year. At the moment Sri Lankans expect President Rajapakse to win by a land slide. May be events like what happened in the Islamic Republic of Iran will be repeated here. Perhaps the opposition in collaboration with the Tamil diaspora funded and backed by the Western powers may cause political upheaval by claiming the election a hoax in the event of a victory for the incumbent Rajapakse.

The events that occurred in Iran and its causes should be studied by the authorities in detail and action must be planned to neutralize a repeat of the events in our elections. The euphoria of victory against the L.T.T.E must now cease sober contemplative vigilance must prevail among all patriotic Sri Lankans, who love our motherland.

The entire scenario for an Iran like situation to occur in Sri Lanka in the presidential elections in 2010-2011 like the diaspora, local agents, Tamil Provisional Transitional government, human rights issues, non payment of financial aid by the Western powers, unfriendly INGOs and NGOs, and a hostile media are in place. What is needed is the order to destabilize from the predatory Western powers.

More than at anytime in our recent history we are in real danger, all patriots must be alert and united to crush any threat to our sovereignty.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

By R. Swaminathan

(July 10, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) President Rajapaksa and the armed forces of Sri Lanka are justifiably happy and proud of having “eliminated” (in mid-May 2009) the capabilities of LTTE to mount conventional military operations. I would, however, sound a note of caution that, while the militant leaders of a major terrorist group have been neutralized, terrorism as such cannot be eliminated till the basic grievances and deprivations of the Tamils are addressed and resolved. As long as the basic causes exist, there can be no guarantee that other similar groups/leaders may not emerge.

It can be said without fear of contradiction that rehabilitation, reconciliation, development and restoration (of democracy) are the most essential measures to be taken. It is my view that there should be no rigidity in attempting these measures sequentially, and that efforts need to be made to attempt them almost simultaneously. War consists of a series of actions by the parties involved in the confrontation, but peace is a combination of a state of mind and harmony between all the different ethnic groups that populate Sri Lanka. Another potentially complicating factor is the announced expansion of the armed forces and the proposed regular military deployments in the north and the east – raising the possibility of the armed forces becoming another credible power center in Sri Lankan politics.

History has shown that a political solution, delivered or credibly promised, is an essential component of reconciliation, in situations as in Sri Lanka. President Rajapaksa had earlier hinted that a political solution would be offered once the military operations ended. There was also the hint that the report of the All Party Representative Committee (APRC - under Tissa Vitharana.) would be implemented, when finalized. Later, the non-participation of the TNA in the formulation of a policy for reconciliation was stated as being the delaying factor. Recently, the President convened the All Party Meeting for Development and Reconciliation – without any linkage between political solution (power devolution) and reconciliation. Meanwhile, local body elections are being held without a clear definition of the issues. Now, the President says that he needs a fresh mandate and that the political solution would have to await his re-election. It is difficult to comprehend as to why separate mandates are required to wage war and to make peace. All these delays result in scepticism about the intention to evolve an equitable political solution.

Nearly 300,000 Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) are in relief camps and additional thousands had been semi-permanently “displaced” in earlier years. I accept the reports that the conditions in these camps are as good as could be expected in the current circumstances. However, the President says that these IDPs cannot yet go back to their homes, which (in his words) are “jungles”. The situation is very disturbing.

I will be very brief in stating my views about India’s role in the present situation. Politically, India can only be persuasive – not too obtrusively, but persistent in working towards the Tamils being treated as equal citizens the same as the Sinhalas, Muslims etc. On the economic front, India could be as cooperative and helpful as possible. In matters relating to relief and rehabilitation, India could easily display much more activism and involvement.

(These points were made by R.Swaminathan, former Special Secretary (DG-Security), Government of India, to form the basis of his “Chairperson’s Remarks” at a seminar jointly organized by Observer Research Foundation - Chennai Chapter and Stella Maris College, on 7 July 2009.)

-Sri Lanka Guardian Read the full story »

"The policy of transparency continues. Chinese journalists say that the Chinese authorities have allowed about 400 journalists to go to Urumqi. However, they do not specify how many of them are foreign journalists."
_________

By B.Raman

(July 10, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) In a report carried on July 10,2009, the "China Daily" has projected the situation in Urumqi, the capital of the Xinjiang province of China, as a "relative state of normalcy" after two days of violent rioting by the Uighurs followed by two days of communal tension due to retaliatory attacks by sections of the Han Chinese.

No major incident of violence or protest was reported on July 9,2009. Most shops have re-opened, the Government servants have reported back to work and the public transport system which was very badly damaged during the initial rioting by the Uighurs is functioning again.

However, there have been complaints from Uighurs that shops owned by Han Chinese are not selling them provisions and that Han drivers of buses and taxis are not prepared to take them. The public transport system in Urumqi is dominated by the Han Chinese. Practically all taxi-drivers are Han Chinese. While there are no more reports of protests by the Han Chinese, reports indicate a kind of undeclared social boycott of the Uighurs being observed by many Han Chinese residents of the city. While administrative normalcy might have been restored, it might take a long time to restore social normalcy.

"Restoration of stability"-----that has been the key theme of a statement issued after a meeting of the nine-member Standing Committee of the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party held on the evening of July 8 under the chairmanship of President Hu Jintao. That has also been the theme of discourses by other Chinese leaders and editorials and comments in the Government-controlled media.

The policy of transparency continues. Chinese journalists say that the Chinese authorities have allowed about 400 journalists to go to Urumqi. However, they do not specify how many of them are foreign journalists.

The Chinese have kept up the focus of their psywar on the World Uighur Congress (WUC), allegedly funded by the National Endowment For Democracy of the US and helped by the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation (UNPO) of Holland. The Munich-based WUC and its US-based President Ms.Rebiya Kadeer have played into the hands of the Chinese authorities by making exaggerated statements about the fatalities and by unwittingly disseminating or using documents and alleged pictures of the Chinese security forces using force against the Uighurs. In at least two instances, the Chinese authorities have been able to prove them to be fake.

For example, during an interview with Al Jazeera on July 7 , Rebiya Kadeer showed a picture of what she claimed was Chinese security forces massed against peaceful protesters in Urumqi. The Chinese have claimed that the picture which she said was taken in Urumqi was actually carried by the "Nanfang Weekly" in its online edition on June 26. According to the Chinese authorities, the picture had been taken by the weekly during a public demonstration at Shishou in the Hubei province.

According to the Chinese, the Uighur American Association had also disseminated a photograph purporting to be of a scene of the riots in Urumqi. According to them, it was actually a photograph taken when sections of the public in Hangzhou in the Zhejiang province had protested on May 15,2009, after a traffic accident.

The WUC had initially alleged that 600 Uighurs were killed during the use of force by the security forces on July 5 and 6. They subsequently changed the figure of Uighur fatalities to over 800. These figures have not been corroborated so far. Similarly, the WUC's claims of violent incidents in Kashgar have not been corroborated.

Till now all Uighur reactions have come from the WUC, its leaders and spokesmen. There have been no reactions from the Islamic Movement of Eastern Turkestan (IMET) headed by Sheikh Abdul Haq, which operates from the Waziristan area of Pakistan and is allied to Osama Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda in the International Islamic Front (IIF).

The CBS News of the US had reported on April 15,2009, that the media wing of the IMET called Sawt al Islam had recently disseminated a 43-minute video entitled “Persistence and preparation for Jihad”. To quote the CBS:" It includes a statement by the group’s current leader Sheikh Abul Haq, as well as its late leader Hassan Makhdum, whose alias is Abu Mohammed al Turkistani. Abul Haq said “jihad” was a duty that falls on all Muslims just like any other religious duty. He also pledged more attacks against Chinese forces.”

While the Chinese are not yet openly talking of any role of the IMET in the Urumqi riots, they are reported to have reiterated once again to the Pakistani authorities the need to act against its terrorist infrastructure in Pakistani territory. Neither Al Qaeda nor the Afghan or Pakistani Taliban nor any of the Pakistani jihadi oranisations have so far commented on the Urumqi uprising.

However,the only comment in Pakistan has come from the Jamaat-e-Islami (JEI),which has many members from the Uighur diaspora in Pakistan. It had in the past protested against the refusal of the Saudi Embassy in Islamabad to issue Haj and Umra visas to Uighurs living in Pakistan. The Saudis were insisting that they should apply for the visas to the Saudi Embassy in Beijing.

"The News" carried the following report on July 9: " LAHORE: Jamaat-e-Islami Ameer Syed Munawwar Hasan has expressed deep concern over the bloody riots in China’s largest Muslim population province Xinjiang, and urged the Chinese government to show magnanimity towards its Muslim minority. He cited reports saying around 3,000 Chinese Muslims were tortured in the Urumqi city when they were demanding a probe into the clashes between the Muslim Uighurs and the Han Chinese that left hundreds killed. He said though it was China’s internal affair yet it was painful to hear about so many Muslim deaths. He said he would like to assert that violence and inflexible attitude could make things worse. He suggested the Chinese authorities to consider the genuine demands of the Muslims with an open mind and be large-hearted in respect of their religious rights. He said there were reports of the US involvement in the incident. In that case, he said the Chinese authorities should create an atmosphere in which the US did not get an opportunity to interfere."

The web site of the NED of the US gives details of the following grants given by it to Uighur organisations during 2008:

International Uyghur Human Rights and Democracy Foundation

$134,805.To advance the human rights of ethnic Uyghur women and children. The Foundation will maintain an English- and Uyghur-language website, publish a report on the human rights situation of Uyghur women and children and conduct a civic-education workshop for Uyghur women.

International Uyghur PEN Club $20,300. To promote freedom of expression for writers creating work in the Uyghur language. The International Uyghur PEN Club will maintain a website publishing banned writings and the works of persecuted poets, historians, journalists, and others, and will conduct international advocacy campaigns on behalf of imprisoned writers.

Uyghur American Association (UAA) $269,000. To raise awareness of Uyghur human rights issues and advance Uyghurs’ religious freedom and human rights. The UAA’s Uyghur Human

Rights Project will research, document and bring to international attention, independent and accurate information about human rights violations affecting the Turkic populations of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.

World Uyghur Congress $146,000 . To strengthen advocacy on behalf of Uyghur human rights and democracy. The World Uyghur Congress will solicit its members to prepare strategy papers and will organize a major conference bringing together pro-democracy Uyghur leaders to discuss priorities for the Uyghur movement in the areas of advocacy, outreach, and democracy education.

After Hu's return from Italy, the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party has tried to project a picture of unity in order to dispel speculation about possible differences over the handling of the situation. This does not mean that differences do not exist. These might come out in the open subsequenly. A report disseminated by the Xinhua news agency on the meeting of the Standing Committee of the Politburo held after Hu's return from Italy is annexed.

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt.of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

ANNEXURE

Xinhua report on the meeting of the Standing Committee of the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party chaired by Hu Jintao

---------------

Chinese President Hu Jintao on Wednesday night convened a meeting of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Central

Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) to discuss issues relating to the Xinjiang riot.

The meeting was told that stability in Xinjiang is the "most important and pressing task," according to a statement issued Thursday. The

meeting also vowed "severe punishment" on culprits in accordance with the law.

The government will "firmly crack down on serious crimes including assaults, vandalism, looting and arson" to maintain social stability and

safeguard people's fundamental interests in Xinjiang, according to the statement.

The Standing Committee told relevant authorities to "isolate and crack down on the tiny few" and "unify and educate the majority of masses".

"Instigators, organizers, culprits and violent criminals in the unrest shall be severely punished in accordance with the law," it said. "Those taking part in the riot due to provocation and deceit from by separatists, should be given education."

The deadly July 5 unrest in Urumqi, capital of northwest China's Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region, has "profound" political background, the statement said.

It was a serious violent crime which was masterminded and organized by the "three forces" of terrorism, separatism and extremism at home

and abroad, it said. The unrest has resulted in great losses to people and done great harm to local order and stability, it said.

The Standing Committee asked local government to visit bereaved families, innocent people injured, and those with property losses, to offer necessary support and aid.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

A response to Dayan Jayatilleka

By Malinda Seneviratne

(July 10, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) There can be a military victory over a military challenge but there cannot be a purely military victory over a political challenge. An enemy army can and must be defeated, an armed opponent can be killed, but a political challenge requires a political response and an idea can be defeated only by another idea. – Dayan Jayatilleka

This is old. I would say it is basic to political science. However, like all things that stand the test of time, it is profound. Dayan is absolutely right. He is erroneous however in the application of this principle (see his piece in The Island of July 9, 2009 titled ‘The 13th Amendment and the international system’).

What is his reference?

Let me quote:

"One of the basic errors of Malinda and his co-thinkers is the conclusion that Tamil ethnic politics died on the banks of the Nandikadal. The idea of Tamil Eelam can be defeated only by the counter-idea of reformed and restructured Sri Lankan state which may remain unitary but contains an irreducible autonomous political space for the Tamil people of the North and East. It cannot be defeated by the idea of Sri Lanka shorn of even the 13th amendment. Armed Tamil secessionism can and has been defeated, but the politics of collective Tamil identity cannot be militarily defeated or suppressed; it can only be politically addressed."

Dayan’s defense of the 13th Amendment and his plea for its implementation is predicated on the validity of the Tamil (chauvinist) demands, or, to put it another way, the erroneous and mischievous assertion of the equation that equates ‘grievance’ + ‘aspiration’ to ‘legitimate demand’. More on this later.

He defends the hurried and coercively introduced 13th Amendment as a (necessary?) ‘Caesarean surgical intervention to bring forth a power sharing solution thwarted from 1957’ and pats himself on the back for having predicted the same. He attributes that ’ to extra-parliamentary lobbying: ‘none of the proposals for moderate power-sharing were voted down democratically’. Lobbying, Dayan knows, is part of democratic process. India dropping parippu and a lot more besides is not.

Dayan enumerates the advantages of going with the 13th, painting a happily-ever-after picture of internal stability, international backing and communal harmony with an equally ‘happy’ division of the Tamil Diaspora (that’s a racist wish, I believe), a bridging of the North-South gap and a downing of the anti-Sri Lanka global campaign. These are ‘strategic benefits’ which Dayan believes will accrue automatically if we implemented the 13th. He implies that pandering to Eelamist mythology and burning defensible historical transcript is a small price to pay for all these goodies.

First of all, I don’t think that the goodies are there for the taking. There are no ‘friends’ or ‘enemies’ in the international, just entities playing cards as per self-interest. There is a give and take and there’s a lot of arm-twisting too. Dayan knows this and Dayan knows that India is not the do-gooder that India likes us to believe she is. Yes, there is a ‘World System’, I acknowledge. That is however not an entity that was god-made and meant to be immobile from Day One to Day Last. Things change. To accept current realities as overarching forces best met with acquiescence is a legitimate option, but honour, dignity and intellectual honesty demand that error in perception be resisted. That however, is not an important entry in the diary of a politician. I believe it was one of the First Nations in the Americas that predicated policy decision on a consideration of impact on the seventh generation down the line. Resolving for aspirations that infringe on the rights of other communities and for grievances that can be addressed in other ways may appease ‘international pals’ in the here-and-now but will amount to little more than shoving a bunch of garbage under the carpet.

Dayan, so adept at meeting, countering and triumphing over Western mischief-making with respect to Sri Lanka, is surprisingly meek when it comes to Eelamist posturing regarding history.

Perhaps this is because he is fascinated with the notion of ‘autonomous political space’ for the Tamil people in the North and East. I will go with ‘political space’ but there is nothing to support ‘autonomy’ as per defined territory. The provincial boundaries were arbitrarily drawn, to begin with. The Eastern Province is demographically divided roughly into three equal parts, and in terms of territory, ‘Sinhala’ areas far outweigh Tamil and Muslim areas put together. As for legitimacy of claim following historical evidence, it is at best paltry. The archaeological record does not support the thesis. We could of course set the take-off point closer to the present, but then again, we do know that Chelvanayagam was not a Ceylonese, that Ponnambalam Ramanathan’s grandfather did not have an address in this country and we have to make note of the fact that the results of the first census were surreptitiously ‘disappeared’. Oh yes, Tamil chauvinism has a long history and one that pre-dates the horrendous disenfranchisement of Tamils in the estates and Bandaranaike’s swabasha adventure.

Dayan points out that our so-called ‘friends’ in the international community want the 13th implemented, citing statements made. Even if we were generous and grant that all these statements were/are made in good faith, the fact remains that they are based on their perceptions of our problem, something that is largely influenced by three factors: a) strong and sustained propaganda by the Eelam lobby, b) an ‘intellectual’ community (mostly of Marxist-Leninist leanings) that was and still is quite quiescent, and c) governments and political leaders who were operating throughout in the here-and-now mode.

Bandaranaike cowed down to ‘extra-parliamentary pressure’, yes. But it was not a matter of going through with the Chelva-Banda pact or dumping it unceremoniously. There was a compelling argument for a instituting a reason-privileging exercise in considering ‘Tamil grievances’. He could have instituted a historical audit into claims and thereafter addressed that which was legitimate and ignore that which was not. His successors could have too. That they did not is a pity, and does not in any way make a case for Caesarian section or the sanitization of belligerent bullying on the part of India. Or anyone else.

I agree with Dayan that the Sri Lanka state needs structural reform. There can be structural reform without compromising its centralized form. Devolution of power is not only antithetical to current global trends (for those who are fascinated by the ‘Global’ with a capital G) it is not a necessary precondition for reconciliation of Sinhala and Tamil communities. That is like saying that the United States should devolve power to the African Americans, Hispanics and Asians in clearly demarcated pieces of land in order to obtain reconciliation.

There is nothing wrong in any community wanting legitimate political space, in wanting equal rights as citizens, but autonomous political space is another matter altogether. That can be an aspiration, sure, but not delivering that aspiration is not a crime against humanity and not necessarily undemocratic.

All communities should have ‘political space’ to air grievances, assert identity and obtain relief where infringement occurs. This requires an overall democratization of our institutions. This is where my argument for the 17th Amendment is not the apple against the 13th Amendment orange as per Dayan’s characterization makes sense. The 1978 constitution is anti-citizen, first and foremost and this is the structural anomaly that needs to be addressed most urgently. It diminishes the citizen. The 17th, flawed though it is and inadequate to boot, as Dayan correctly observes, is the only step taken in the direction of addressing this problem.

Dayan says, ‘The 17th amendment only tangentially impacts upon the crucial problem of power-sharing between centre and periphery and is therefore no substitute for the implementation of the 13th amendment.’ True. The 17th does not really impact power-sharing between centre and periphery. However, ‘power sharing between centre and periphery’ is not the ‘problem’ Dayan believes it is. There has to be more decentralization of administrative functions, a greater degree of say for citizen in decision-making etc., but the answer is not devolution as per the 13th, which, we know is essentially a mechanism for pampering local thugs and a huge burden on the public. A District Council would be far more effective, democratic and yielding ‘self-determination’ to the ordinary citizen. What the 17th, or rather a 17th Plus formulation, would do is to insulate all people from the excesses of politicians.

Reconciliation is not about pandering to ahistorical claim. Aspiration clothed as right may excite those who like masquerades and cross-dressing of course, but a nation can do better than to go overboard with such things. This is why we need to get to the basics, i.e. a historical audit of Tamil claims. If not we will condemn our children to deal with chauvinism and the violence it tends to spawn. We cannot afford, especially not after suffering immense costs in eliminating the military avatar of Eelamist posturing, to concede constitutionally the rudimentary structures that can later be the basis for a renewed journey towards Prabhakaran’s objective. Reconciliation, rather, is about coming to terms with realities, of privileging respect, affirming equal rights for all citizens and providing the necessary space for celebrating identity.

It is beholden on us then to set the record state with respect to all misconceptions about Sri Lanka and her history. I will concede that mine is ‘version’. Dayan too will have to concede that his is ‘version’ too. I am ready to support a historical audit so that the root of the demand (for ‘autonomous political space for Tamils’) can be obtained. We can’t gloss over this. We have, for too long, and have had to pay a massive price for our collective sloth as a people. We need a new embrace in this country, a citizens’ embrace. This is not the time to embrace a wasteful, ineffective and grotesque historical misadventure just so that we win some accolades from ‘friends’ abroad for a few feel-good moments.

I firmly believe that the Sinhala and Tamil people are more than ready for a reconciliation that is not bastardised by formulations promoted and established by third-rate politicians and I believe that such reconciliation (which necessitates a re-hauling of the constitution; most certainly a worthy cause to espouse) alone would win us long-term and sustainable friendships internationally.

The 13th Amendment is, in short, a ‘bad idea’ and worse, ‘an erroneous idea’. It has to be defeated.

Malinda Seneviratne is a freelance writer who can be reached at malinsene@gmail.com.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

"Prabhakaran was unscrupulously exploiting the hatred of the Tamil diaspora for the Sinhalese. They were financing Prabhakaran to kill the Sinhalese but to Prabhakaran his first priority was to kill the Tamils before he turned his guns on the Sinhalese. "
______________

By H.L.D. Mahindapala | Link Part One

(July 10, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) The last and the unbearable thrust that eroded the power of Prabhakaran was when the Tamil people fled through every nook and cranny, running, crawling on their bellies, dodging Tiger bullets sniping at them, to escape his Pol Potist grip straight into the arms of the Sri Lankan forces waiting to receive them. The world gazed in disbelief at 300,000 Tamils running away from the man who claimed to be their protector and saviour. The historical fact is that before the Security Forces could get him the Tamil people kicked him out of their lives contemptuously and unceremoniously. The Tamils had no compunction in kicking out the Tamil “thalivar” who had deceived them and misled them into the depths of misery and despair.

The fleeing Tamils dug the grave of the man who was digging the graves of their children and their future. There could not have been a more humiliating end for the man who claimed to be the “sole representative of the Tamils”. No Tamil leader has gone down, despised and rejected by his people and the world at large, as Prabhakaran.

With no one to prop him up Prabhakaran had to pin his last hopes on the Tamil diaspora reeling under the shock and awe of the irreversible forces, advancing speedily and crushing “the invincible might” of their hollow man with his head full of straw, mostly those coming from Tamil political myths. He has been riding high on concocted Tamil myths which made him believe that he was in reality a messianic giant with extraordinary powers to take on the whole world with his band of gung-ho terrorists. They were psyched to believe that his crimes against humanity and war crimes were necessary evils to win the unwinnable Eelam.

The Tamils who were heaping curses on the Sinhalese after the lunatic fringe of Sinhala mobs killed 300 – 400 in 1983 did not react with similar anger or concern when Prabhakaran went on his outrageous murderous campaign liquidating more Tamils than all the other forces put together, as stated by S. Chandrahasan, son of S. J. V. Chelvanayakam, the father of Tamil separatism, and UN peace award winning TULF leader, V. Anandasangaree. They were brain-washed to overlook the crime of throwing under aged children into a war they did not want on the excuse that the Sri Lankan government had to be defeated at any cost. More than the Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Tamils in the diaspora were the most vociferous and indefatigable in polishing the image of Prabhakaran as the “saviour” of the Tamils. They were falling over each other to create anti-Sri Lankan headlines abroad which, in the end, had no impact on their separatist cause or the fate of Prabhakaran.

Tied to this melodrama enacted in Western capitals was the humanitarian issue of saving the Tamil civilians caught in the cross-fire. As usual the Tamil propaganda machine was manufacturing myths to cover up the sins of Prabhakaran – a Pol Potist who climbed to power on mountains of Tamil corpses. Prabhakaran was unscrupulously exploiting the hatred of the Tamil diaspora for the Sinhalese. They were financing Prabhakaran to kill the Sinhalese but to Prabhakaran his first priority was to kill the Tamils before he turned his guns on the Sinhalese.

His first act was to kill Alfred Duraiyappah, the mild-mannered mayor of Jaffna. His last act was to kill the Tamils running away from him. The tragedy is that the hero-worshipping of the Tamils in the diaspora grew in proportion to the number of Tamils he killed. The generosity of the diasporic contributors to Prabhakaran’s war chest too increased in direct proportion to the Tamils laid to rest. Prabhakaran was a merchant of death who thrived and survived by selling Tamil corpses to the affluent Tamils in the diaspora.

Perpetuating the unwanted war was the only means of gathering support, internally and externally, for his survival. As the record shows, there was nothing to crow about his politics except the ruthless power he acquired to kill. His reputation rested mainly on the methodologies, and tactics he developed to eliminate his rivals. Compromise, negotiations, talks were anathema to his brand of negative politics. He came alive only when his victims were liquidated. He got a kick out of watching videos and photos of his victims dying. It was this kink that provided the vital evidence for his involvement in killing Rajiv Gandhi. The negatives found in the camera of the agent appointed to cover the assassination of the electioneering Gandhi spotted “Dhanu” (Themazi Rajaratnam),-- a female suicide bomber of the Tigers blowing herself up as she garlanded Gandhi, in Sriperimbudur in Chennai on May 21, 1991. The negatives provided incontrovertible evidence to nail Prabhakaran for good. He never recovered from this colossal blunder.

This was not identity politics as imagined by some pundits. This was sheer brutal and vindictive politics of a beastly terrorist taking revenge on his perceived enemies. Gandhi was the first to underwrite a political space within Sri Lanka for Prabhakaran. In characteristic style Prabhakaran bit the hand that fed him. His insatiable blood thirstiness and the efficacy of his killing machine did empower him to some extent but not to the extent that he and his followers dreamed of. He was bent on hijacking Jaffna jingoism to serve his personal glorification. This was also a part of his myopic politics which was strategized basically to eliminate his real and imagined rivals. Eliminating those who were perceived to be a threat to his maniacal ego had no right to live according to Prabhakaranism. This is what Erik Solheim and the pro-Prabhakaranist propagandist called his “military genius”.

In their eyes, Prabhakaran’s capacity to fine tune a ruthless killing machine that targeted mainly the Tamils was a sign of “military genius”. An officer who was with the soldiers who found his corpse told me: “The bullet that hit his head and sliced a part of it went through easily because there was nothing inside it, except perhaps hatred!” His greatest achievement was in creating the Black Tigers – the killer squad fed with bitter hatred. His heroism was in sending the children of other parents to die while keeping his children under his protective wing and holding lavish birthday parties. He came out of the hatred bred in the womb of Jaffna and died as a victim of his own hatred. To his dying day there wasn’t a smidgen of mercy in his ruthless politics to redeem him either in the eyes of his fellow-man or God.

Those who followed him too are guilty of his war crimes and crimes against humanity. The worst are the Tamils in the diaspora who financed Prabhakaran – “a serial, pathological killer”, according to Prof. James Jupp of Australian National University – knowing that he was using their blood money to kill their own people. They had no compunction in deifying him and forcing their children to worship his portrait in the Neanderthal shrines of Eelam politics. They were falling over each other to go on pilgrimages to Killinochci, where he was presiding over chunks of territory administered by his oppressive bureaucracy. They revered and worshipped the power of their “sole representative” who had turned into a tyrannical war lord defending his survival and not that of the Tamil people.


He dragged the Tamils from Jaffna to Vanni and from Vanni to Mullativu not to save the Tamils – the majority of the Tamils did not rush to flood his Terroristan like the way the Tamils flooded the Army camps -- but to use them as human shields and as a reserve body from which he could forcibly recruit other people’s children to fill the gaps in his depleted ranks. Of course, the pro-Prabhakaranists argued that saving Prabhakaran was the only way to save Eelam. One was equated with the other. But as his grip on the Tamil people became oppressive he like, all deified figures of authority, lost touch with reality and believed in the myth that he could save the Tamils only by saving himself. When the Tamil people rejected this myth he had to force them to believe in him.

The more he gained territory and power the more ruthless he became. Though the diasporic Tamils were elated with his territorial gains the people under him were turning against him because they were forced to make sacrifices to defend not themselves but an oppressive regime. In the end, it is the expansion of his territorial gains and power which undermined his power. He was in stalemate unable to deliver his Eelam or to remain in a limbo of pseudo-state which was fast losing its rationale internationally and even among his own people. Nor could he hold the people forever under his oppressive regime. The mass exodus of Tamils running away from him indicates how much trust the Tamils had in him and his politics. His gains, in short, paved the way for his demise. The regime he built was imploding from within. The Security Forces marched in to finish off what was left of it. .

Besides, he was thinly stretched to defend a territory threatened by a superior military force that had outwitted, outnumbered and outdated his strategies from Mavil Aru to Mullativu. Though Prabhakaran was desperately in need of the war to survive Eelam War IV turned out to be a war which could not sustain morally or physically. He could have saved many Tamil lives if he grasped the ground realities more intelligently, without his ingrained arrogance and intransigence.

In the external front of the LTTE, the diaspora had no counter to save Prabhakaran except to denigrate the Sri Lankan government to weaken its military offensive by raking up humanitarian issues. They mobilized their numbers to influence the Western media, the MPs in their pocket boroughs in London, Toronto and Sydney and some lame-duck leaders like George Brown who believe fancifully that they can continue to legislate to their ex-colonies as in the bad old days of gun boat imperialism.

The misguided Tamil diaspora was erecting barricades in London, Toronto and Sydney when the desperate need of the hour was to rush reinforcements and build human barricades in Mullativu, Pudukuduirrupu and Nanthi Kadal. Their heroism was in funding a war fought by children of poor Tamils while the Tamil expats kept their kids safely in the comfortable suburbs of affluent West, feeding them Kentucky Fried chicken, McDonald’s and pizzas. They funded not only his killing machine but also his luxury life style of dipping in swimming pools, hiding in air-conditioned bunkers and celebrating in grand style birthdays of his children while he forcibly plucked the children of other Tamils and sent them to fight in four futile Eelam wars which ended with no glory to either himself or the Tamil people.

They subscribed nearly $300 million annually to keep Prabhakaran alive and kicking -- kicking mainly their fellow-Tamils who were kept alive only because they were needed to wage a war that boosted their inflated egos. In the end what did they gain? How far did their shouting, parading and financing go to save the Tamils and their hero, Prabhakaran? When the dust began to settle down they discovered that their investments in Prabhakaran yielded the identical results of the billions deposited in Lalith Kotelawela’s Golden Key that was supposed to open the doors to his akasa kaday (castle in the air).

Suddenly and unexpectedly the pseudo-state of Eelam was collapsing before their stunned eyes like the sand banks built hastily to protect Prabhakaran. The emotionally disturbed Tamils in the diaspora, who were nonplussed not knowing what had hit them, failed to realize that there was no force on earth to stop the advance of the Sri Lankan forces sitting defiantly and confidently on the cusp of final victory. The Forces were not going to throw away the best opportunity they had gained in the longest-running Asian war under noisy pressures – mostly hot air -- mounted abroad.

At the ground level in Mullativu the morale of the forces too was running high. It was so high that soldiers refused to take home leave fearing that they would not be there to witness the finale to the war they had waged so valiantly and brilliantly, astounding the world which had written them off as no match to Prabhakaran’s deadly cadres.

In his last days Prabhakaran was caught between the heat of the bullets whizzing past his confused head and the cold waters of Nanthi Kadal. Though he must have had an inkling about his days being numbered he was still hoping against hope to escape through any means – an option he refused to give the desperate Tamils, sometimes crawling on their bellies in the jungles without food or water, to get away from his heartless cadres and his ruthless grip.

(To be continued)

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

The struggle is in the body politic. Spirit-filled by the suffering people in the homelands. Without the spirit the body is dead.
____________

By Chandi Sinnathurai

(July 10, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Tamil struggle for freedom, equality, dignified and decent living is not something that requires re-kindling. The agonising voice of the Tamils in IDP camps is a living witness of suffering. Some one in Sri Lanka who had been working with the suffering people said over a telephone conversation to me that there are those who have lost limbs and arms were pleading passers by to scratch their bodies. Many have heat pimples and mosquito bites.

These are open signs of suffering. However, there are much deeper signs of psychological trauma and stress related disorders. Many have been eye witnesses to gruesome cold blooded killings. They have been held up between the Armed forces and the Tigers. No one wanted to tell the truth on behalf of the innocent people. These people will carry emotional scars for the rest of their lives. There are thousands of children, young teens who have witnessed the gruesome side of war. Tragically, all these innocent people were indispensable.

Truth in the fog of war comes with many a spin. When one speaks of deepest convictions, one has to be doubly sure, one's convictions are under girded by truth that sits comfortable with your conscience. Often, in the midst of war and struggle, truth and conscience, dies a thousand deaths. Propaganda takes the hallowed place of truth.

There is something called the social truth. People who have stood and witnessed the events of war know what really took place - and it is these poor and vulnerable people -- it is in their midst truth can be located. They may be too weak to protest. But truth suffers in silence among them while noises are heard, symbols are raised, and arguments are polished elsewhere. All these are, no doubt, done for public consumption.

The West wanted an end to the Tamil Tigers. And they saw to it that it came to pass. The truth of the matter is the West was concerned about the undemocratic way in which the tigers were operating and they wondered what sort of governance Tamil Eelam would have. No amount of lobbying, nor any convincing arguments worked. They saw the hubris of the belief in the invincibility of the tigers. Even though, reportedly, in the final moments, Erik Solheim and other Western foreign ministers have tried to save the neck of the tiger leadership. It was too late for any guarantees.

Now the West is talking about war crimes in Sri Lanka. But that is only after wiping out the Tamil resistance. What the West is now concerned about is the involvement of two emerging super powers in Sri Lanka. Let's not get over excited and mis-read the signs or misinterpret the context. The US don't have any appetite to entertain the trans-national government concept. As for a government in exile we need a host country. That is a waste of time.

As for the Diaspora forming a 'democratic' leadership on behalf of the homeland Tamils has many undemocratic pit falls. If this is a lobbying group that is fine. But is the trans-national government a front or a "glorified talk shop" is a question that begs an answer.

Is the Tamil national question no longer a national issue? Who would the trans-national government govern? Will their governance extend to the Sri Lankan Tamils including the refugees in Tamil Nadu? (However, the Lankan Tamils are already under the governance of Colombo.

As democracy would demand, the Tamils in Sri Lanka must be given their fundamental right to choose their leaders. That is their liberty. None should try and hijack that - even with convincing high sounding ideals.

Of course, liberation is a people's struggle. Fish without water is good for a broil. People's struggle has clear markers, milestones, stages and above all credible leaders of integrity and clarity. People will see the 'cloud of unknowing' when they can feel the tug of puppet strings.

The struggle is in the body politic. Spirit-filled by the suffering people in the homelands. Without the spirit the body is dead. It is the people, Eelam Makkal, who have the bleeding wounds and scars.

The Diaspora must know its limits.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

“Let us be frank. Do you think that we can persuade people to work for the government and hold high office, if they are to be told that they have account for every cent they spend, that they would have keep books and be audited; that they can’t use their official position to help their family or friends and the like?”
_______________

By Basil Fernando

(July 09, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) This is a discussion among several imaginary characters. These imaginary characters do not represent any living persons.

The Characters:

A journalist, conducting the interview;
A senior police officer who has agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity;
A retired judge;
A political scientist;
A philosopher.

Journalist: We have now discussed some important transformations in our country. We discussed about the Gyges’ ring, which makes the wearer invisible as part of our local experience now. In that transformation the 1978 Constitution played a very significant role. Now, the executive president can wear the Gyges’ ring and what this does is make him quite invisible. Perhaps we need to discuss this more.

Philosopher: At this stage, I thought it is better to recall the legend of the Gyges’ Ring. I found this description of it in Google: According to the legend, the ancestor (in Book 10 Socrates refers to the ring as belonging to Gyges himself, not his ancestor as Glaucon states in Book 2) of Gyges of Lydia was a shepherd in the service of King Candaules of Lydia. After an earthquake, a cave was revealed in a mountainside where Gyges was feeding his flock. Entering the cave, Gyges discovered that it was in fact a tomb with a bronze horse containing a corpse, larger than that of a man, who wore a golden ring, which Gyges pocketed. He discovered that the ring gave him the power to become invisible by adjusting it. Gyges then arranged to be chosen as one of the messengers who reported to the king as to the status of the flocks. Arriving at the palace, Gyges used his new power of invisibility to seduce the queen, and with her help he murdered the king, and became king of Lydia himself. King Croesus, famous for his wealth, was Gyges' descendant.

Political Scientist: Now, the moral of the story is that a typical person would not be moral if he or she did not have to fear the consequences of their actions. If anyone can be invisible, it is possible to do things that one may not be willing to do because of bad publicity and other adverse consequences.

Retired Police Officer: I think I understand this legend and what it tries to say. But, I cannot agree that we should encourage our officers or leaders to follow the moral of this story.

Political Scientist: You mean it is too western?

Retired Police Officer: Whatever. If we have to become visible, we cannot do anything. We will become powerless. How can we ask our officers to kill undesirable people, bad criminals, if they have to do that openly. If their wives and children know these things, they will think they are bad people. Ordinary folk need to observe morals. If they know what we do, they will try to emulate us and then there will be more problems. We need to have the capacity to do many things in an invisible way.

Retired Judicial Officer: Some people might say that what our police officer says is wrong. However, he is simply saying honestly what everybody knows to be happening.
Political Scientist: Now, let us go back to our original question: in 1978 when the Executive Presidential system was created the President gave himself, the Gyges’ Ring. We created a very powerful president, as powerful as those Kings who ruled before this thing called democracy came to the world. We rejected the Western Democracy and created our own thing.

Philosopher: What you mean, I think, is that we replaced the paramount law idea with the idea of the paramount personae. Large, big, tall, fat personae as we see them in ancient statues, which is really, our thing, our idea of who the powerful person should be.

Retired Police Officer: Let us be frank. Do you think that we can persuade people to work for the government and hold high office, if they are to be told that they have account for every cent they spend, that they would have keep books and be audited; that they can’t use their official position to help their family or friends and the like? If we ask our officers to bring every suspect before judges, that they should not torture people who do not give information, or that they have to produce every dead body before a magistrate to have a post mortem, will they do anything? We will have to pay officers who do nothing

Retired Judicial Officer: I think what you are saying is that we must be more flexible. We must give people room to exercise power, more freedom. Freedom of those in authority is more important than ‘the so called people’s freedom’. People are free only if they obey rulers and respect rulers.

Philosopher: According to our officer and judicial officer, this is what has happened since 1978. This is our new order.

Journalist: Now I understand why so many journalists are being killed. Since, we journalists believe in transparency and accountability we no longer have any place under this new order.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

By Terry Lacey

(July 09, Jakarta, Sri Lanka Guardian) The eighteenth century British highwayman Dick Turpin would hold up the rich in their carriages at pistol-point, demanding money and jewels, by shouting “Stand and deliver.”

Now a generation of British politicians, Members of Parliament and banking chiefs who have robbed the people are being thrown out of their jobs on a wave of discontent at their salaries, bonuses and unjustifiable expenses, while people are losing jobs, salaries, pensions and houses.

Across the big ditch President Obama masterminds reform to the echoes of the old song of Pete Seeger that you can rob a man with a six-gun or with a fountain pen. The bankers and finance gurus who led Americans to disaster now face jail and ruin. Even their wives won´t back them any more.

Asia with its corruption and a largely discredited political class has to move smartly, so that the global political tsunami now sweeping the US and Europe, destabilizing parts of Africa and Latin America, will not rebound again across the Asian region.

Thailand, with 7.1 percent economic contraction faces political crisis and a separatist Southern Muslim rebellion. Malaysia faces 6.2 percent economic contraction in a period of political fragility and transition. Singapore faces recession and knows political change has to come.

China, despite signs of recovery, faces the loss of up to 20 million jobs from the downturn, fears what will happen to its huge reserves in US bonds and its over-dependence on a US dollar that could be hit by high inflation, while facing a wave of discontent from the Muslim Uighur minority in under-developed Xinjiang.

The economy and development are the key. The real enemies are the economic gap between haves and have-nots, the sensitivities of the coincidence of economic privileges with ethnic groupings, and a revolution in rising expectations hitting a hard wall of harsh realities. These are dangerous times.

In the past the Asian way of consensus, softly-softly and step-by-step could cope, but the new global conditions need a sharper response and firmer faster leadership.

The best internal defense is development that reaches the poor.

Public administration reform becomes even more necessary than anti-corruption drives and the latter must become part of the former.

Policies cannot work without implementation and Asia needs speed. Too little too late will be the political epitaph of the leaders that fail.

But now Indonesia has a good chance. President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) has cruised to victory in the direct presidential elections on July 8th leading a coalition of his Democratic Party and Islamic allies, with 60 percent of the votes on a 72.5 percent turnout of 176.4 million voters.

This 2:1 victory potentially buys five years of stability and legitimacy.

SBY made a good start in his first term, with 4.4 percent growth this year, the highest consumer confidence in several years, the lowest inflation in nine years, a 25 percent drop in poverty in four years, a 40 percent stock market recovery in nine months, local conflicts under control and a start to public administration reform.

Now he is stronger, but the world is a harder place. The Indonesian ship of state must sail with a steady hand on the tiller through a stormy sea and emerge as part of the economic leadership of the world.

Without firm leadership from Indonesia, China and India the world recovery will be delayed and Asia will pay a higher price.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has taken his stand. Now he must deliver.

Terry Lacey is a development economist who writes from Jakarta on modernization in the Muslim world, investment and trade relations with the EU and Islamic banking.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

(July 09, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Sajith Premadasa UNP M.P. speaking to the media today (July -09) , at the UNP media unit highlighted the injustice the PA Government and the Mahinda Chintana had perpetrated on the farmers of this country. Though SL is an essentially agricultural country and its economy depends on the farmers ; since 2000 , the PA Govts. have meted out step -motherly treatment to them ,he lamented.

During the period of the UNP regimes the farmers were given their due place . So many provisions and Acts were passed in Parliament conferring benefits on the farmers , particularly those who cultivated lands taken from land owners. Even the laws which gave protection to these cultivating farmers from being evicted by the landowners was withdrawn by the PA Govt. in the year 2000. Consequently , these farmers are left to the mercy of the land owners who can evict them any time. Between the year 2000 and now , thousands of farmers have suffered and had to abandon their occupation. Besides , the rights and privileges of farmers passing to his kith and kin when he dies are also denied after the PA govt.’s legislation .

Though the present Govt. has realized what the UNP did was the right thing and is trying to lethargically make amends by passing new laws to restore their rights , all those farmers who suffered losses until now will be left in the lurch because the Govt. will not give retroactive operation to the legislation , he bemoaned.

-Sri Lanka Guardian Read the full story »

(July 09, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) is planning to start operating its upcoming Port in Hambantota by November 2010, said Ports Authority Chairman, Dr. Priyath B. Wickrema.

The construction work of the Port in the Deep South is “5 months ahead of the scheduled completion date” and will see the completion of the 1st phase construction
by 2009 October, he said.

Wickrema also said “ we have completed more than 50% key wall, 40% Excavation work, 100% of the Breakwater construction” while added that once completed the 1st phase will consist of 2 general purpose berths, one Bunkering berth and a small Craft berth which will be 120 meters long."

SLPA is planning to call Requests for proposals during next month from willing investors to invest in projects such as Cement Bagging & Grinding, Fertilizer Bagging, warehousing, Bulk Transshipment, Car Transshipment and Car assembling projects, a BOI press release issued on July 9 said.

The investors can either enter into a Joint venture with SLPA, or get involved in Build, Operate and Transfer projects or run their own operations on leased out lands that is coming under the Hambantota port.

Dr. Wickrema says Hambantota port has ample land space available running up to 2000 hectares, 5 times bigger than Colombo leaving room for continuous Expansion.

He also said they are looking to establish a Food processing company in Hambantota
to cater to the vessels arriving at the port.

The Chairman added, at the moment 10 to 12 investors from countries like China, Australia, India and Russia is speaking with them on possible investment opportunities and has handed over preliminary proposals.

According to Wickrema Hambantota will start Bunkering either during this year or early part of next year and Bunkering is going to be the main revenue stream at the new port.

First phase of the Port will cost 437 million dollars which 85% of it comes from China. The Port is built by a joint venture between China Harbor Engineering and Syno Hydro Corporation. While the Tank farm also been built by a Chinese Firm.

Hambantota port will be a free port where operators will not be “taxed”, Wickrema said along with that and the Geographical advantage upcoming port will give a good competition to ports such as Jebal Ali and Singapore.

Sri Lanka has planned a 3 phase development program for the Port, which once completed will be able to handle 20 million TEU’s. However Wickrema said the 2nd and the 3rd phase expansion will depend on the demand the new port receives.

SLPA says nearly 200 vessels pass Hambantota every day, which is situated closer to a prime international shipping route.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

"Public Interest Litigation was misused in India which has caused drastic rifts between the Judiciary and the Executive. This principle is now outdated and sparingly and carefully used in India."
_______________

By Sarath Wijesinghe

Supreme Court and Supreme Law

(July 09, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Supreme Court set up under Article 105(1) of the Sri Lankan Constitution is the highest court and the institution established for the administration of Justice in the country which protests, vindicates, and enforces the rights of the people. Source of the supreme law is the Parliament and the Supreme interprets and administers justice “According to the Law” in the implementation of the “Due Process”.

The New Chief Justice His Lordship Asoka de Silva has stated that he will act strictly according to the parameters of the legal system and law and any changes will be made slowly, steadily and carefully as it is the final Court of appellate in the country in which the decisions are binding on all other courts and hard to revise except on exceptional circumstances. He has further stated that Judges can not do whatever they wish and want. He appears to be a balanced traditionalist who will act in harmony with the other limbs of the State and according to the trends of the Nation and needs of the people through whom the power is derived under 4(c) which states that the judicial power shall be exercised by Parliament through courts etc. Court is the last hope and resort to a citizen for his life and property, and it is the duty of the Government in power to facilitate a viable mode of delivery of legal aid for access to justice which is not a favour and an absolute right for justice fair play and “Due Process” without which there is a possibility for the common man to take law into own hands. Public Interest Litigation and Legal Aid is interconnected. In most liberal democracies consider it necessary to provide some level of legal aid for persons otherwise unable to officer legal representation. This system is developed in the United Kingdom to the extent that any aggrieved citizen eligible for legal aid is provide by the Legal Services Commission funded by the State. In India and many Commonwealth countries Legal aid is given priority by the State. State must provide Legal Aid to an affordable Price at a reasonable time as “Delay in Justice and Denial of Justice” Judicial acts should be strictly based on the following principle in Dhammapada which states as follows:

“Not by passing arbitrary judgements does a man becomes, a wise man is he who investigates both right and wrong. He who does not judge others arbitrarily according to the truth, that sagacious man is a guardian of law and is called just. One is not wise because one speaks much. He who is peaceful, friendly and fearless is called wise. A man is not versed in Dhamma because he speaks much. He who, after hearing a little Dhamma, realizes its truth directly and is not heedless of it is truly versed in Dhamma. One is called noble because he is harmless towards all living beings” The Just – Dhamamapada

Public Interest Litigation

Public Interest Litigation is litigation for the protection of the public interest which is a double edged sword which is to be used and enforced carefully. It is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism. Judicial activism is a critical term used to describe a judicial ruling that are viewed as “personal biased interpretation” by a given court of what law means as opposed to what a neutral unbiased naturally interpret the law to be. The pioneers of the concept are Justice P.N.Bagwathie one time Chief Justice of and V.R.Krishnan one time Supreme Court of India whose activism influenced “some Sri Lankan” judges. Same concept prevails in the UK and Commonwealth jurisdictions as group actions in the interest of “Groups”. It was difficult to put into practice under the 1970 Constitution. Article 126 of the constitution which empowers a citizen or a group to invoke the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court relating to the infringement of an executive or administrative action of any fundamental right or language right made a “window” - which today has become a main door wide open to be used and misused by the public - for the enlargement of the jurisdiction of the concept by judicial activism. 1980s this writer in the official and personal capacity took steps carefully with the association and directions by Justice Bagawathie who had a close rapport with late Neelan Thiruchelvem a dedicated and a celebrated lawyers and an academic on the process which has influenced the current developments in Sri Lanka.

Public Interest Litigation was misused in India which has caused drastic rifts between the Judiciary and the Executive. This principle is now outdated and sparingly and carefully used in India. Judges are excellent umpires and jurists acting judicially and not good managers, administrators and businessmen to run businesses, school admissions, and security arrangements and managing vast sums of funds of NGO’s. It is not within their preview and jurisdictions and it is time in Sri Lanka too to be self regulated and frame rules to this effect. Judiciary in the United Kingdom has absolute freedom in the absence of a written constitution, yet it’s self regulatory mechanism and maintaining the concept of separation of powered to the last word is exemplary. Neville Samarakoon (Q.C) had rifts with the Executive on matters of principle and Sarath Silva (P.C) too did not maintain cordial relationships with the other limbs of the State. He made number of controversial decisions based on Public Interest Litigation which is still being discussed by the citizen litigant on various angles. Public Interest is a concept which derives from genuine public spirited citizen with no hidden agenda motives political religious or otherwise. It should not be used as a vehicle to propagate hidden agendas, political or personal ideologies however the issues appear to be genuine. The other danger is the deviation of the procedure in the interest of public interest whish is unsafe and leads to miscarriage of justice, which gives ammonisation to ambush and take advantage of the situation to satisfy the ego and personal agendas. What is the remedy to the ordinary citizen in the absence of an act on the procedure on contempt of law as in UK, USA, India and many commonwealth jurisdictions and developed countries.( please refer to the article on contempt of court in Sunday Observer dated by the author which could be retrieved from the internet)

Temple of Justice and Remedies

Then what is the remedy if the judgments are arbitrary, hasty, unfair and personal as stated in Dhammapada. Judes are no God or Super Man. They are liable to make mistakes especially when they are in haste, angry, agitated and engulfed with personal family problems and public and religious issues. What if they make genuine mistakes or misdirected themselves as knowledge is fast developing and growing. The principle of finality should be a balanced and a reasonable concept. In small states the parties are known and some judges who happened to be vindictive may vindicate the litigants who are helpless and no remedy on various reasons. There should be a remedy according to the gravity of the situation. It is a tragedy if there is no remedy in the Temple of Justice.

Doctrine of Public Trust

Doctrine of Public Trust is that certain resources are preserved for public use and that government is required to maintain it for public’s reasonable use. Public Interest is common well being or general welfare central to policy depends, politics and democracy. Mahinda Chintana is clear on this point. It is in the preamble of the mahnda Chintana as follows, “This earth and its vegetation is yours. But they should be protected not only for your benefit but also for the benefit of future generation. A ruler is only a temporary trustee and not an owner of your children’s heritage” (Mahinda Chantana)

There fore public property and enterprises are given to the ruler on trust and it is his duty to be careful and diligent to preserve and manage the state treasures in the best interest and for the benefit if the people who has given the power and treasures on Trust. Basic basis of many judgments since the application of this article 126 are these principles and procedures which has relaxed and stretched on the basis of judicial activism though not necessary and strictly within the rules. There is nobody to question deadlines, procedures, time limits as even the head of the Executive or the Executive have no power to intervene or look onto the legality of procedural regulatory.

Declare your interest before adjudication

It is a cardinal practice for great judges to declare any interest before adjudication of issues of citizens entrusted the future life and property rights to the Temple of Justice. In the United Kingdom a Judge who came to know of a minor share of a company to his wife immediately withdrew from the case and there are number of matters world wide on this issue which has direct relevant to our Jurisdiction, where Politics, religious, Social activism is intermingled in the Society above principles Public Trust and Public Duty. Judges should not be dabbled in public political social or religious discussions, environmental or any forms of NGOsm in public and should not be in the “Public Eye” and controversial. “Justice should not only be done but seem to be done” is the most famous and accepted adage without which the citizen litigant will loose trust on the Judiciary which will lead to the “Law of the Jungle” and “survival of the fittest”. Judges are not social reformers or activists chasing after wrongdoers which is the duty of the Executive and the citizen litigant, however the society in need to eradicate corruption. Judges should always should not be the adjudicator of their own issues however mush the needs are grave. Association with business community, public television discussions on activism, social reforms and religions do not suit judges who are being scrutinized by citizen litigants entrusted their future with great devotion and trust. The position of a Judicial Officer should not be used or misused to promote and ideology or a religion which will be an indictment of the genuineness and the trust entrusted by the public.

Possible remedy and the future of the Nation

Future of the Nation depends on the behaviours of the Executive, Legislature and the Judiciary in the next few days. We have a charismatic leader - President Mahinda Rajapaksa- who can be relied on and depend on based on past performances, who has liberated the citizen from the terror and terrorism the nation went through for 30 long years, in a short span of period of three years. We need a balanced and trustworthy Judiciary for the fair adjudication with checks and balances. It is an accepted fact that nobody is above law, including the President with all mighty powers who had at one stage to say that his powers are even not as powerful as the powers of a magistrate. Then who has the power to supervise the Supreme Court which is not above law. In theory it can summon any citizen and deal with on matters based on inherent powers and the new found practices based on Public Interest Litigation. Until constitutional arrangements are made the Supreme Court itself could have self regulatory procedure by implementing the great practices of decisions of higher benches which is in practice by great jurists and Judges, taking into consideration that this is the final Court in the final Temple of Justice. Many litigants have been successful in winning cases against Sri Lanka in the Committee of Human Rights in Geneva and the number of applications has risen during the tenure of the former Chief Justice. We see a beam of ray of hopes of a Judiciary accepted and loved by the nation in time to come.

The writer, Senior Solicitor in England-is a former Secretary of the Bar Association and onetime Administrator Legal Aid Commission.( sarath8@hotmail.com to reach the author for comments or criticism or suggestions)

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

"The death of 60, 000 youths, of whatever ethnicity, is a tragedy to be mourned. That which is true of the LTTE is also true of the JVP: these were youths who took up arms courageously, but wielded them barbarically and after a point, needlessly. They paid the inevitable price at the hands of the state, indeed the self-same Sri Lankan armed forces, including its top brass. That’s what a state is and what a state does."
_______________

By Dayan Jayatilleka

(July 09, Geneva, Sri Lanka Guardian) My young friend and critic Malinda Seneviratne just has to be kidding. He writes in The Nation of July 5th 09, that "Dayan not only thinks the 13th is great, but trusts the President to deliver his (Dayan’s) Utopia". Now that’s wrong on all three counts. I don’t think the 13th amendment is "great". It is not the President I "trust" to deliver on it. And the present Sri Lanka with an activated 13th amendment is a far cry from any notion of Utopia I might have.

I think the Sermon on the Mount is "great". I think that the US Declaration of Independence of July 4th 1776 is "great". I think that Mao’s ‘On Contradiction’ is "great". I think that Fidel’s Second Declaration of Havana and Che’s Message to the Tricontinental are "great". I do not think the 13th amendment is "great".

I think the 13th amendment is historically significant and currently indispensable because it is the only structural reform of the centralized Sri Lankan state which devolves power, makes for some measure of autonomy and thereby provides a basis for the reconciliation of the Sinhalese and Tamil communities within a united and unitary Sri Lanka.

Furthermore, it is the only such reform to take place exactly three decades after the abrogation of the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayagam pact of 1957 which made for Regional Councils. Those who say that the Indo-Lanka Accord and the 13th amendment were "hurried"and "externally coerced" forget the fact that from another point of view, they amounted to a Caesarean surgical intervention, bringing forth a power sharing solution that had been thwarted from 1957, through the District Councils of 1966 and the Indian facilitated negotiations of 1984 (APC/Annexure C) to 1986 (December 19th Chidambaram proposals). It is important to recall than none of these proposals for moderate power sharing were voted down democratically. They never had a chance to be. The leaders, such as SWRD Bandaranaike, were besieged by extra-parliamentary lobbies and the parliamentary process aborted by extra-parliamentary agitation. A structural blockage enforced by domestic coercion was removed by coercive external intervention – an "externally propelled re-composition" of the state I had predicted 3 years before the Accord, while in my late twenties. (D. Jayatilleka, "The ethnic conflict and the crisis in the south", in Committee for Rational Development, Sri Lanka: The ethnic conflict, New Delhi, 1984).

My strong support (not "fascination" as Malinda would have it) for the 13th amendment is because it is already in place and does not have to be (re)negotiated. It has only to be implemented and Sri Lanka’s military triumph would be politically reinforced instantly. Tamil nationalism would be split between the hyper-nationalists who reject it and the moderates who accept and participate, the Tamil Diaspora would be divided, the North-South gap would be bridged, a renewed cycle of conflict would be less likely or possible, the impressive weight of India in the world system would be solidly with us, the international pressure on us would lift somewhat, our allies and friends in the international system would be relieved and vindicated, external financing would be more readily available, the anti-Sri Lanka global campaign would be severely weakened and the attempt to encircle Sri Lanka internationally would be defeated. All these strategic benefits are obtainable right now.

It is not any particular President I trust to deliver on the 13th amendment or its equivalent or improvement. My point was that President Rajapakse can deliver because he is the least vulnerable to a Southern backlash. What I trust is the reality of Sri Lanka’s multiethnic character, that the challenge of accommodating Tamil identity and reconciling it with Sinhala and Muslim identity will remain, that it will be necessary for any government to negotiate with the Tamil parliamentarians who will be present, due to the system of proportional representation, in greater numbers after next year’s parliamentary election, that India will not go away and our need for India in the face of western pressure will not go away either, and that the 13th amendment, however elasticized, will remain the saddle-point between the Sinhala insistence on a unitary state and the Tamil demand for some degree of self –rule.

Sri Lanka with a working 13th amendment is a far cry from "Dayan’s Utopia", but it is a brake on a downward slide to Dayan’s Dystopia of renewed conflict in different forms, of a resumed narrative of lost opportunities, of civic violence, stagnation and decay, of a long and bitter peace and rueful mid- 21st century ruminations of "the path we never took/into the rose garden" (Eliot).

As for "Dayan’s Utopia", it is probably far more ambitious and wildly eclectic than Sri Lanka with a modest reform, and closer to the combination of the contradictory virtues of Athens and Sparta that Plato envisaged, than anything Thomas More dreamed of. The ideological mix and social philosophy of the new wave of Latin American Left governments, the dignity, internationalist activism and military ethics of Fidel’s Cuba, the secular state of India, the reflective self-critical conscience of the intelligentsia of Israel, the elite foreign services of Pakistan and Brazil, the sophisticated intellectual and political discourse of France and Italy, the meritocracy of the public service of Singapore, the ubiquitous street corner music and movies and think tankquality periodical subculture of the USA, the architecture and aesthetics of Europe, the Platonic "philosopher-President" political leadership style of Barack Obama, the abiding natural beauty of Sri Lanka and the relaxed Lankan lifestyle of the 1960s and early ’70s that I grew up in – all these would be ingredients and characteristic features of Dayan’s Utopia.

Malinda next gets on to my argument about the geo-political reality that is India. He has a critique and a counterview. The first is that India precipitated the deaths of 60,000 youths in the late 1980s. Now that’s a partial truth. If Sri Lanka had devolved power in 1957, 1966, 1981 (DDCs), 1984 (Annexure c) or 1986 (Chidambaram), there would have been no Indian intervention. If the 1987 accord had been resisted by the JVP peacefully, there would have been no call for the Sri Lankan state to defend itself violently. In a striking mirror image, both the LTTE and the JVP violently opposed the 13th amendment and the North east provincial council. Both movements have been militarily defeated. It must also be recalled that the JVP took up the gun before a single IPKF jawan had appeared on Sri Lankan soil. Daya Pathirana was murdered in November 1986, and the entire left was under violent siege for supporting devolution which was luridly portrayed as secessionism. And this was the JVP’s second time out as an insurrectionary force, the first being in 1971, with no Indians around and a freshly elected centre-left administration in place. Thus the JVP’s violent denouement was in its DNA.

The death of 60, 000 youths, of whatever ethnicity, is a tragedy to be mourned. That which is true of the LTTE is also true of the JVP: these were youths who took up arms courageously, but wielded them barbarically and after a point, needlessly. They paid the inevitable price at the hands of the state, indeed the self-same Sri Lankan armed forces, including its top brass. That’s what a state is and what a state does.

There have been three civil wars fought against the Sri Lankan state: 1971, 1986-89, 1979-2009. The Sri Lankan state prevailed in all three. These three wars settled three basic questions. The first uprising was about the character of the State, society and the economy and it was settled in favor of the market economy and multiparty democracy. The second civil war brought up the same questions but placed at the forefront the issue of centralization or devolution and power sharing (Wijeweera’s 300 page magnum opus was all about it), and with the victory of the state that too was settled in favor of the post Accord structural reform, the 13th amendment and provincial autonomy, with all parties including the militarily defeated JVP actually contesting the PC elections. This reform remained dormant because of the full-scale war waged in the North East by the Tigers.

Malinda’s second point about India is that Tamil Nadu matters less than it did while China matters more. Yeah, but the 13th amendment matters even to China, which is why the official Sri Lankan communiqué following the discussions between the Foreign Ministers of Sri Lanka and China twice mentions Sri Lanka’s reiteration of its commitment to implementing the 13th amendment. Malinda must understand that there is an international system or world system. If during the Cold war, there were two systems, capitalist and socialist, and the international system consisted of the contradictory unity of these two systems, today there is one single world system, with all its unevenness and contradiction ( North/South, East/West). Sri Lanka is a peripheral unit of this world system. We can reduce the domination of and our dependence upon the West by balancing off our natural allies the global South and East against them, but all this takes place within the world system.

There are three views on Sri Lanka’s external relations and role in the world: de-linking, involution/isolationism, coupled probably with a belief in the chimera of a co-religionists bloc of states; dependency on and appeasement of the West; a multi-vector policy which engages the West (especially the USA) while maintaining Sri Lanka’s dignity, but anchored in the neighborhood, the Asian region and the global South, while practicing a policy of multi-polar balancing to maximize our autonomy and defend our interests. Options 2 and 3 (and I am an adherent and practitioner of Option 3) take place within the framework of the international system, unlike Option 1 which takes us outside it. What Malinda and others who share his view fail to appreciate is the fact that while some players may wish to go beyond it, the 13th amendment and concern for reform that accommodates Sri Lanka’s Tamils in a power sharing arrangement, is a bottom line consensus within the international system as a whole.

Malinda says "we are not in 1987 now... We lived through a time when a federal arrangement was thought to be inevitable…We were told that the LTTE was a reality that will not go away and therefore we have to accommodate terrorism. Things change".

The thing is that those who encourage us to implement the 13th amendment are not those who lectured us on federalism and the need to accommodate the LTTE. Those folks talk of war crimes tribunals, unfettered access, an UN role in political reconciliation, economic sanctions etc. These are the folks who were defeated in Geneva on May 27th. We are being encouraged to swiftly implement at least the 13th amendment, precisely by those who did not belong to that camp, and stood by us, helping us in various ways during the war. It is these friends who will be undermined and who will pull back if we fail to, leaving us vulnerable to the Tamil Diaspora driven West.

"Things change" and that’s not been breaking news since 5 BC, but why assume as Malinda does, that they change in only one direction? Things sure have changed: we have a universally respected US president (with a "transformational mystique") who commented on Sri Lanka in his remarks on the White House lawn, we have a UN Security Council informal briefings and press statement on Sri Lanka; we have rumblings from Chile to South Africa and Mauritius.

Malinda’s solution is the 17th amendment but he’s talking apples and oranges. If implemented, the 17th amendment would take us halfway back to the de-politicized public service we had before 1972, when the architects of the new Constitution chose to abolish the independent Public Service Commission that prevailed until that time. This would be no small deal but it does not address the Tamil problem. The independent Public Service Commission was in existence when "Sinhala Only" was implemented in 1956, the Bandaranaike –Chelvanayagam pact was thwarted in 1957, ethnic rioting took place in 1958, and the Dudley Chelvanayagam pact for District councils was aborted in 1966. As the policy mainstream became more mono-ethnic, monolingual and mono religious, Tamil politics sought space at the periphery. The 17th amendment only tangentially impacts upon the crucial problem of power-sharing between centre and periphery and is therefore no substitute for the implementation of the 13th amendment.

Finally, one of the basic errors of Malinda and his co-thinkers is the conclusion that Tamil ethnic politics died on the banks of the Nandikadal. There can be a military victory over a military challenge but there cannot be a purely military victory over a political challenge. An enemy army can and must be defeated, an armed opponent can be killed, but a political challenge requires a political response and an idea can be defeated only by another idea. The idea of Tamil Eelam can be defeated only by the counter-idea of reformed and restructured Sri Lankan state which may remain unitary but contains an irreducible autonomous political space for the Tamil people of the North and East. It cannot be defeated by the idea of Sri Lanka shorn of even the 13th amendment. Armed Tamil secessionism can and has been defeated, but the politics of collective Tamil identity cannot be militarily defeated or suppressed; it can only be politically addressed.

(These are the strictly personal views of the writer).

-Sri Lanka Guardian Read the full story »

"All this pomp and glory were short-lived. In the last days when the forces were closing in on Prabhakaran none of them was there to hold his hand. He was a lonely man on the run, hunted by the Sri Lankan forces. "
_______________

By H. L. D. Mahindapala

(July 09, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) Right opposite the rusting and cannibalized hull of Farah 3, the Egyptian ship pirated by the Tamil Tigers, a monument is rising now from the sandy beach in Vellamullivaikkal to mark the historic event of May 16, 2009 – the day when the two divisions, 58 and 59, that advanced from the south and the north met, clearing the entire northern and eastern coastline of the last vestiges of Tiger threats to the territorial integrity and national sovereignty. In short, it meant that the military ring of the Security Forces had come full circle, covering every inch of the coastline, and closed all possible routes for Velupillai Prabhakaran to escape via the sea in the east.

This was the first step of the triangular trap closing in on Prabhakaran. The second step was the clearing of Tamil hostages held by Prabhakaran as a human shield. He was still holding a section of the Tamils as hostage — a serious obstacle to the advance of the forces determined to avoid civilian casualties. On the 16th morning the forces began their operations to clear the last of the hostages held by Prabhakaran. He too had no option but to let the people go because he was preparing to escape himself. This time he could not run by dragging the people to follow him. By the morning of the 17th the forces had cleared the hostages and they were free to confront the Tigers cadres without fear of collateral damage to the civilians.

The third major wing of the triangle was the results of the Indian elections announced on May 16. It blasted all his hopes of a rescue operation from his allies abroad, particularly India – the last refuge of desperate Prabhakaran on the run. The victory of the United Progressive Alliance of Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh announced on May 16 blighted all hopes of any Indian intervention rushing to lift him out of his hideout in the sliver of land between the sea and the Nanthi Kadal (Nanthi Lagoon).

In his interview with President Mahinda Rajapakse the Editor of The Hindu, N. Ram, stated that the Tamils were expecting Prabhakaran to execute "a daring counter attack" at the last moment. In fact, D. B. S. Jeyaraj, who was quoted by Ram, was expecting Prabhakaran to do a Dunkirk – the place where the Allied Forces paused in World War II to recover and launch a massive counter-attack. The Tamil who had pinned their faith in Prabhakaran’s capacity to rise from the ashes like Phoenix refused to believe that the winner of previous battles could lose in the last encounter. They were expecting him to a pull a military rabbit out of his hat.

The Tamils were like Erik Solheim who thought that Prabhakaran was "a military genius". They firmly believed that even at the last minute he could turn tables on the Sri Lankan Forces. In fact Solheim, who was sucked in by the yarns spun to him by Anton Balasingham, told President Rajapaksa around March 2006: "Prabhakaran is a military genius. I have seen him in action…." The President said: "He is from the jungles of the North. I am from the jungles of the South. Let’s see who will win!" (Lalith Weeratunga, at the President’s interview with Ram.)

Of course, by May 2009 Prabhakaran was virtually a dead man walking. He was fighting with his back to wall with depleted forces and material. He had lost all the strategic territory he held to launch a serious counter-attack. He had no external or internal force, or land to fall back. The power of his military bases spread out in 15,000 square kilometers had dwindled to 4 square kilometers in a sandy stretch in the neck of Jaffna. Worst of all, he had no strategy to launch a counter-attack and fight his way out. He was trapped in the tiny stretch of land between the sea in the east and the lagoon in the west with no viable exit plan.

President Rajapaksa summed it up precisely when he told Ram: "They (the Tigers) selected the best place for them: on one side the sea, then the lagoon, and there was a small strip. But then it was not they who actually selected the place: they ‘selected’ it but the armed forces made them go there. The No-Fire Zones were all announced by the armed forces. After Kilinochchi, they were saying: "No-Fire Zones, so go there." So all of them [the LTTE leaders and fighters] went there. These were not areas demarcated by the U.N. or somebody else; they were demarcated by our armed forces. The whole thing was planned by our forces to corner them. The Army was advancing from North to South, South to North, on all sides. So I would say they got cornered by our strategies."

The Dunkirk expected by the Tamils turned out to be a Dumb-kirk.

May 16 was the decisive day when the national and international forces closed in, once and for all, to seal the fate of doomed Prabhakaran.

After these three fateful events locked in – 1) meeting of 58 and 59 division closing any escape route by the sea, 2) the disappointing results of the Indian election, and 3) the freeing of the last of the Tamil hostages — the last hope for Velupillai Prabhakaran,who was holed up in the place where the Army wanted him to be, was to find an escape route by wading across the water-logged Nanthi Kadal sandwiched in the neck of Jaffna between the sea in the east and the Mullativu jungle in the west.

Faced with the grim realities of May 16 he had to make a quick get away, avoiding the watchful eyes of the Security Forces who were posted at critical points on the escape routes leading to the Mullativu jungle. At this stage he was reduced to a man who could run but not hide or survive. It was too late for him. The Forces had anticipated his moves and were waiting for him to get out of the hole in which he was trapped. He was in a no-win situation with all hopes of any one of the actively involved foreign sources – particularly, Erik Solheim, or David Milliband, or, better still, a new Indian government favourable to the Tigers emerging victorious from the elections – fading out of his radar screen. Contrary to Prabhakaran’s expectations there was none rushing to intervene and save him at the eleventh hour.

As stated by Lalith Weeratunga at the interview: "Kilinochchi was captured on the 1st of January 2009. And the whole operation was over on the 19th of May. So there was ample time [for them to get away]." (The Hindu – July 7 2009)

But Prabhakaran miscalculated his tactical moves ever since he lost in Mavil Aru in July 2006. He deluded himself by saying that he was making "a tactical withdrawal" each time he lost territory. Eventually he led the biggest "tactical withdrawal" known in military history, dragging his cadres with him into the cold waters of Nanthi Kadal – the last battleground.

The Tamil Tiger leadership, which announced over Melbourne Radio from Vanni that they would eat the Sri Lankan forces alive for dinner if they dared to step into Killinochchi, was in total disarray not knowing which way to turn, or which source to tap to save trapped Prabhakaran and the last of his Tigers.

Erik Solheim confessed to BBC Hard Talk (June 13, 2009) that he was contacted by Tamil Tiger agents abroad to save Prabhakaran. But after Solheim had discredited himself by playing the partisan role of siding with his boozing buddy Anton Balasingham, he had ceased to be a credible figure for any rescue mission. Besides, he had no status because the Sri Lankan government, by this time, had kicked him out as a reliable negotiator. His past sins had caught up with him like the way the karmic forces had returned to catch up with Prabhakaran.

Earlier, David Milliband, the British Foreign Minister and Bernard Kouchner, the French Foreign Minister, rolled in, somewhat like the hit men of the Tamil diaspora, to save Prabhakaran. But Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the no-nonsense and daring Defence Secretary, who stood his ground firmly, sent the two foreign ministers back to the caves from where they came.

In a desperate bid K. Pathmanathan, the arms procurer appointed as Prabhakaran’s sole representative abroad, contacted Western journalists to send messages to George Brown, British Prime Minister, and President Obama. While the leadership in exile were on their knees begging for mercy from Western powers the misguided Tamil diaspora, who believed (mistakenly) that they had the electoral numbers to force the Sri Lankan government to obey their will by demonstrating in streets of Toronto, London, Paris, Melbourne and Sydney, discovered to their horror that they were merely whistling in the wind with no power to manipulate the powerful Rajapaksa regime in Sri Lanka.

When Prabhakaran waded into the waters of Nanthi Kadal gingerly on the 18th night he would have known that the international leverage he had at the peak of his power, when he held the "military balance" claiming parity of status with the Sri Lankan government, had vanished into thin air. In Phuket and in Geneva Anton Balasingham was arrogantly flaunting the power of their "military balance" gained under Ranil Wickremesinghe’s failed Ceasefire Agreement.

Under the patronage of Ranil Wickremesinghe the Tigers had reached the peak of politico-military power. They were riding high in Phuket where the first of the many rounds of peace talks began. Vidar Helgesen, the Deputy Foreign Minister of Norway, was solemnly addressing Anton Balasingham as "Your Excellency". Erik Solheim, bamboozled by the spin of Anton Balasingham, was bending over backwards to elevate him to a status of a head of state-in-waiting in the Vanni. The late Lasantha Wickrematunga, the Editor of The Leader, wearing his other hat of an apparatchik of Ranil Wickremesinghe’s government, was cozying up to Balasingham in Phuket and Geneva to get exclusives to boost the claims of the triumphant Tigers.

But all this pomp and glory were short-lived. In the last days when the forces were closing in on Prabhakaran none of them was there to hold his hand. He was a lonely man on the run, hunted by the Sri Lankan forces. There were no diplomats queuing up to meet him as in the days when he was in command of Killinochchi, through the blessings of Ranil Wickremesinghe, the gutless wonder of Sri Lankan politics. On the contrary, they were sending messages urging him to surrender and spare the Tamils whom he was holding as hostage. He was internationally ostracized as an untouchable political pariah. The Tigers had lost the national and international goodwill that came with Wickremesinghe’s Ceasefire Agreement.

(To be continued)

-Sri Lanka Guardian Read the full story »

By Lynn Ockersz

(July 09, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) President Mahinda Rajapaksa is on record that he has cautioned sections of his ruling coalition against stoking communal disharmony and this position would, no doubt, be widely welcomed by the ‘moral majority’ in Sri Lanka whose hearts are in a future that would be shared among Sri Lanka’s communities. We have had no ominous indications, so far, of communal friction of any kind erupting in the wake of some already hotly debated ‘post-war issues’, such as the full implementation of the 13th amendment, but complacency carries its perils and it is gratifying that the President has sought to pre-empt stirrings of a communal kind which could make short work of the current widespread Lankan hopes of a stable future.

Admonitions of this kind need to be issued more than occasionally from government leaders for the preparation of the collective consciousness of the people for taking on the exacting but largely untouched challenge of nation-building in this country but it is best that verbal exhortations and moral persuasion are backed by relevant legislation and other legal instruments to prohibit and ‘outlaw’ the lethal cancer that has been assailing the local body politic over the decades. Such legislative and legal deterrents, besides helping to contain communalism, would have the added positive effect of building trust and mutual acceptance among our communities.

A political solution to our conflict, which would address in full the issue of empowering our communities and making them equal stakeholders in the Lankan state, is one of the most urgent national priorities currently, but governments have been notoriously slow-footed in delivering on this score and only the politically naïve would expect an accelerated drive for a political solution this time around too, particularly now that the LTTE has been militarily crushed and the perception seems to be gaining ground among some that a political solution would, indeed, be superfluous or needless. However, international pressure has been mounting on Sri Lanka over the months for a political solution and such pressure cannot be shrugged-off, particularly if there is substantial dependence on the part of the Lankan state on the world community for financial and development assistance and, this, of course, is very much the case. But if past experience in ‘peace-making’ is anything to go by, one cannot expect the Lankan government to be in what may be described as a mighty hurry to work out a solution, although some moves could be expected in this direction.

However, if the government has acquired a clear and comprehensive understanding of the national interest, it would not indulge in any more feet-dragging on this issue and the President, through his recent warning to sections of his governing coalition, on the question of rousing communal passions, indicates that he, indeed, has grasped the gravity of delivering a political package without inordinate delays. Regardless of whether this solution is ‘homegrown’ or otherwise and irrespective of whether it provides for a state dispensation containing ‘federal’ or ‘unitary’ features, the political package would need to address in full the felt need among the minorities for equal citizenship and empowerment, in all its dimensions. Anything short of these requirements would leave the National Question hugely unanswered and ensure that the challenge of nation-building continues to remain unaddressed. For, equal empowerment and citizenship, along with substantial group rights for minorities, are essential ingredients in nation-building. Without these binding elements Sri Lanka would remain disunited.

Hopefully, then, the recently formed All Party Development and Reconciliation forum would prove productive and result-oriented, although it is not clear at present whether this widely representative, somewhat clumsily large forum would be charged with addressing the question of a political solution. Nor is there any intimation of what the future of the APRC would be, although we have been told it has been working on a political solution for well over two years. Getting its act together is a matter for the state and this it would need to get round to if it is in earnest when it says that it is for a political solution.

While it would be realistic to expect a meandering forward drive to a political solution, given the highly contradictory pulls and pressures on the government, it cannot be excused for not putting in place policies and practices in the short term, that would help in paving the way to the expeditious working out of a political solution. Some such measures have already been touched on and they relate to the containing of communalism. It needs to be noted that a head-on confrontation of communalism in all its forms by the state, could help in furthering national integration and thereby lay the basis for nation-building. Besides, putting in place the legal machinery, for instance, to contain communal violence in all its manifestations, why cannot the state make race-hate speeches and utterances, a principal offence?

We should see moves in these directions by the state if the foundation is to be laid for closer national integration and the expeditious working out of a political solution. Besides, these measures would prove immensely effective confidence-building steps in inter-communal relations.

It would also prove advantageous, from the viewpoint of communal amity, for the Lankan state to have a close look at legislation, such as, Britain’s Race Relations Act of 1976. Britain has been at the receiving end of charges in some quarters over the decades, that it has not been doing enough to curb racial intolerance and violence within its boundaries. Whatever the merits or otherwise of these charges, Britain could produce concrete proof that it has in place the legal and other relevant machinery to handle racial intolerance and violence and one piece of evidence to prove this is the just mentioned Act.

Of special interest under this category of legislation, is the creation of Race Relations Councils, under The Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, which, among other things, are charged with eliminating unlawful discrimination in local authority areas, promoting equal opportunities and promoting good race relations between persons of different racial groups.

What is presented here is a brief overview of the relevant legal machinery and legislation and a more in depth look at them is necessary to ascertain how they could be adopted to suit Sri Lanka’s conditions and requirements. From the point of view of rectifying communalism, even India, we are certain, could prove useful, if one would only care to study the relevant institutional mechanisms and other relevant arrangements.

There is hope in some quarters that the Tamil groups currently partnering the government, would prove a boon in working towards a better deal for the Tamil community and in taking the country forward to a more progressive future. Well, one way in which Karuna, Douglas Devananda and Anandasangaree could make a positive contribution is by at least helping to decommunalize social relations. They will need to prove that are indeed capable of improving the lot of the Tamil people.

-Sri Lanka Guardian Read the full story »

"The only common factor in the way the Chinese handled the aftermath of the Lhasa uprising and are now handling the Urumqi uprising is the virulent demonisation of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Youth Congress last year and a similar demonisation of the World Uighur Congress (WUC) and its leaders."
__________

(July 09, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) The situation in Urumqi, the capital of the Xinjiang Province of China, continues to be tense with sporadic acts of violence of a minor nature as compared to what happened on the night of July 5,2009, and the next day. The violent incidents reported on July 8 were mainly in the form of small groups of angry Han Chinese trying to attack individual Uighurs.

In all instances, the police promptly intervened and persuaded the Han Chinese to disperse and not to take the law into their own hands. The police have mobilised the support of some members of the Han Chinese community, who are in a preponderant majority in Urumqi, to go round the Han Chinese areas and appeal to them not to take the law into their own hands. They have also been promising the Han Chinese that all Uighurs who were involved in the attacks on the Han Chinese will be prosecuted and promptly executed if found guilty of violent crimes.

More Army reinforcements have been moved into Urumqi and other areas of the province from Sichuan. They have undertaken a vigorous patrolling of the areas in order to help the police maintain law and order. Helicopter patrols have also been pressed into service. While violence is down, tension and nervousness continue. Many shops remained closed on July 8 and there was a rush at the local airport due to the anxiety of many Han Chinese to leave Xinjiang. All flights going out of Urumqi are packed and Han Chinese, not able to get a seat in the flights, have been staying in hotels near the airport, hoping to get a place in subsequent flights.

Meng Jianzhu, State Councillor, who is the Minister for Public Security and in that capacity is the chief of China's internal intelligence and homeland security set-up, has flown into Urumqi from Beijing and has been going round the city along with officials of the local Government and party appealing for calm and assuring the Han Chinese that the laws will be applied firmly against those who indulged in violence. In an unusual move, the People's Daily of China, owned by the Chinese Communist Party, asked its readers in advance to look out for an editorial on July 9 in which it would call for the strict application of the laws against those found guilty and for strict measures to restore social order.

Even after the surprise return of President Hu Jintao from Italy on the morning of July 8 after cancelling his participation in the G-8 summit, the Chinese have continued with their policy of transparency in order to let the world know about the kind of brutalities allegedly committed by the Uighurs on July 5 and 6,2009.This would probably show that the policy of transparency, which was reportedly ordered by Prime Minister Wen Jiabao in the absence of Hu in Italy, had the support of Hu.

The way the Chinese have handled the aftermath has been refreshingly different from the way they reacted after the Lhasa uprising of March 2008. After the Lhasa uprising, they ordered all foreign journalists and tourists in Tibet to leave and stopped permitting foreign journalists to visit Tibet for nearly three months. Now, the Chinese Foreign and Information offices in Beijing have been taking the initiative in contacting foreign journalists and requesting them to go to Urumqi to report on the situation. It has been reported that many journalists are already in Urumqi.

The only common factor in the way the Chinese handled the aftermath of the Lhasa uprising and are now handling the Urumqi uprising is the virulent demonisation of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Youth Congress last year and a similar demonisation of the World Uighur Congress (WUC) and its leaders.

The immediate priority for the Chinese, as seen by them, is to address the Han Chinese anger over the alleged failure of the Police to protect them on July 5 and 6,2009. The next priority is to arrest and prosecute all those involved in acts of violence.

The ground situation in Xinjiang is qualitatively different from that in Tibet. In Tibet, the Tibetans are in a decisive majority still despite the settlement of a large number of Han Chinese. In Xinjiang, the Uighurs are not in a decisive majority. Muslims constitute about 60 per cent of the Xinjiang population, but not all of them are Uighurs. The Uighutrs constitute only 45 per cent of the Xinjiang population and the Han Chinese 40 per cent. The remaining 15 per cent are Muslims of non-Uighur origin. These non-Uighur Muslims have kept away from the protests.

Moreover, during the uprising in Lhasa, the Tibetans did not indulge in the kind of physical brutalities against the Han Chinese similar to the brutalities allegedly inflicted by some Uighurs on the Han Chinese. From the latest reports received from Urumqi, it would appear that the protest movement was initially started by a group of secular Uighurs, owing loyalty to the Munich-based WUC, but subsequently some of the jihadi fundamentalist elements owing loyalty to the Islamic Movement of Eastern Turkestan, allied to Al Qaeda, infiltrated into their ranks and indulged in an orgy of violence against the Han Chinese. However, the Chinese authorities continue to project the Urumqi uprising as the handiwork of ethnic separatist terrorists. They are not talking of jihadi terrorists.

There is more than meets the eye in the Urumqi uprising. It took place a little more than a year after the Holland-based Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation, jointly with the WUC and the USA's National Endowment for Democracy (NED), had organised a training course----the second one--- for a group of Uighurs from the diaspora. The reported theme of the training course was "the right of self-determination". Annexed is a press statement issued on this subject at that time by the UNPO. The uprising took place less than two months after the WUC held its third world assembly in Washington DC in May,2009.

It is not clear why Hu had to cancel his participation in the G-8 summit and fly back almost in panic to Beijing. Was it because of the Han Chinese anger or was it because of differences in the party leadership over how to handle it?

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

ANNEXURE

TRAINING OF UIGHURS BY NED AND UNPO ( PRESS STATEMEMENT BY UNPO)

21 April 2008

The World Uyghur Congress (WUC) together with the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) and support of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) organized their second leadership training seminar in two years, which opened today the 21st of April 2008. Over 50 members of the Uyghur Diaspora from around the world together with prominent academics, government representatives and

members of the civil society gathered in Berlin Germany to discuss this year’s topic “Self-Determination under International Law”.

Mr. Dolkun Isa, Secretary General of the World Uyghur Congress, opened the occasion, welcoming participants to the training seminar, manyof whom traveled some distance to attend the event, including from Australia, Canada, Kazakhstan, Norway and the United States.

President of the WUC and internationally renowned advocate of the Uyghur cause, Ms. Rebiya Kadeer, warmly greeted the audience with great energy, enthusiasm and determination. Ms. Kadeer spoke on the lack of freedom afflicting Uyghurs since the communist clamp of power in 1949, including a constant constriction of human rights by Chinese authorities. People in East Turkestan cannot imagine the amount of freedom people in the western world enjoy, explained Ms. Kadeer, and individuals in the west cannot imagine the extent of suppression people in East Turkestan are experiencing.

The international community is very familiar with the situation of Tibet, however knowledge of the situation of East Turkestan is quite limited in comparison. Nonetheless, the last two years have seen many efforts to educate the world on the poor human rights situation in East Turkestan. It is therefore essential, reminded Ms. Kadeer, to continue to educate and inform all about the Uyghur situation.

Mr. Marino Busdachin, UNPO General Secretary, further noted that survival of the Uyghur culture and identity are vital issues Uyghurs arefaced with today. Introducing the topic of self-determination, Mr. Busdachin recognized the difficulty and controversy surrounding the subject. It is important to recognize that Chinese authorities are not willing to grant full autonomy or full federal solutions to East Turkestan, he explained, however we should stay positive in the situation and focus on means of raising awareness for the Uyghur cause and on the survival of their culture. Members of the Diaspora should be weary of tendencies towards radicalization and need to stay in constant dialogue with the people in East Turkestan so as not to become estranged by their position.

UNPO and WUC were thrilled to welcome multiple guests of honour on the opening day, including Mr. Günther Nooke, Federal Commissioner for Human Rights Policy and Humanitarian Aid at the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Dirk Pleiter of Amnesty International, Ms. Frances Eqerer, representative of Mr. Margarete Bause from the Green Party of the Bavarian Parliament, and Mr. Feruk Unsal, Member of Parliament in Turkey.

Mr. Nooke spoke of the importance of pursuing a nonviolent path and avoiding any further escalation within minority groups in China. He called for an analysis into the roots of recent uprisings in China and reminded China that it is in their interest to review their policies towards minority groups. These actions would then necessitate a dialogue between the government and minorities – the exact path which could nonviolently reach a solution.

Furthermore, Mr. Nooke touched upon the situation of the Uyghurs currently incarcerated in Guantanamo Bay, individuals who have been found not guilty of any charges and are ready to be released immediately. The Uyhgurs cannot however return to China, as they will undoubtedly suffer severe persecution. Ironically, Mr. Nooke points out, they are largely safer in prison than they would be in China. He therefore called for civil courage in Europe and the United States to grant these individuals immigration visas. Ms. Seema Saifee, pro bono attorney for several Uyghurs at Guantanamo, confirmed this argument, underlining that they could be released tomorrow as long as a country will admit them.

Following a lively and well-attended press conference, to which members of various media sources including Deutsche Welle TV, WDR and the Associated Press attended, participants dove right into their training material.

With the aid of moderators Mr. Ulrich Delius of the Society for Threatened Peoples and Senator Marco Perduca, newly elected Member of the Italian Parliament, participants were guided through an introductory series of lectures on the concepts of international law, avenues of self-determination and case studies of such.

Ms. Anna Batalla, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Hans-Joachim Heintze, Institute of International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict, Mr. Michael Gibb, Oxford University, Mr. Pedro Pinto Leite, International Platform for Jurists for East Timor, and Mr. Mohamoud Daar, Somaliland Ambassador to the European Union provided participants with a series of insightful and informative lectures which sparked dynamic discussion from all present.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »

(July 09, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Mr. James Moore, chargé d’ affaires of the U.S. Embassy called at his request on Dr. Palitha Kohona, Secretary, Foreign Affairs today and wished to clarify the U.S. position regarding the IMF loan facility to Sri Lanka.

Mr. Moore stated that the U.S. government has on no occasion, either publicly or privately, threatened to block the IMF loan to Sri Lanka on political grounds. He explained that the decision will be taken by the Executive Board of the IMF, of which U.S. is a member, based only on economic criteria and not political factors. He also added that the U.S. Government and other members of the Board will review and consider the loan on financial and economic criteria after such time when the Government of Sri Lanka submits the Letter of Intent to the IMF.

-Sri Lanka Guardian

Read the full story »