| by Gunadasa Amarasekara

( April 19, 2014, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) When one considers the issues that have emerged following the Geneva resolution it is only natural that any perceptive observer should ask the question, ‘Has a new approach to divide the country been initiated following the Geneva session?’ Such a question is prompted by a number of factors that have surfaced at the moment-

Theses factors should engage our attention.

The most important factor that should engage our attention is the behaviour of India. An analysis of India’s behaviour I believe provides the necessary key in answering the above question to a good extent.

India which voted with the US in Geneva and endorsed the charges of the Human Rights Violations against us did a complete about turn this time by abstaining from voting. This was unbelievable. It came as a shock to many. Not only did India abstain from voting, its envoy even went onto explain its attitude in no unmistakable terms-"an external investigation mechanism with an open ended mandate to monitor a national process is not a constructive approach. An intrusive approach that undermines national sovereignty is counter productive."

This behaviour of India has given rise to many interpretations from different quarters.

‘If India allowed this resolution to be passed that would open the door to a similar internal investigation on Kashmir. Hence the stand taken by India.’

This interpretation was offered in an editorial of The Island.

‘If India endorsed the resolution India invariably would have to face Human Rights violations against its forces that were here following the JR-Rajiv pact.’

‘In abstaining from voting India has reasserted its authority which faced much humiliation in recent times at Us hands. Its female Diplomat was stripped and searched. Sonia Gandhi had to run away from the hospital to avoid summons in a US court. Narendra Modi was banned from entering US. Body searches were carried out on Abdul Kalam the former Indian President at various airports.In this background it was a good opportunity for India to tell the US that they were not prepared to dance to their tune. It provided an opportunity for India to regain its self respect. It also carried a veiled message to Jayalalitha and Karuna Nidhi of Tamil Nadu with regard to their place in the country.

This was the interpretation offered by CA Chandraprema of the Sunday Island.

Minister Basil Rajapakse too came out with an interpretation that was entirely different from any of the above interpretations.

‘India has always been a good friend of ours who has been looking after our interests. It is very natural that India should have behaved in this manner at this juncture’

All these interpretations except Basil Rajapakse’s contain a modicum of truth. But they do not disclose the fundamental truth, the premise on which India acted.

As I see India took this decision in keeping with a long term plan they have decided to embark upon. This action taken at Geneva was a prelude to it. This probably was the first step in that direction. And for good reasons these Geneva sessions provided the much needed moral high ground for such a task.

To understand this long term plan we will have to consider a number of relevant factors.

Though India was against a certain section in the Resolution they did not reject it entirely. The observation made by the Editor of the Sunday Times,- ‘the bottom line is that India did not vote against the resolution’ cannot be dismissed. As pointed out by that Editorial the inclusion of paragraphs relating to the thirteenth amendment came from India.

What has that got to do with the violation of Human Rights charges?

We are made to understand that US is displeased with India’s behaviour. That may be for our consumption . Even if India did not consult US on this stand India would have made US aware of it

The modus operandi -the time limit anticipated in implementing this resolution should be another factor that should be considered.

The written document-the charge sheet will only be presented in March 0I5. The operational move to be undertaken will take up another year going up to 0 6 . Till then it will hang over our heads like the proverbial Democles’ sword instilling perpetual fear in

our hearts. Not knowing at what moment it will come down, at what moment economic sanctions would be imposed. We will live in subservience not attempting any resistance. However it is absurd to assume that those sanctions would come post haste within a matter of a few months. When a reporter asked Ms Biswal when US would impose sanctions the answer she gave was revealing. ‘we have not even thought of the matter’.

The Democles’ sword is there to see that we do not go astray and comply with the long term plan dished out to us by India and the US.

As I see, we could be certain of one thing- no harm will come upon Mahinda Rajapakse or his regime from the US or India till this plan is executed. In fact there will be aid and investment to cheer us up.

Why is India in collaboration with US resorting to this strategy? The decisive factor is nothing but the immense popularity Mahinda Rajapaksa enjoys from the day he crushed terrorism. That popularity as not diminished at all. There is no leader who could challenge him; there is no political force that can topple his regime. In such a situation US and India know too well that Arab Springs or Rose Revolutions are not possible in this country at the moment.

That realization means one thing- that the desired goal of dividing the country can be achieved not by ousting Mahinda Rajapaksa but by getting into his good books and getting him to implement the Thirteenth Amendment. India by abstaining from voting has obtained the moral right to initiate that long term plan.

It is India that will stage manage this whole process. India will get Vigneswaran, Sampanthan etc to toe its line and carry out the orders given to them. We may see these gentlemen coming over to Colombo regularly to discuss matters with the President without any preconditions. Even Suren Surendran of the GTF has told his colleagues not to blame India but to critically examine the action, taking away emotions. He cannot be unaware of Indian plans to come out with such platitudes.

Those amongst us who were for the implementation of the Thirteenth Amendment will welcome this move by India with open arms. Dayan Jaytilleke who appeared to have got lost a few weeks ago has come out with great confidence and is asking us to reciprocate the good done to us by India. Does he want us to have both our feet in India or does he want India to have both its feet in Sri Lanka. I do not understand the simile or the metaphor or the figure of speech. Anyway he must looking forward to playing the role of Kapati Arakashkaya which is close to his chest or his heart.

It is the duty of all patriotic forces to see that this move by India is crushed at the very inception. We should see that the President is not beguiled into becoming a prey to this diabolical plan .We should be proactive and not wait for things to take us unawares.