True friends and ‘Truce friends’

The Indian Express reports that Sri Lanka has turned to Pakistan for defence supplies (The Island of May 04) after ‘India dragged its feet for reasons rooted in domestic Tamil politics’. The LTTE is all out to return to war and nothing else the government could have done. It has to better equip the armed forces and bolster their firepower. Sri Lankamilitary purchases from Pakistan are nothing new. When the LTTE bombed its way through upto the gateway to Jaffna in 2000, thanks to Chandrika’s bungling, it was Pakistan which rushed MBRLs to help stop the marauding Tigers in their tracks. India only offered ships to ferry the troops trapped in Jaffna to Colombo! Had Chandrika waited for Indian ships, the Tigers would have marched on Jaffna, and there would have been a bloodbath. Little did India realise that ships were no substitutes for guns in an emergency.

It is not only the domestic Tamil politics that makes India dither on the issue of helping Sri Lanka. She is sprucing herself up to woo the world powers, some of which are involved in Sri Lanka’s peace process. She prefers their company better than helping her neighbour out. She doesn’t want to strike a discordant note. Interestingly, in denouncing the LTTE terror now she is beginning to sound just like her big friends! Solheim is more in Kilinochchi and New Delhi than in Colombo or Oslo!

Whatever the reasons for the transformation of India’s policy towards Sri Lanka from parippu dropping to the present indifference, the Rajapakse government cannot kick its heels on India’s doorstep at a time when the Tigers are beating war drums. While continuing with the peace process, it has to prepare for any eventuality by turning to other countries that are willing to help. The Deccan Herald recently put its editorial finger on the implications of Sri Lanka looking away from India: "The UPA government should," that paper said on April 04, "decide its next steps keeping in mind India’s interests and not allow parties in Tamil Nadu to restrict its options. On previous occasions, when the crisis in Sri Lanka deepened and quick decisions were required on the part of India, New Delhi dithered. Should it dither now in the event of war, there is a danger of Colombo turning to China and Pakistan. That will deal a huge blow to India’s influence in the region."

The fallout of Sri Lanka’s dependence on Pakistan for defence supplies notwithstanding—we see nothing wrong in it as that country has always answered Colombo’s distress signals as a true friend—the haste that the government is making to reinvigorate the security forces points to how unprepared successive governments have been militarily. Peace processes have always sapped the armed forces as governments tend to confuse the absence of war with peace and get lulled into a false sense of complacency during a truce. When they remember the difficulties the armed forces are in, it is often too late. This time around, fortunately, the LTTE has not been able to torpedo the peace process and wrong-foot the government, the way it did in the past.

As for ‘truce friends’ Sri Lanka has many but it has only a few true friends who are prepared to help it through thick and thin. It is time the government stopped chasing the illusion of seeking military assistance from ‘truce friends’ who are running with the hare and hunting with the hounds. Sri Lanka’s sovereignty or territorial integrity matters little to them. Anything goes, in their opinion, by way of resolving the conflict—even a Cyprus type solution or something like the Machakos Protocol in Sudan’s conflict. Some of them are already toying with the idea of UN intervention! With such friends, Sri Lanka needs no enemies!

Finally, one can’t but wish India had adopted the same nonchalance in the 1980s and avoided interference with Sri Lanka’s internal problems through the creation of the LTTE. Had it done so, there wouldn’t have been a conflict, to begin with and tens of thousands of lives including that of Rajiv Gandhi, who together with his mother created the monster of Sri Lanka’s terrorism, would have been saved. But when its intervention is sought, it turns its back. One is reminded of the poodle of the legendary court jester, Andare: If asked to go, it would come and if asked to come it would go.

Having such friends is always problematic.

-IOL

Is Japan or China Lanka’s friend?

Yasushi Akashi

In 1951 Sri Lanka pleaded strongly against punitive measures that spared, in the words of then Japanese Prime Minister, ‘the sovereignty of the Japanese people’.

Today, Japan seems to be in the forefront of nations that would call for the supersession of the sovereignty of Lanka.

An entire folklore has developed about the "special relationship" between Sri Lanka and Japan "our great friend in the Far East". The reason for this is Mr. J. R. Jayewardene’s intervention on behalf of Japan at the post World War II Peace Conference in San Francisco in 1951.

The young J. R. Jayewardene was at that time the Foreign Minister of a newly independent nation. He successfully pleaded for a spirit of clemency and harmony in the treatment of Japan after its military defeat by the Western alliance.

To support his plea Jayewardene quoted the words of Lord Buddha, Asia’s greatest spiritual leader:

"In this world hatred cannot be overcome by hatred. But only by non-hatred".

Some nations at the conference insisted that Japan should not be given its full freedom. They argued that Japan should remain shackled by imposing payment of crushing reparations for damages done to allied nations and countries it occupied during World War II.

But Jayewardene’s enlightened intervention must have played a role in mitigating the punitive measures taken against Japan. This was reflected in the opening sentences of Japan’s then prime Minister’s Shigeru Yoshida’s speech at the Peace Conference (September 7, 1951):

"The peace treaty before the Conference contains no punitive or retaliatory clauses; nor does it impose upon Japan any permanent restrictions or disabilities. It will restore the Japanese people to full sovereignty, equality, and freedom, and reinstates us as a free and equal member in the community of nations. It is not a treaty of vengeance, but an instrument of reconciliation. The Japanese Delegation gladly accepts this fair and generous treaty."

Sri Lanka proved to be Japan’s great friend at a time when it was regarded as a pariah nation. After San Francisco, Jayewardene was treated as a personal friend by the imperial family.

Changed Fortunes Changed Attitudes

In 1951, Sri Lanka economically was in a more advantageous position than the war ravaged Japan. One must not forget that the first two atomic bombs were ‘tested’ by dropping them on an Asian country inhabited by a ‘yellow race’. (The Vietnamese were regarded as slit-eyed ‘Gooks’). By dint of hard work, national unity and resolve Japan has become an economic power house, one of the mega economic blocks in the world.

Meanwhile due to the disgusting mismanagement of this nation’s affairs by its post independence pretentious political leaders, Lanka today is a poor, cash strapped, pitiably dependent nation with a dominant dependent mentality. Due to out of touch religious leadership it is sinking ever deeper into cultural and moral degeneracy. As for Japan, today especially under the leadership of the current Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, is determined to play a role in world affairs commensurate with its economic might. Koizumi got parliamentary approval to send non armed Japanese troops to Iraq to support the US-UK led occupation of Iraq.

Japan is Lanka’s major donor country. It therefore insisted on playing a direct role in the Lanka’s Peace and Development Process. Koizumi’s appointment of conservative, authoritarian Yasushi Akashi as Japan’s Peace Envoy raised many eyebrows especially of those aware of the role Akashi played as the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative for UNPROFOR (Yugoslavia).

Akashi’s Japanese biographer Oinono Toshiko’s writes of his fascination with authoritarian personalities like Campuchea’s Heng Seng and Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic. (Is he also enthralled by Velupillai Prabhakaran?)

Akashi’s refusal to provide close air support to the Dutch UN troops guarding Srebrenica resulted in the biggest genocide in Europe after World War II. The Srebrenicans were Muslim. At a time when especially Muslims were subjected to ethnic cleansing and genocide by Serbian forces, sources close to Milosevic revealed later that Akashi had during a personal meeting with the Serbian President in the latter’s hunting lodge joked about, "providing a safe haven for fauna" in Serbia.

After a visit to Kilinochchi. Akashi jokingly told reporters in Colombo of the delicious crab curry the LTTE leadership shared with him. Akashi summed up his style of Conflict Management to Toshiko, as follows "My basic approach is to combine patient persuasion with sustained pressure".

This preamble is to background what Yashushi Akashi is reported to have told ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) as reported in the Daily Mirror (03/05/06). He thereby revealed what transpired at the recent Co-Chairs meeting in Oslo. Akashi said that the Co-Chairs would meet again in Tokyo and added: "Unless a full scale war resumes which goes beyond the capacity Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission consisting of Scandinavian countries, I do not think full-scale UN peacekeeping is needed".

In 1951 Sri Lanka pleaded strongly against punitive measures that spared, in the words of then Japanese Prime Minister, "the sovereignty of the Japanese people". Today Japan seems to be in the forefront of nations that would call for the suprsession of the sovereignty of Lanka.

With regard to UN intervention in former Yugoslavia and Akashi’s role in it, this is what Croatian writer Nataliya Radic had to say: "I am bitter about the role of the UN throughout Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovin, I am gratified that at least the Dutch `85 have had the courage to face up to what really happened and their part in it`85 although the Dutch are rightly searching their souls for being a party to murder, I primarily blame that epitome of despicable relativism Yasushi Akashi and the entire rotten edifice of the UN for which he worked, for allowing the UN ‘Safe Havens’ to become lethal fiction, making them little more than collection centres for Ratko Mladic and his centric einsatztruppen" (emphasis N.S.).

There is an international warrant for the arrest of Mladic and trial at the War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague. Ethnic cleansing of Muslims and Sinhalese in the Jaffna peninsular has been practiced by the local Mladics – the LTTE, but the Co-Chairs have opted to ignore these crimes against humanity.

Possible LTTE UDI and Fallout

I have for the last two years repeatedly warned that the Norwegian Peace process has created more violence and instability than peace to this Island; that Norway with the connivance of the Donor Co-Chairs and as Erik Solheim, told the Indian journal Tehelka, with Indian acquiescence with Norwegian peace initiatives, is steering this country towards international intervention.

International sanctions against the LTTE and demanding that Sri Lanka under pain of sanctions immediately address the grievances of Tamil people by devolution of power, but not to a "Homeland", can stop the shadow war and bring peace to this Tortured Island. It was done in Aceh. But that is not to be.

During his Heroes Day Speech last November Velupillai Prabhakaran clearly stated: "If the new government rejects our urgent appeal, opts for a hard-line position and adopts delaying tactics, we will, next year, in solidarity with our people, intensify our struggle for self-determination, our struggle for national liberation to establish self-government in our own homeland".

Dayan Jayetileke has repeatedly warned that Prabhakaran’s statements may not be taken lightly. He does what he says. Jayetileke also accurately predicted that Eelam IV will be initiated under civilian cover. If the LTTE unilaterally declares independence, the government will have no option but to declare war against the LTTE. Having brought the country to the brink of ‘failure’, Norway will then pull out and call for international intervention. The Donor Co-Chairs have remained silent as the LTTE trains and arms civilians for war. This is blurring the distinction between regular combatants and civilians, making it possible for the LTTE to charge the SL Armed Forces are committing genocide when full scale war breaks out.

The LTTE is deliberately sacrificing the Tamil people, directly in uncleared areas and indirectly in cleared areas by using Tamil civilians and establishments and Lankan civic freedoms as cover for its terrorist activities.

The much expected EU proscription of the LTTE did not materialise. The Co-Chairs refusal to even to so much as threaten sanctions for the savage suicide bomb attack on Sri Lanka’s Army Chief after their Oslo meeting indicates which way the wind is blowing. Sri Lanka was included (May 2. 2006) in its index of Category 2 failed states by Washington based ‘Foreign Policy’ think tank. Sri Lanka is placed in the 25th position just below Rwanda. Though little-education Lankan ‘Liberals’ and their fellow traveller ‘Leftists’ enthusiastically apply the concept of Failed State to their own country, it is a Washington Consensus doctrine. IPS courting, anti US imperialism, NGO ‘Madame’ take note.

Apparently the Donor Co Chairs believe that successive Lankan governments have not seriously addressed the problems of the Tamil people seriously. They have grounds for so thinking, but does this rationalise being equivocal about LTTE’s terrorism and tacit support for its claim to be "The Sole Representative of the Tamil People"? Do the Donor Co-Chairs want to preside over the establishment of a terrorist state just as they (Japan included) once supported and traded with the terrorist dictatorship of Saddam Hussein? Will the handing over of the Tamil people to a dreadful one party dictatorship merely liberate them from one "oppression" only subject them to the more dreadful oppression of a fascist dictatorship?

What about the West’s moral crusade for democracy? If war breaks out there will be island-wide mayhem. The leader of an upcountry political party and trade union warned on Workers Day that unless President Rajapakse breaks with the JVP and JHU, he will have no option but to join Prabhakaran against the President and that his union is in a position to cripple the economy.

The main concern underlying all my writings has been about what will happen to ordinary citizens if multi-polar violence breaks out, especially to Tamil citizens. My eyes have seen too much horror in July 1983. That officially engineered pogrom was directed against unarmed Tamil citizens not only in Colombo but in all major towns in the island. Innocent Tamils in the hill country were targeted from the day that the UNP came to power in July 1977. Attacks in ’78, ‘81, followed. They were attacked in July 1983 even though they had nothing to do with the killing of the soldiers in Jaffna. Despite these organised atrocities, today Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims live peaceably among each other. They do not need foreign funded NGOs to teach them how to co-exist. It’s the fat cat politicians who need to be taught how to live nonviolently and incorruptly.

Meanwhile it is becoming clear that the government’s diplomatic efforts against the LTTE have no effect on the Donor Co-Chairs. They are not impressed with whatever the GOSL has to say on its own behalf. The publication of the LTTE’s charge sheet on ‘paramilitaries’ with names, districts and mobile phone numbers, by a Sunday English language newspaper was a major propaganda coup for the LTTE. Despite efforts to fudge the issue, that newspaper it must be recalled, in a front page banner referred to the article on an inside page with a photo of Karuna and the title "LTTE’s Facts File".

Checking with defence correspondents of other private newspapers confirmed that none of the LTTE newspapers or front journals published the list. A Sinhala owned newspaper group with an axe to grind, did the needful. The government did not handle that ‘leak’ correctly. What was called for was not a CID investigation. The editor rightly refused to reveal his source. But one did not to be need a CID sleuth to guess who the source was. On the same Sunday, the newspaper ridiculed the performance of the government delegation and glorified Anton Balasingham as the real hero of Geneva. The Media Minister should have immediately invited the editors of all newspaper and asked them to be responsible and not act out of petty resentment against government in the face of a grave threat to national security.

The publication of that charge sheet severely damaged the credibility of army spokesmen who deny links with the Karuna faction. The government has to deal with the problem politically and not leave it to the armed forces to defend themselves against third party allegations. Defending themselves against daily physical attacks by the LTTE. is bad enough. Charges by the SLMM and media must be met head on. The so called ‘evidence’ of camps and other allegations must be publicly presented and refuted. Only then can the government bridge the credibility gap being created by sections of the media, local and foreign. There are too many GOSL ‘expert’ spokesman talking ad lib. As a result they tend to contradict each other.

Even at a time of national crisis the afore mentioned newspaper group continues to lampoon government ministers. Notwithstanding the weekly ‘nutty shelling’, Minister Mangala Samarawickreme must be congratulated for the way he is acquitting his task as Foreign Minister, though he had to step into the shoes of a great man. Samarawickreme has held firm and not flinched under attempts to bully him by Norwegian Development Minister Erik Solheim or by the British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.

The Yasuhshi Akashi Threat

Without allowing events to follow an ‘inevitable’ course, the President should take up what Yashushi Akashi told the ABC with the government of Japan. Will the Japanese Ambassador issue a clarification of Japan’s ‘co-intentions’? That Japan should be in the forefront of a move to call for external intervention is very painful to Lankans who have regarded Japan as one of their great Asian friends. The Co-Chairs eventual call for UN intervention will require Security Council approval.

Only Russian and Chinese intervention could be relied upon to block that. They seem to be only friends Sri Lanka can turn to. Sri Lanka is not Haiti, where the indigenous Non Christian population was annihilated. Any attempt to impose a Cyprus style solution on Sri Lanka will turn this country into a mini Iraq. Historical memories of Asians or ‘Orientals’ go back to the dawn of civilization. So are the memories of centuries of heroic resistance to foreign intervention and occupation. Three hundred years of unceasing armed resistance to Western colonialism is not nothing. Resistance collapsed due to internal divisions. Colombo based collaboration followed and continues.-Island by Nalin Swaris

JVP’s stance on Palestine

The repeated JVP statement that the Norwegians had created the state of Palestine while acting as peace-makers in the troubled Middle East and’ that they are hell bent on doing the same thing here by creating Eelam is sending confusing signals all around.

The Norwegians had done no such thing in the Middle East. They did not create Palestine. Palestine was in existence long before the Norwegians entered the civilised world. What happened was that Palestine was wiped off the map of the world and Israel created in its stead by the Zionists with American, British and Russian backing. The ‘Oslo Peace Accord’ was laid to rest many moons ago. If anything, the Norwegians had exacerbated the plight of the Palestinians.

I would have thought that being ‘Marxists’, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) would be natural supporters of the Palestinians, who are fighting imperialist oppression for well over sixty years, if not more. Instead we are faulting the Norwegians for ‘creating’ Palestine, which is absolute poppycock. And even if they had, then the JVP should be patting the Norwegians on their backs – for doing a good job of work for humanity’s sake.

The JVP stance on Palestine, apart from being reckless, is also out of sync with their publicised ideology`85and also with reality. Well not so much with ideology, since the Russians recognised Israel a short while after the Americans did. Then they were truly full-blooded Marxist-Leninist.

Like their ideological father, the JVP has exposed themselves for what they really are — or for what they are not. For sure, they cannot claim to be fighting Western imperialism in the form of globalization on the one hand and on the other punishing those who are actually in the thick of things fighting Western imperialism — in this case — in the form of Jewish Zionism, which is dyed-in-the wool racism in all its megalomaniac glory, never mind what the UN says and then unlearns a few years later.

The not-so-red comrades must bear in mind that President Mahinda Rajapakse, whom they claim they made president mainly through their effort, is about the staunchest supporter of the Palestinians, this side of the Suez. He on his own steam, championed the Palestinian cause when it was taboo to mention the subject.

Guys like me were nowhere in the picture at that time. So the JVP is not only out of sync with reality, but also out of step with the country’s leader!

The JVP should state their stance on Palestine without delay.

-Hameed Abdul Karim

Govt. rules out military transport for Tigers

The government said yesterday that it understands the LTTE had accepted its offer of a bigger private aircraft for transport of LTTE cadres from the east to Wanni for consult ations with their leadership.

Plan Implementation Minister and Defence Ministry spokesman Keheliya Rambukwalle, addressing the weekly Cabinet press briefing in Colombo said "We understand that the LTTE has accepted the offer of a bigger private aircraft. They could obtain it from the relevant source."

He was replying a question what the governments response would be if the LTTE continued to insist on a military aircraft being provided.

"Our policy of not providing military aircraft for transport of LTTE cadres has not changed. The issue was one of capacity. The LTTE wanted a bigger aircraft that could carry more of its cadres and that has been met," he said.

Media Minister and Cabinet spokesman Anura Priyadharshana Yapa said that there were favourable signals from the LTTE for the resumption of peace talks.

"We are ready for talks and there are grounds for optimism", Rambukwalle said.

Asked about the reported visit of Japanese Special Peace Envoy Yasushi Akashi to Sri Lanka on Saturday, to revive the faltering peace process ,Yapa said he had only seen it in the newspapers. "I will have to check on that."

Rambukwalle, chipped in saying "Mr.Akashi has become a regular visitor to Sri Lanka." -Island by Zacki Jabbar

Straw never spoke to Mangala – British HC

Denying recent media reports that British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw phoned Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera shortly after the government ordered attacks on LTTE-held Muttur east, the British High Commission spokesperson John Culley Thursday issued the following statement: "I am writing about the article ‘To Geneva through London and Bombs’, published in your 3rd May edition. In this article a telephone conversation between the British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, and the Honourable Foreign Minister, Mangala Samaraweera, was reported at length. According to your newspaper the main purpose of the conversation was to query the number of civilian casualties in the air strikes that had taken place on 25 April. The article discussed how the UK knew about the air strikes so quickly and argued that this was evidence that the LTTE had a direct line to British Government Ministers. The article even argues that the air strikes may have been halted because of pressure from Mr. Straw.

In fact there was no conversation between Mr. Straw and Mr. Samaraweera. There was a conversation between our Deputy High Commissioner Ms Lesley Craig, and Mr. Samaraweera on 25 April. In this conversation Ms Craig passed on the condolences of the British government, including the personal condolences of Ms. Straw, over the terrorists attack on the army commander. Ms Craig also asked for confirmation of reports which were coming from media sources that air strikes were taking place.

Had your correspondent checked with us, we would have briefed him both on the fact of who spoke to whom and could have made clear the main purpose of the communication – namely, to pass on our official condolences at the attack on the army commander." (IOL)