http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=31366
Shavendra alleges British media plot to discredit the governmentJuly 30, 2011, 6:39 pm
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Sri Lanka’s Deputy UN Representative, Maj. Gen. Shavendra Silva, alleges a British media plot to discredit the government of Sri Lanka at the behest of the UK-based LTTE operatives.
Responding to queries by The Sunday Island in the aftermath of the UK-based Channel 4 News confronting him outside his offices in Manhattan, he emphasized the need to expose those behind the Channel 4 News operation targeting Sri Lanka.
``Channel 4 News is nothing but a media outfit hired by the LTTE activists to harass Sri Lanka on the diplomatic front,’’ he said.
The Major General’s staff, too captured the confrontation outside on the pavement on video and a subsequent interview in the 20th floor of the UN building in New York. Maj. Gen. Silva challenged Channel 4 News to telecast the entire meeting with him alleging the British network of working overtime for the LTTE.
"They never expected us to record the interview and release it through the Sri Lankan media. Now it is on the net. The bottom line is that they probably felt they could overwhelm me by ambushing me on my way to office. But I was prepared and had equipment to record the scene," the Gajaba veteran said.
The former General Officer Commanding (GOC) of 58 Division challenged Jonathan Miller, foreign affairs correspondent of Channel 4 News, to reveal the identity of the so-called Sri Lankan army officer who alleged the then Brigadier Shavendra Silva had received instructions from Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa to finish off those surrendering on the Vanni East front.
Miller refused to name the source.
Asked whether he felt intimidated by British media action, Maj. Gen. Silva said that those working for the LTTE seemed to be confident of achieving their goals in spite of the group losing its conventional military capability in May 2009.
Those countries demanding an international mechanism to investigate accountability issues in Sri Lanka on the basis of so-called Channel 4 News exposures should demand the British network to reveal the identity of its informants.
"If they are so concerned about executions, rape and destruction carried out by the Sri Lankan Army and as many as over 40,000 killings, they shouldn’t hesitate to produce their sources at whatever international forum. We cannot be held accountable for war crimes raised by faceless men," Ambassador Silva said.
He pointed out that even the controversial Darisman Report too didn’t identify its sources.
The diplomat further stressed that Channel 4 News based at the Independent Television News (ITN), No 200, Grays Inn Road, London WCIX8X had produced ‘Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields’, whereas another UK- based media outfit, Channel 4 telecast it.
"They are two different organizations, though many know only about Channel 4, which is based at 124 Horseferry Road, London SWIP 2TX,’’ he said.
Channel 4 News did the research, production and presentation of ‘Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields’ though Channel 4 telecast it first on June 14 before the LTTE contacted television networks in several parts of the world to carry the 50-minute programme, he added.
Jonathan Miller, Jon Snow (presenter of ‘Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields’) and Krishan Gurumurthy et al work for Channel 4 News at the ITN.
Silva pointed out that UNSG Ban Ki moon office had strongly contradicted ‘Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields’ with regard to what the Channel 4 News said on the UN Chief’s visit to Sri Lanka in the immediate aftermath of the war.
``Could Sri Lanka expect Channel 4 News to be fair, when it didn’t care whether its project ridiculed the UN Chief?,’’ the Major Gen asked.
Silva, one of the top commanders who led the final onslaught on the LTTE said that those wanting to know the truth should speak with some 300,000 people rescued by the army in the final phase of the conflict. They should also speak with thousands of LTTE cadres freed after rehabilitation and now living in the Northern and Eastern Provinces.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/2011/07/24/retribution-with-arrears/
Retribution with Arrears!Posted on July 24th, 2011
Vajiragnana Warnakulasuriya Melbourne
Minister for Messing Small Nations!NorwayErik Solheim
I am immensely disappointed that you were deprived of joining your bosom Terrorist General Velupulle Prbakaran in Hell! You under the pretext of a Peace moderator sent the best in the business of war strategy as instructors abusing the Diplomatic immunity to train the LTTE cadres to make them the Worlds renowned Terrorists! You and those sadistic butchers of LTTE derived their satisfaction in killing, maiming thousands of innocent Sri Lankans right across this tiny Island!
Around 800AD the barbaric Vikings terrorized the Mediterranean, if one were to read that history, the horrific atrocities perpetrated by your ancestors were despicable. Later for some stroke of good fortune the later generations of your barbaric ancestors became civilized. However with the passage of time, that submerged violent tendencies begun to surface gradually. Thus you became a sham moderator to pass on your cruel strategy to a selfish, disgruntled group of robbers & cold blooded murderers how to capture a piece of land that belongs to a Peaceful Nation, just the way your ancestors captured the Mediterranean lands! Well now the time has come to receive the retribution with arrears!
When the bombs blasted in the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, the scene was much worse than that happened in you office building. Now you have the first hand experience of living in a violent time. Your innocent citizens for the first time got the shock of their lives that may be the start of many more days of violence to come, so brace yourself to enjoy the carnage. The innocent Sri Lankans lived thirty years in this Hell! The bombs started to go off in busses, near schools, places of Worship, in the Parliament, open areas where masses accumulate during rush hours.
You know in your heart, how you helped these marauders, the way to disguise themselves as innocent, beggars, pregnant women, children and also to impersonate as the defenders of the Nation wearing their uniforms, so that they could go unsuspected to cause heavy damage and suffering at the most unexpected time and place.
Few days back as we were told your own countryman impersonated as a policeman and bombed your office building, executing just the way you taught with the LTTE leader in Sri Lanka. This is exactly what Sri Lankan Government told the World, it’s not the Government soldiers who executed those people in that video, it’s the LTTE soldiers dressed in Government soldiers’ uniforms, would you now believe it? The unknown element for the outside World was the language in that video, what was spoken in the original is Tamil, but CH4 dubbed it into Sinhala the language spoken by the Sinhalese, the language was irrelevant to the non-Sri Lankan crowd, just a uniform clad person shooting some victims is good enough to pass the judgment it’s Sri Lankan forces who carried out the execution!
You cannot deny he was not your most admired Military Genius, Sri Lanka’s President has photos how you and Prabakaran shake hand wearing an affectionate broad grin by both, I am at a lost to note, how FBI got it so wrong to mark this man and his group as the most brutal Terrorists in the Globe, where as you didn’t!
Perhaps you knew FBI got it wrong at that time, and thought of a cunning plan to full fledge FBI’s recognition by arming this group to the teeth with the most modern war weaponry and make them qualify for that label!!
In year 2002 you came up with a unique formulation known only to you, Balasingham, George Bush & Sri Lanka’s timid Prime Minister at the time Ranil! He flew with this document in hand to get the seal of approval from another fool who occupied the Whitehouse at the time!
That paved the way for you to arm this mob to be the well equipped Terrorists in the World, this where another silly woman quipped there are good terrorists and bad terrorists! Isn’t this an ambiguous politicking? If the mob happens to be followers of Christianity, they do No wrong, then they have to be the Good terrorists, as long as they kill their own kind in their part of the World.
When you believed, now LTTE are a formidable force, you went to the President of Sri Lanka expecting time is ripe to convince him to part with what this mob is demanding, and tried to put a scare to him by advising not to go to war with this mob divulging to the President, his opponent is not a mouse but a War Genius in the jungle!!! I have no doubts the President being a man with pride having name “Raja”paksa (Raja means King) would have retorted back to make you shudder ( or pee ) in your seat uttering “ I am too a Genius where war is concerned, I am ready to go to war”! Though this is purely my imagination only you could verify my Psyche! Prabakaran’s LTTE did not hesitate to forcibly recruit LTTE cadres from the “UNTOUCHABLES”, any objection lead to instant execution as shown in CH4 video shooting three civilians and many more as they were treated as vermin that are dispensable! The Tamil Diaspora abroad only gets down the high caste wealthy Tamils, if one takes a census, it will be crystal clear the low caste (untouchables) are those left behind. This being the reality, there’s no reason for Tamils abroad to help those left behind in Sri Lanka for a prosperous life ahead.
In summary, you helped to grow a terrorist movement to destroy the Peace and Harmony of a Democratic country, the word Democracy & Freedom are very flexible terms that one could twist for one’s selfish advantage, well that’s one’s perception!
Your countrymen know how you encouraged these terrorists harboring them in Norway, who indulges in various nefarious activities to raise funds for the destruction of a distant country. It took some time for the Norwegians to imitate the migrants and to bring out their dormant barbaric tendencies, now the time has come for the Norwegians to taste a dose of what Sri Lankan’s experienced for three decades. The parents could not travel together to work for the fear of being killed leaving the children orphan! There was no guarantee that the children who went to school will return home safely, there was no entertainment possible in the cities, even the popular games were hindered severely.
Let’s see how Norwegians enjoy their future under this atmosphere. Serves you right for the bastardly conduct on your part!
Let this be a lesson for others who harbour these shady characters that migrate as refugees and later abuse the goodness of the unsuspecting hosts to reach their goals manipulating their gullibility. They are no “kittens”
Have a good Day!
Vajiragnana WarnakulasuriyaMelbourne
Retribution with Arrears!Posted on July 24th, 2011
Vajiragnana Warnakulasuriya Melbourne
Minister for Messing Small Nations!NorwayErik Solheim
I am immensely disappointed that you were deprived of joining your bosom Terrorist General Velupulle Prbakaran in Hell! You under the pretext of a Peace moderator sent the best in the business of war strategy as instructors abusing the Diplomatic immunity to train the LTTE cadres to make them the Worlds renowned Terrorists! You and those sadistic butchers of LTTE derived their satisfaction in killing, maiming thousands of innocent Sri Lankans right across this tiny Island!
Around 800AD the barbaric Vikings terrorized the Mediterranean, if one were to read that history, the horrific atrocities perpetrated by your ancestors were despicable. Later for some stroke of good fortune the later generations of your barbaric ancestors became civilized. However with the passage of time, that submerged violent tendencies begun to surface gradually. Thus you became a sham moderator to pass on your cruel strategy to a selfish, disgruntled group of robbers & cold blooded murderers how to capture a piece of land that belongs to a Peaceful Nation, just the way your ancestors captured the Mediterranean lands! Well now the time has come to receive the retribution with arrears!
When the bombs blasted in the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, the scene was much worse than that happened in you office building. Now you have the first hand experience of living in a violent time. Your innocent citizens for the first time got the shock of their lives that may be the start of many more days of violence to come, so brace yourself to enjoy the carnage. The innocent Sri Lankans lived thirty years in this Hell! The bombs started to go off in busses, near schools, places of Worship, in the Parliament, open areas where masses accumulate during rush hours.
You know in your heart, how you helped these marauders, the way to disguise themselves as innocent, beggars, pregnant women, children and also to impersonate as the defenders of the Nation wearing their uniforms, so that they could go unsuspected to cause heavy damage and suffering at the most unexpected time and place.
Few days back as we were told your own countryman impersonated as a policeman and bombed your office building, executing just the way you taught with the LTTE leader in Sri Lanka. This is exactly what Sri Lankan Government told the World, it’s not the Government soldiers who executed those people in that video, it’s the LTTE soldiers dressed in Government soldiers’ uniforms, would you now believe it? The unknown element for the outside World was the language in that video, what was spoken in the original is Tamil, but CH4 dubbed it into Sinhala the language spoken by the Sinhalese, the language was irrelevant to the non-Sri Lankan crowd, just a uniform clad person shooting some victims is good enough to pass the judgment it’s Sri Lankan forces who carried out the execution!
You cannot deny he was not your most admired Military Genius, Sri Lanka’s President has photos how you and Prabakaran shake hand wearing an affectionate broad grin by both, I am at a lost to note, how FBI got it so wrong to mark this man and his group as the most brutal Terrorists in the Globe, where as you didn’t!
Perhaps you knew FBI got it wrong at that time, and thought of a cunning plan to full fledge FBI’s recognition by arming this group to the teeth with the most modern war weaponry and make them qualify for that label!!
In year 2002 you came up with a unique formulation known only to you, Balasingham, George Bush & Sri Lanka’s timid Prime Minister at the time Ranil! He flew with this document in hand to get the seal of approval from another fool who occupied the Whitehouse at the time!
That paved the way for you to arm this mob to be the well equipped Terrorists in the World, this where another silly woman quipped there are good terrorists and bad terrorists! Isn’t this an ambiguous politicking? If the mob happens to be followers of Christianity, they do No wrong, then they have to be the Good terrorists, as long as they kill their own kind in their part of the World.
When you believed, now LTTE are a formidable force, you went to the President of Sri Lanka expecting time is ripe to convince him to part with what this mob is demanding, and tried to put a scare to him by advising not to go to war with this mob divulging to the President, his opponent is not a mouse but a War Genius in the jungle!!! I have no doubts the President being a man with pride having name “Raja”paksa (Raja means King) would have retorted back to make you shudder ( or pee ) in your seat uttering “ I am too a Genius where war is concerned, I am ready to go to war”! Though this is purely my imagination only you could verify my Psyche! Prabakaran’s LTTE did not hesitate to forcibly recruit LTTE cadres from the “UNTOUCHABLES”, any objection lead to instant execution as shown in CH4 video shooting three civilians and many more as they were treated as vermin that are dispensable! The Tamil Diaspora abroad only gets down the high caste wealthy Tamils, if one takes a census, it will be crystal clear the low caste (untouchables) are those left behind. This being the reality, there’s no reason for Tamils abroad to help those left behind in Sri Lanka for a prosperous life ahead.
In summary, you helped to grow a terrorist movement to destroy the Peace and Harmony of a Democratic country, the word Democracy & Freedom are very flexible terms that one could twist for one’s selfish advantage, well that’s one’s perception!
Your countrymen know how you encouraged these terrorists harboring them in Norway, who indulges in various nefarious activities to raise funds for the destruction of a distant country. It took some time for the Norwegians to imitate the migrants and to bring out their dormant barbaric tendencies, now the time has come for the Norwegians to taste a dose of what Sri Lankan’s experienced for three decades. The parents could not travel together to work for the fear of being killed leaving the children orphan! There was no guarantee that the children who went to school will return home safely, there was no entertainment possible in the cities, even the popular games were hindered severely.
Let’s see how Norwegians enjoy their future under this atmosphere. Serves you right for the bastardly conduct on your part!
Let this be a lesson for others who harbour these shady characters that migrate as refugees and later abuse the goodness of the unsuspecting hosts to reach their goals manipulating their gullibility. They are no “kittens”
Have a good Day!
Vajiragnana WarnakulasuriyaMelbourne
http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2011/07/boomerang-on-norway.html
Boomerang On NorwayUploaded by admin BBC, feature, Interview, MalinAbeyatunge, Oslo, Politics, UK, USA 8:31:00 AM
It has come true today when I listened to BBC morning news today that there has been bomb blasts in Norway capital Oslo and a youth camp on an island close to Oslo in quick succession killing 7 in Oslo and 80 in a youth camp and injuring many. A BBC correspondent in Norway said that this is the most severe act of violence since world war 11. I have no qualms that USA, UK and all other western countries didn’t spare a wink to condemn this act.
by Malin Abeyatunge
(July 25, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) I have quoted a below a part of a letter I sent to media soon after the bomb blast in Bombay saying that we should not condemn any bomb blasts killing innocent civilians in the countries who have been supporting the LTTE by providing safe haven, assisting financially and propagating their Eelam Agenda.
Quote “Sri Lanka is the most affected country in the world by terrorism. We have seen how the LTTE terrorists have killed thousands of innocent civilians, destroyed remote villages killing of thousands of innocent villagers, bombing of public establishments including tourist hotels, Central Bank, country’s main airport and bus terminal etc., in the past. LTTE’s terrorist atrocities continue to date because the countries like Norway, UK, USA, Canada, India, Australia and some EU countries are still complacent with LTTE’s dubious operations in procuring arms, raising funds and even some politicians attending and addressing LTTE sponsored rallies and meetings. Therefore, in conclusion, I for one will not condemn terrorists’ acts in countries who harbor, nurture and support terrorists. Unquote
It has come true today when I listened to BBC morning news today that there has been bomb blasts in Norway capital Oslo and a youth camp on an island close to Oslo in quick succession killing 7 in Oslo and 80 in a youth camp and injuring many. A BBC correspondent in Norway said that this is the most severe act of violence since world war 11. I have no qualms that USA, UK and all other western countries didn’t spare a wink to condemn this act. But when thousands of innocent civilians were killed in Sri Lanka by continuous bomb blasts, suicide bombers, claymore mines etc, Norway and the rest of the western world kept mum without condemning those heinous crimes but instead increase their support to LTTE thro dubious means.. We still haven’t forgotten how Norway Embassy in Sri Lanka used its diplomatic immunity to get state-of- the art communication equipment to LTTE.. Therefore, as a Sri Lankan, I am somewhat reluctant to condemn the people behind this bomb blast for the simple reason the Oslo people are seeing the brutality of terrorism in their own soil with their own eyes. I still sympathize with the kith and kins of the innocent victims. I hope Norwegian Authorities will at least now realize their past “wrongs” by financing, assisting, appeasing and collaborating with LTTE terrorists and “correct” the future in dealing with Sri Lanka. They should immediately stop campaigning against Sri Lanka for alleged war crimes.
My immediate thoughts were that LTTE Diaspora may be behind this bomb blast as after the annihilation of LTTE militarily the Norwegian support was somewhat dwindling and even allowed the Dutch Police to interrogate Norwegian Tamil Terrorist Nediyawan. But the BBC reported that a 32 year old ethnic Norwegian Islamic has been arrested. This cannot be a one man act but there may be other terrorist links as cross border terrorism is now a global phenomenon and I will not rule out links with the LTTE rump in Norway. In fact a gun man arrested was in a camouflaged police uniform (LTTE terrorists used army uniforms to massacre villagers) which may have ben copied from LTTE’s modus operandi. .
There is Buddhist saying that “ditta Dhamma vedeneeya kamma” which means that there is retribution for your acts of good deeds and bad deeds. Hence this is retribution for the Norwegians for having supported a terrorist outfit .
Therefore, in conclusion, I for one will not condemn terrorists’ acts in countries who harbor, nurture and support terrorists.
Boomerang On NorwayUploaded by admin BBC, feature, Interview, MalinAbeyatunge, Oslo, Politics, UK, USA 8:31:00 AM
It has come true today when I listened to BBC morning news today that there has been bomb blasts in Norway capital Oslo and a youth camp on an island close to Oslo in quick succession killing 7 in Oslo and 80 in a youth camp and injuring many. A BBC correspondent in Norway said that this is the most severe act of violence since world war 11. I have no qualms that USA, UK and all other western countries didn’t spare a wink to condemn this act.
by Malin Abeyatunge
(July 25, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) I have quoted a below a part of a letter I sent to media soon after the bomb blast in Bombay saying that we should not condemn any bomb blasts killing innocent civilians in the countries who have been supporting the LTTE by providing safe haven, assisting financially and propagating their Eelam Agenda.
Quote “Sri Lanka is the most affected country in the world by terrorism. We have seen how the LTTE terrorists have killed thousands of innocent civilians, destroyed remote villages killing of thousands of innocent villagers, bombing of public establishments including tourist hotels, Central Bank, country’s main airport and bus terminal etc., in the past. LTTE’s terrorist atrocities continue to date because the countries like Norway, UK, USA, Canada, India, Australia and some EU countries are still complacent with LTTE’s dubious operations in procuring arms, raising funds and even some politicians attending and addressing LTTE sponsored rallies and meetings. Therefore, in conclusion, I for one will not condemn terrorists’ acts in countries who harbor, nurture and support terrorists. Unquote
It has come true today when I listened to BBC morning news today that there has been bomb blasts in Norway capital Oslo and a youth camp on an island close to Oslo in quick succession killing 7 in Oslo and 80 in a youth camp and injuring many. A BBC correspondent in Norway said that this is the most severe act of violence since world war 11. I have no qualms that USA, UK and all other western countries didn’t spare a wink to condemn this act. But when thousands of innocent civilians were killed in Sri Lanka by continuous bomb blasts, suicide bombers, claymore mines etc, Norway and the rest of the western world kept mum without condemning those heinous crimes but instead increase their support to LTTE thro dubious means.. We still haven’t forgotten how Norway Embassy in Sri Lanka used its diplomatic immunity to get state-of- the art communication equipment to LTTE.. Therefore, as a Sri Lankan, I am somewhat reluctant to condemn the people behind this bomb blast for the simple reason the Oslo people are seeing the brutality of terrorism in their own soil with their own eyes. I still sympathize with the kith and kins of the innocent victims. I hope Norwegian Authorities will at least now realize their past “wrongs” by financing, assisting, appeasing and collaborating with LTTE terrorists and “correct” the future in dealing with Sri Lanka. They should immediately stop campaigning against Sri Lanka for alleged war crimes.
My immediate thoughts were that LTTE Diaspora may be behind this bomb blast as after the annihilation of LTTE militarily the Norwegian support was somewhat dwindling and even allowed the Dutch Police to interrogate Norwegian Tamil Terrorist Nediyawan. But the BBC reported that a 32 year old ethnic Norwegian Islamic has been arrested. This cannot be a one man act but there may be other terrorist links as cross border terrorism is now a global phenomenon and I will not rule out links with the LTTE rump in Norway. In fact a gun man arrested was in a camouflaged police uniform (LTTE terrorists used army uniforms to massacre villagers) which may have ben copied from LTTE’s modus operandi. .
There is Buddhist saying that “ditta Dhamma vedeneeya kamma” which means that there is retribution for your acts of good deeds and bad deeds. Hence this is retribution for the Norwegians for having supported a terrorist outfit .
Therefore, in conclusion, I for one will not condemn terrorists’ acts in countries who harbor, nurture and support terrorists.
http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2011/07/boomerang-on-norway.html
Boomerang On NorwayUploaded by admin BBC, feature, Interview, MalinAbeyatunge, Oslo, Politics, UK, USA 8:31:00 AM
It has come true today when I listened to BBC morning news today that there has been bomb blasts in Norway capital Oslo and a youth camp on an island close to Oslo in quick succession killing 7 in Oslo and 80 in a youth camp and injuring many. A BBC correspondent in Norway said that this is the most severe act of violence since world war 11. I have no qualms that USA, UK and all other western countries didn’t spare a wink to condemn this act.
by Malin Abeyatunge
(July 25, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) I have quoted a below a part of a letter I sent to media soon after the bomb blast in Bombay saying that we should not condemn any bomb blasts killing innocent civilians in the countries who have been supporting the LTTE by providing safe haven, assisting financially and propagating their Eelam Agenda.
Quote “Sri Lanka is the most affected country in the world by terrorism. We have seen how the LTTE terrorists have killed thousands of innocent civilians, destroyed remote villages killing of thousands of innocent villagers, bombing of public establishments including tourist hotels, Central Bank, country’s main airport and bus terminal etc., in the past. LTTE’s terrorist atrocities continue to date because the countries like Norway, UK, USA, Canada, India, Australia and some EU countries are still complacent with LTTE’s dubious operations in procuring arms, raising funds and even some politicians attending and addressing LTTE sponsored rallies and meetings. Therefore, in conclusion, I for one will not condemn terrorists’ acts in countries who harbor, nurture and support terrorists. Unquote
It has come true today when I listened to BBC morning news today that there has been bomb blasts in Norway capital Oslo and a youth camp on an island close to Oslo in quick succession killing 7 in Oslo and 80 in a youth camp and injuring many. A BBC correspondent in Norway said that this is the most severe act of violence since world war 11. I have no qualms that USA, UK and all other western countries didn’t spare a wink to condemn this act. But when thousands of innocent civilians were killed in Sri Lanka by continuous bomb blasts, suicide bombers, claymore mines etc, Norway and the rest of the western world kept mum without condemning those heinous crimes but instead increase their support to LTTE thro dubious means.. We still haven’t forgotten how Norway Embassy in Sri Lanka used its diplomatic immunity to get state-of- the art communication equipment to LTTE.. Therefore, as a Sri Lankan, I am somewhat reluctant to condemn the people behind this bomb blast for the simple reason the Oslo people are seeing the brutality of terrorism in their own soil with their own eyes. I still sympathize with the kith and kins of the innocent victims. I hope Norwegian Authorities will at least now realize their past “wrongs” by financing, assisting, appeasing and collaborating with LTTE terrorists and “correct” the future in dealing with Sri Lanka. They should immediately stop campaigning against Sri Lanka for alleged war crimes.
My immediate thoughts were that LTTE Diaspora may be behind this bomb blast as after the annihilation of LTTE militarily the Norwegian support was somewhat dwindling and even allowed the Dutch Police to interrogate Norwegian Tamil Terrorist Nediyawan. But the BBC reported that a 32 year old ethnic Norwegian Islamic has been arrested. This cannot be a one man act but there may be other terrorist links as cross border terrorism is now a global phenomenon and I will not rule out links with the LTTE rump in Norway. In fact a gun man arrested was in a camouflaged police uniform (LTTE terrorists used army uniforms to massacre villagers) which may have ben copied from LTTE’s modus operandi. .
There is Buddhist saying that “ditta Dhamma vedeneeya kamma” which means that there is retribution for your acts of good deeds and bad deeds. Hence this is retribution for the Norwegians for having supported a terrorist outfit .
Therefore, in conclusion, I for one will not condemn terrorists’ acts in countries who harbor, nurture and support terrorists.
Boomerang On NorwayUploaded by admin BBC, feature, Interview, MalinAbeyatunge, Oslo, Politics, UK, USA 8:31:00 AM
It has come true today when I listened to BBC morning news today that there has been bomb blasts in Norway capital Oslo and a youth camp on an island close to Oslo in quick succession killing 7 in Oslo and 80 in a youth camp and injuring many. A BBC correspondent in Norway said that this is the most severe act of violence since world war 11. I have no qualms that USA, UK and all other western countries didn’t spare a wink to condemn this act.
by Malin Abeyatunge
(July 25, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) I have quoted a below a part of a letter I sent to media soon after the bomb blast in Bombay saying that we should not condemn any bomb blasts killing innocent civilians in the countries who have been supporting the LTTE by providing safe haven, assisting financially and propagating their Eelam Agenda.
Quote “Sri Lanka is the most affected country in the world by terrorism. We have seen how the LTTE terrorists have killed thousands of innocent civilians, destroyed remote villages killing of thousands of innocent villagers, bombing of public establishments including tourist hotels, Central Bank, country’s main airport and bus terminal etc., in the past. LTTE’s terrorist atrocities continue to date because the countries like Norway, UK, USA, Canada, India, Australia and some EU countries are still complacent with LTTE’s dubious operations in procuring arms, raising funds and even some politicians attending and addressing LTTE sponsored rallies and meetings. Therefore, in conclusion, I for one will not condemn terrorists’ acts in countries who harbor, nurture and support terrorists. Unquote
It has come true today when I listened to BBC morning news today that there has been bomb blasts in Norway capital Oslo and a youth camp on an island close to Oslo in quick succession killing 7 in Oslo and 80 in a youth camp and injuring many. A BBC correspondent in Norway said that this is the most severe act of violence since world war 11. I have no qualms that USA, UK and all other western countries didn’t spare a wink to condemn this act. But when thousands of innocent civilians were killed in Sri Lanka by continuous bomb blasts, suicide bombers, claymore mines etc, Norway and the rest of the western world kept mum without condemning those heinous crimes but instead increase their support to LTTE thro dubious means.. We still haven’t forgotten how Norway Embassy in Sri Lanka used its diplomatic immunity to get state-of- the art communication equipment to LTTE.. Therefore, as a Sri Lankan, I am somewhat reluctant to condemn the people behind this bomb blast for the simple reason the Oslo people are seeing the brutality of terrorism in their own soil with their own eyes. I still sympathize with the kith and kins of the innocent victims. I hope Norwegian Authorities will at least now realize their past “wrongs” by financing, assisting, appeasing and collaborating with LTTE terrorists and “correct” the future in dealing with Sri Lanka. They should immediately stop campaigning against Sri Lanka for alleged war crimes.
My immediate thoughts were that LTTE Diaspora may be behind this bomb blast as after the annihilation of LTTE militarily the Norwegian support was somewhat dwindling and even allowed the Dutch Police to interrogate Norwegian Tamil Terrorist Nediyawan. But the BBC reported that a 32 year old ethnic Norwegian Islamic has been arrested. This cannot be a one man act but there may be other terrorist links as cross border terrorism is now a global phenomenon and I will not rule out links with the LTTE rump in Norway. In fact a gun man arrested was in a camouflaged police uniform (LTTE terrorists used army uniforms to massacre villagers) which may have ben copied from LTTE’s modus operandi. .
There is Buddhist saying that “ditta Dhamma vedeneeya kamma” which means that there is retribution for your acts of good deeds and bad deeds. Hence this is retribution for the Norwegians for having supported a terrorist outfit .
Therefore, in conclusion, I for one will not condemn terrorists’ acts in countries who harbor, nurture and support terrorists.
Friday, July 29, 2011
http://www.defence.lk/new.asp?fname=20110727_05
Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris meets New Zealand's Foreign Minister
Minister of External Affairs Professor G.L. Peiris had bilateral discussions on the sidelines of the Regional Forum in Bali, Indonesia, with Mr. Murray McCully, Minister of Foreign Affairs of New Zealand.
Among the matters discussed was the issue of illegal migration, in the context of regional security.
The vessel "Alice", currently apprehended in Indonesian waters, was believed to be travelling to a destination which could possibly have been New Zealand. This represents continuity with the problem posed by illegal immigrants who arrived in Canada on previous occasions on board "The Ocean Lady" and "Sun Sea" Prof. Peiris discussed the implications of these developments with Canada's Foreign Minister John Baird on the sidelines of the Regional Forum in Bali.
The issue of illicit migration was also touched upon during a conversation which Minister Peiris had with Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd.
The Government of Australia was dealing with matters connected with the vessel "Ocean Viking" which had reached the shores of Australia.
Some months ago Prof. Peiris discussed with his counterpart in Thailand, the elements of an overall strategy to deal with this problem. On his return from Thailand, he convened at the Ministry of External Affairs a meeting, attended by the High Commissioners of Australia, Canada and Malaysia, and the Ambassadors of Indonesia and Thailand, to decide on a series of measures to be adopted for this purpose.
The issue of illicit migration, together with its repercussions on regional security and law and order aspects, received a sharp focus in the discussions of Foreign Ministers at the Bali Conference.
Minister Peiris, citing recent observations by representatives of some Western governments and the UNHCR, emphasized that asylum seekers on board these vessels had no legitimate claim and that they are merely economic refugees.
Courtesy : Ministry of External Affairs
http://www.defence.lk/new.asp?fname=20110726_03
A tale of two isles - Island Editorial
Now that the Norwegians know what the horror of terror is really like, it is hoped that they will gain wisdom to bid farewell to their misguided liberal values which have stood terrorists in good stead the world over and pressure their government to abandon Norway's longstanding policy of harbouring foreign terrorist groups on its soil, states the Island in an eye opening editorial on Tuesday( July 26).
Full text of The Island Editorial on Tuesday, July 26th, 2011.
Norway, still reeling from last week's twin terror strikes, is said to be struggling to make sense of the carnage. The criminals responsible for those cowardly attacks stand condemned for their barbarity.
Living in a country which had been known until last week as one of the most peaceful places on earth, the Norwegians may not have ever thought they would one day have to taste terrorism in this dreadful manner. It is only natural that, stunned, they find it extremely difficult to come to terms with what has befallen them and their beloved country.
The Norwegians are, as is the way with all disaster victims, trying to reassure themselves that the carnage they have just witnessed is a one-off simply because a lone assailant has claimed responsibility for it. But, let them be warned that there could be much more to the acts of savage terror at issue than meets the eye. Norway is a haven for terrorists of all sorts and it has its share of neo-Nazis, Jihadists and xenophobic far right extremists champing at the bit; given half a chance, they will bare their fangs. Anti-Semitic and anti-immigrant tensions are also said to be high in that country. It is a powder keg to all intents and purposes!
Besides parallels that one may draw between last week's mass murder of Norwegian youth and scores of massacres carried out by terrorists in this country (for nearly three decades) until 2009, Norway's Utoya Island, where Friday's killing took place, has a remarkable resemblance in shape to Sri Lanka (as could be seen from a picture we carry in the World View section today).
The tragedy evokes one's memories of how Norway sponsored the LTTE in spite of the latter's mindless terror, which plagued Sri Lanka. Among the victims of LTTE terrorists who kept on attacking civilian targets here were many infants and even unborn children, some of whom were taken out of their dying mothers' wombs and dashed on trees and walls. LTTE death squads also targeted packed trains and buses killing men, women and children alike. In spite of such heinous crimes, Norway had no qualms about backing the LTTE to the hilt internationally, allowing it to raise funds on its soil for terrorist activity and about urging Sri Lanka to make peace with the outfit notorious for its insatiable thirst for blood. Had the remedies prescribed by Norway been adopted by this country, it would still have been experiencing massacres like the Utoya killings.
It is believed that the mass murderer, Anders Behring Breivik, responsible for Friday's carnage went on his killing spree after he had met Right-wing extremists in London. A hunt is reportedly under way for his British counterparts. But, Norway and Britain launched no such hunts for Sri Lanka's terrorists who perpetrated worse crimes. Instead, they backed those psychos!
The developed world may have duped themselves into believing that threats to its interests emanated only from religious fanatics like Jihadists. But, the Oslo attacks have blown that myth sky high. They ought to take cognisance of the fact that terrorism transcends religion and ethnicity. It, like a virulent killer disease, spares none and poses a grave threat to mankind. Some countries have assisted in its spread by being selective in fighting it or promoting it in a bid to tame their rivals.
Now that the Norwegians know what the horror of terror is really like, it is hoped that they will gain wisdom to bid farewell to their misguided liberal values which have stood terrorists in good stead the world over and pressure their government to abandon Norway's longstanding policy of harbouring foreign terrorist groups on its soil.
Courtesy: The Island
A tale of two isles - Island Editorial
Now that the Norwegians know what the horror of terror is really like, it is hoped that they will gain wisdom to bid farewell to their misguided liberal values which have stood terrorists in good stead the world over and pressure their government to abandon Norway's longstanding policy of harbouring foreign terrorist groups on its soil, states the Island in an eye opening editorial on Tuesday( July 26).
Full text of The Island Editorial on Tuesday, July 26th, 2011.
Norway, still reeling from last week's twin terror strikes, is said to be struggling to make sense of the carnage. The criminals responsible for those cowardly attacks stand condemned for their barbarity.
Living in a country which had been known until last week as one of the most peaceful places on earth, the Norwegians may not have ever thought they would one day have to taste terrorism in this dreadful manner. It is only natural that, stunned, they find it extremely difficult to come to terms with what has befallen them and their beloved country.
The Norwegians are, as is the way with all disaster victims, trying to reassure themselves that the carnage they have just witnessed is a one-off simply because a lone assailant has claimed responsibility for it. But, let them be warned that there could be much more to the acts of savage terror at issue than meets the eye. Norway is a haven for terrorists of all sorts and it has its share of neo-Nazis, Jihadists and xenophobic far right extremists champing at the bit; given half a chance, they will bare their fangs. Anti-Semitic and anti-immigrant tensions are also said to be high in that country. It is a powder keg to all intents and purposes!
Besides parallels that one may draw between last week's mass murder of Norwegian youth and scores of massacres carried out by terrorists in this country (for nearly three decades) until 2009, Norway's Utoya Island, where Friday's killing took place, has a remarkable resemblance in shape to Sri Lanka (as could be seen from a picture we carry in the World View section today).
The tragedy evokes one's memories of how Norway sponsored the LTTE in spite of the latter's mindless terror, which plagued Sri Lanka. Among the victims of LTTE terrorists who kept on attacking civilian targets here were many infants and even unborn children, some of whom were taken out of their dying mothers' wombs and dashed on trees and walls. LTTE death squads also targeted packed trains and buses killing men, women and children alike. In spite of such heinous crimes, Norway had no qualms about backing the LTTE to the hilt internationally, allowing it to raise funds on its soil for terrorist activity and about urging Sri Lanka to make peace with the outfit notorious for its insatiable thirst for blood. Had the remedies prescribed by Norway been adopted by this country, it would still have been experiencing massacres like the Utoya killings.
It is believed that the mass murderer, Anders Behring Breivik, responsible for Friday's carnage went on his killing spree after he had met Right-wing extremists in London. A hunt is reportedly under way for his British counterparts. But, Norway and Britain launched no such hunts for Sri Lanka's terrorists who perpetrated worse crimes. Instead, they backed those psychos!
The developed world may have duped themselves into believing that threats to its interests emanated only from religious fanatics like Jihadists. But, the Oslo attacks have blown that myth sky high. They ought to take cognisance of the fact that terrorism transcends religion and ethnicity. It, like a virulent killer disease, spares none and poses a grave threat to mankind. Some countries have assisted in its spread by being selective in fighting it or promoting it in a bid to tame their rivals.
Now that the Norwegians know what the horror of terror is really like, it is hoped that they will gain wisdom to bid farewell to their misguided liberal values which have stood terrorists in good stead the world over and pressure their government to abandon Norway's longstanding policy of harbouring foreign terrorist groups on its soil.
Courtesy: The Island
C4 has many concoctions
http://www.defence.lk/new.asp?fname=20110729_01
C4 has many concoctions
*Govt rejects allegation in latest one
*More episodes to follow
The government yesterday totally rejects claims made in the latest Channel - 4 video, Mass Media and Communications Minister Keheliya Rambukwella said yesterday. Answering queries raised by the media during the weekly cabinet briefing, the minister said that it was another attempt to tarnish the image of the country using fabricated material.
The minister recalled, he had predicted that the Channel - 4 possessed several such videos at the time when the first one surfaced.
"Plans to air these videos at the time by Channel 4 had to be shelved due to efforts taken by the government to counter them", he added.
When questioned on his reaction over an alleged comment made by former President Chandrika Kumaratunga's son over the phone to his mother regarding the channel 4 video, the minister said that if this was truly the case it was very unfortunate.
He recalled that the LTTE had tried to assassinate former President Kumaratunge using a suicide bomber which blinded her in one eye. The British Channel 4 aired another video on Wednesday night featuring a man with his face blurred on the screen. It claimed that the man on the video was a Lankan soldier engaged in the final stages of the conflict.
However, Military Spokesman Major General Ubhaya Medewala denied that any solider gave such an interview to the Channel 4.
Speaking over the phone Major General Medewala said: "They are attempting to justify the fake videos previously aired by the TV station'.
Meanwhile, when questioned on what action the government would take in the face of repeated airing of such videos by Channel 4, Minister Rambukwella said that the government would make use of all avenues at its disposal to counter such false propaganda.
The government has taken a number of steps to make the world community aware of the true happenings during the 'humanitarian operation, he observed.
Minister Rambukwella said that the detailed report compiled by the Defence Ministry on the conduct of the humanitarian operation would be made available to all. The report was handed over to the President on Wednesday by Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa. The details of the report would be made available to the international community through relevant Sri Lankan missions abroad. Through Lankan missions all steps would be taken to make the international community aware in this regard. The minister also described the report as a 'public document' and added that it would soon be released to the local media.
Courtesy: Daily News
http://www.dailynews.lk/2011/07/30/news15.asp
Another 9,182 IDPs to be resettled
Resettlement Minister Gunarathna Weerakoon yesterday said 271,602 IDPs who were provided accommodation in Ananda Kumaraswami, Kadiragamar, Arunachalam, Ramanadan, welfare villages in Vavuniya have already been resettled in their original villages, states a ministry release.
Number of welfare villages have reduced to two with the successful resettlement of over 98% of IDPs in their original villages.
Only 9,182 IDPs are living in Kadiragamar and Ananda Kumaraswami relief villages and 1,600 persons among them are to be resettled on August 02. People go back to villages will receive dry rations for a period of six months, a livelihood allowance of Rs 25,000.
http://rajivawijesinha.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/networks-of-informers-i-the-channel-4-independent-witnesses/#more-3109
Networks of Informers I – The Channel 4 independent witnesses
July 29, 2011 in Networks of Informers
Watching the Channel 4 film that is now doing the rounds, I was struck by its essential predictability. It relied very heavily on three individuals whom it suggested were independent witnesses, though in all three cases their reliability is in grave doubt. I had in fact drawn attention previously to the potential dangers posed by these individuals.
The failure to have taken action in this respect is I believe another indictment on the lack of professionalism within our government departments, a lack of professionalism which I fear will continue in the absence of intelligent, high-powered groups to monitor and anticipate and deal with problems. I have been suggesting such bodies for months now, only to be told endlessly about the difficulties of setting them up. We thus tend to react to attacks on us, often without consistency, which often contributes to further attacks.
Three star witnesses
An example of what we failed to do is provided by Bernard Dix, who was trotted out after two years to be one of the three star witnesses in the case against the Sri Lankan state. There had previously been a dress rehearsal for this, when he had popped up in Geneva to attack us, way back in 2008. We got the UN to put a stop to this, but we failed to get from them, despite my suggesting this at the time, something in writing that specifically repudiated Dix and what he was doing.
I can do no better now than republishing something I wrote a year ago, in which I noted that doubtless Dix ‘will be recycled elsewhere at some stage‘. Sadly, though it is always heartening when one’s foresight is proved correct, the continuing failure of our system to develop such foresight in general will continue to create problems for us.
The article as a whole also suggests other reasons for us facing so much criticism now. I regret too therefore that I never got answers to the questions I raised in 2009 with our Ministry of External Affairs about Holdsworth, and indeed the intervention of one of its officials who tried to persuade us to reverse our decision.
Emotional and Other Excesses of UN Staff Within the UN system
In considering the individuals within the UN system who have tried to undermine the Sri Lankan government, and in the process also contributed to undermining the good work that the UN in general tries to do, we should look carefully at the various examples of what might be termed pernicious excess.
Most obviously we have those who have gone out on a limb, and been found out, so that even the usually complacent UN system had to deal with them with relative if still inadequate firmness. Prominent amongst these in the last couple of years were John Campbell and Benjamin Dix. The latter in fact behaved badly openly only after he had left the services of the UN in Colombo, but then he turned up in Geneva where he was escorted round to various missions by Amnesty International. He did a sort of magic lantern show with slides, which were obviously not very revealing since we did not hear of them later. What gave them, and his critical narrative, substance was his status as an employee of the United Nations, which most regrettably Amnesty was selling for all it was worth.
I told the normally scrupulous Peter Splinter, head of Amnesty in Geneva, that it was really very naughty of him to make use of an emotionally overwrought individual who was in breach of his contract. Peter however seemed to think such conduct was not reprehensible. Fortunately the UN system disagreed, and the UN head in Colombo made sure that Mr Dix stopped using his position to advance criticisms that were fraudulent and proving an embarrassment to the UN as well as to Sri Lanka. Sadly the UN did not see fit on this occasion to issue a statement making its position public, but the system seems to have worked, for that was the last we heard about Mr Dix and his tale of woe. Doubtless he will be recycled elsewhere at some stage, not least because he had been taken into the UN system after a stint with Solidar, which was at the height of its influence at the time.cited by the BBC as claiming that the situation in Sri Lanka was as bad as the one in Somalia. The BBC naturally presented him as speaking on behalf of the UN, and later he was confidently cited by a British journalist, Peter Foster, as evidence for the assertion that ‘relations between the Sri Lankan government and the United Nations are strained on the ground’.
Foster’s diatribe was peculiar, in that he claimed it was based on information supplied by a ‘veteran international aid worker’. It is almost certain that this was a UN official, since much of the material is about UN activities. Thus we find horror that UN vehicles were searched, with the assertion that even the Serbs in Kosovo were not as disrespectful of UN staff. This is a telling comparison, given what we now know about the agenda of at least some elements pretending to do humanitarian work in Kosovo in 1998.
This wondrous veteran complains again later of a search ‘by soldiers with a pompous attitude which would not have been tolerated by those being searched on Belfast Streets years ago’. This comparison is equally telling, since it suggests that the writer is not only British, but also one of those amnesiac Britishers who has no idea what the people of Belfast suffered. Obviously he would not dream of reading the report on the subject of the Northern Ireland Ombudsman, for which British officers refused to answer questions.
The assumption that this veteran was British is confirmed by a typically British description of Sri Lankan soldiers ‘splashing around almost naked in the river’. The description is sublimated in the gleeful rhetorical question, with a very Anglo Saxon use of the subjunctive, ‘Is it much surprise that the army take such heavy casualties?’ Only a Britisher could have thought death, admittedly at a subjunctive remove, a suitable punishment for nudity. Certainly only a Britisher could have believed that wearing discreet bathing trunks might save Sri Lankan soldiers from Tiger bullets.
My own view was that this veteran, who later cites Campbell, was in fact Campbell himself, since it is unlikely that there were two emotionally underdeveloped experienced British aid workers with military backgrounds running around the Wanni at the same time. Campbell we know served in the British army, and then worked for the UN in Somalia. That I suspect explains why the UN got rid of him quietly, without a public repudiation of his outburst. If he was being financed by the British, it was obviously necessary to be discreet.
It was my experience of these characters that made me wary when I came across others of that ilk in applications for visas we received over the last few months. The most bizarre came shortly after the conclusion of the conflict, when OCHA requested a visa for a coordinating position, for what seemed a perfectly innocuous candidate. Subsequently the candidate was changed and, without indicating the need for someone with a very different background, replaced by someone with a British military background, Brian Holdsworth.
This was the period at which we were being told that countries that continued to protest their friendship for us had satellite imagery which confirmed that our forces had behaved very badly. I rather suspect that this intelligence was of the Weapons of Mass Destruction sort, where as it turned out military intelligence had not overstepped the mark but been subject to misinterpretation by the British government for its own reasons. In this context I should reiterate that what I would term British professionals, such as the last admirable British Defence Adviser, have seemed to me very sensible about a country doing its best to deal with terrorism under difficult circumstances. Now that the political compulsions of a few individuals will not complicate matters (and the British electors have turned their backs conclusively on the more extreme), I hope we can go back to a productive relationship with a country that will look positively to the future.
Sadly however, in the past, with both sanctimoniousness and deceit being standard practice for some politicians, it struck me that the sudden decision to send a senior soldier to look after humanitarian operations was extremely suspicious. I thought it best therefore to tell OCHA that I did not think I should recommend a visa for him. Not surprisingly, they took the rejection very well. We will doubtless find out fairly soon whether whoever had proposed funding the position has now found a substitute equally skillled in extrapolating information from any data that can be summoned up.
My recollection is that one reason for the change in personnel was that the British had decided to fund the position, but I may be confusing this position with others which British DFID had initiated. In all such cases I believe it is vital that the UN first discuss the need for any official position with the relevant Sri Lankan authorities, but this is not a principle that is generally followed. Given however the sad experiences we have had with so many vociferous critics, who claim and are granted by generally British journalists the status of UN officials, it is essential that for the future basic principles of responsibility and accountability be laid down and scrupulously observed.
Daily News 25 July 2011
Networks of Informers I – The Channel 4 independent witnesses
July 29, 2011 in Networks of Informers
Watching the Channel 4 film that is now doing the rounds, I was struck by its essential predictability. It relied very heavily on three individuals whom it suggested were independent witnesses, though in all three cases their reliability is in grave doubt. I had in fact drawn attention previously to the potential dangers posed by these individuals.
The failure to have taken action in this respect is I believe another indictment on the lack of professionalism within our government departments, a lack of professionalism which I fear will continue in the absence of intelligent, high-powered groups to monitor and anticipate and deal with problems. I have been suggesting such bodies for months now, only to be told endlessly about the difficulties of setting them up. We thus tend to react to attacks on us, often without consistency, which often contributes to further attacks.
Three star witnesses
An example of what we failed to do is provided by Bernard Dix, who was trotted out after two years to be one of the three star witnesses in the case against the Sri Lankan state. There had previously been a dress rehearsal for this, when he had popped up in Geneva to attack us, way back in 2008. We got the UN to put a stop to this, but we failed to get from them, despite my suggesting this at the time, something in writing that specifically repudiated Dix and what he was doing.
I can do no better now than republishing something I wrote a year ago, in which I noted that doubtless Dix ‘will be recycled elsewhere at some stage‘. Sadly, though it is always heartening when one’s foresight is proved correct, the continuing failure of our system to develop such foresight in general will continue to create problems for us.
The article as a whole also suggests other reasons for us facing so much criticism now. I regret too therefore that I never got answers to the questions I raised in 2009 with our Ministry of External Affairs about Holdsworth, and indeed the intervention of one of its officials who tried to persuade us to reverse our decision.
Emotional and Other Excesses of UN Staff Within the UN system
In considering the individuals within the UN system who have tried to undermine the Sri Lankan government, and in the process also contributed to undermining the good work that the UN in general tries to do, we should look carefully at the various examples of what might be termed pernicious excess.
Most obviously we have those who have gone out on a limb, and been found out, so that even the usually complacent UN system had to deal with them with relative if still inadequate firmness. Prominent amongst these in the last couple of years were John Campbell and Benjamin Dix. The latter in fact behaved badly openly only after he had left the services of the UN in Colombo, but then he turned up in Geneva where he was escorted round to various missions by Amnesty International. He did a sort of magic lantern show with slides, which were obviously not very revealing since we did not hear of them later. What gave them, and his critical narrative, substance was his status as an employee of the United Nations, which most regrettably Amnesty was selling for all it was worth.
I told the normally scrupulous Peter Splinter, head of Amnesty in Geneva, that it was really very naughty of him to make use of an emotionally overwrought individual who was in breach of his contract. Peter however seemed to think such conduct was not reprehensible. Fortunately the UN system disagreed, and the UN head in Colombo made sure that Mr Dix stopped using his position to advance criticisms that were fraudulent and proving an embarrassment to the UN as well as to Sri Lanka. Sadly the UN did not see fit on this occasion to issue a statement making its position public, but the system seems to have worked, for that was the last we heard about Mr Dix and his tale of woe. Doubtless he will be recycled elsewhere at some stage, not least because he had been taken into the UN system after a stint with Solidar, which was at the height of its influence at the time.cited by the BBC as claiming that the situation in Sri Lanka was as bad as the one in Somalia. The BBC naturally presented him as speaking on behalf of the UN, and later he was confidently cited by a British journalist, Peter Foster, as evidence for the assertion that ‘relations between the Sri Lankan government and the United Nations are strained on the ground’.
Foster’s diatribe was peculiar, in that he claimed it was based on information supplied by a ‘veteran international aid worker’. It is almost certain that this was a UN official, since much of the material is about UN activities. Thus we find horror that UN vehicles were searched, with the assertion that even the Serbs in Kosovo were not as disrespectful of UN staff. This is a telling comparison, given what we now know about the agenda of at least some elements pretending to do humanitarian work in Kosovo in 1998.
This wondrous veteran complains again later of a search ‘by soldiers with a pompous attitude which would not have been tolerated by those being searched on Belfast Streets years ago’. This comparison is equally telling, since it suggests that the writer is not only British, but also one of those amnesiac Britishers who has no idea what the people of Belfast suffered. Obviously he would not dream of reading the report on the subject of the Northern Ireland Ombudsman, for which British officers refused to answer questions.
The assumption that this veteran was British is confirmed by a typically British description of Sri Lankan soldiers ‘splashing around almost naked in the river’. The description is sublimated in the gleeful rhetorical question, with a very Anglo Saxon use of the subjunctive, ‘Is it much surprise that the army take such heavy casualties?’ Only a Britisher could have thought death, admittedly at a subjunctive remove, a suitable punishment for nudity. Certainly only a Britisher could have believed that wearing discreet bathing trunks might save Sri Lankan soldiers from Tiger bullets.
My own view was that this veteran, who later cites Campbell, was in fact Campbell himself, since it is unlikely that there were two emotionally underdeveloped experienced British aid workers with military backgrounds running around the Wanni at the same time. Campbell we know served in the British army, and then worked for the UN in Somalia. That I suspect explains why the UN got rid of him quietly, without a public repudiation of his outburst. If he was being financed by the British, it was obviously necessary to be discreet.
It was my experience of these characters that made me wary when I came across others of that ilk in applications for visas we received over the last few months. The most bizarre came shortly after the conclusion of the conflict, when OCHA requested a visa for a coordinating position, for what seemed a perfectly innocuous candidate. Subsequently the candidate was changed and, without indicating the need for someone with a very different background, replaced by someone with a British military background, Brian Holdsworth.
This was the period at which we were being told that countries that continued to protest their friendship for us had satellite imagery which confirmed that our forces had behaved very badly. I rather suspect that this intelligence was of the Weapons of Mass Destruction sort, where as it turned out military intelligence had not overstepped the mark but been subject to misinterpretation by the British government for its own reasons. In this context I should reiterate that what I would term British professionals, such as the last admirable British Defence Adviser, have seemed to me very sensible about a country doing its best to deal with terrorism under difficult circumstances. Now that the political compulsions of a few individuals will not complicate matters (and the British electors have turned their backs conclusively on the more extreme), I hope we can go back to a productive relationship with a country that will look positively to the future.
Sadly however, in the past, with both sanctimoniousness and deceit being standard practice for some politicians, it struck me that the sudden decision to send a senior soldier to look after humanitarian operations was extremely suspicious. I thought it best therefore to tell OCHA that I did not think I should recommend a visa for him. Not surprisingly, they took the rejection very well. We will doubtless find out fairly soon whether whoever had proposed funding the position has now found a substitute equally skillled in extrapolating information from any data that can be summoned up.
My recollection is that one reason for the change in personnel was that the British had decided to fund the position, but I may be confusing this position with others which British DFID had initiated. In all such cases I believe it is vital that the UN first discuss the need for any official position with the relevant Sri Lankan authorities, but this is not a principle that is generally followed. Given however the sad experiences we have had with so many vociferous critics, who claim and are granted by generally British journalists the status of UN officials, it is essential that for the future basic principles of responsibility and accountability be laid down and scrupulously observed.
Daily News 25 July 2011
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Terrorist violence: The Sri Lankan experience, Norway and New Zealand
Norway is the latest country that succumbed to terrorism. It is reported that nearly 100 people have been killed either by the bomb blast or the shooting incident. As members of two organisations of Sri Lankans living in New Zealand, we would like to express our heartfelt sympathy for the victims and their loved ones. Our organisations have fought against terrorism for decades and have highlighted time and again the dangers in tolerating the extremist movements who have resorted to terrorism. The objective of this press release is to appeal the New Zealand people to be extremely vigilant in providing safe haven for the sympathizers of the terrorist organisations.
At a recent session in the New Zealand Parliament, the Green MP Keith Locke vehemently opposed the Prime Minister John Key‘s rejection of the appeals of Tamil boat people, to come to New Zealand. Keith’s point was that it was against the New Zealand character to be so heartless to people who have probably experienced great tragedy in their lives and are fleeing ongoing persecution. He has also accused the Prime Minister for violating the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees.
We agree with MP Keith Locke that New Zealanders are kind hearted and compassionate people, who are willing to support others. However, the question here is whether such qualities of New Zealanders are deliberately abused by some interested parties. There are credible allegations to that effect in Sri Lanka and it is worth examining and placing the facts before the New Zealand people.
Like New Zealanders Norwegians are also kind hearted people. Like New Zealanders Norwegians also opened their doors to the asylum seekers. Like Keith Locke in New Zealand, Eric Solheim in Norway has tolerated the groups with terrorist connections and advised the respective governments to accept the sympathizers of these groups. Both countries did not believe that the terrorists could creep through their doors when left unchecked. Norwegian people may now realize the folly of the policies of their governments through this tragedy. Unless the asylum regulations in New Zealand are not tightened, New Zealanders also may have to realize it through the hard way.
That is why we agree with the Prime Minister John Key’s hard line stand to reject 87 Sri Lankan boat people, who are in Indonesian waters at present.
In Sri Lanka, hundreds of agents operate with various kinds of offers to arrange employment, education and refugee status in foreign countries. Some represent genuine agencies while many are either bogus or semi bogus entities. Some are connected to the people smuggling groups around the world. They offer “attractive packages” to take their clients to a western country and to obtain some kind of a visa for them. Destinations are mainly UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Out of these countries, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are considered as soft touches. Australia became less attractive some time ago due to Howard Government’s Pacific Solution policy, but it is becoming a popular destination again.
Refugees and terrorist violence in Sri Lanka
The war in Sri Lanka commenced around July 1983 and ended on 18 May 2009. Within this period the Sri Lankan community saw the Tamil Tigers ( LTTE) massacre tens of thousands of innocent un-armed civilian s - men, women, children, pregnant mothers and infants from Sinhalese, Muslim and Tamil communities. For almost 27 years the Tigers virtually controlled the day to day lives of 21 million people who were scared to step out sides their homes for fear of being shot or bombed to smithereens by them. Tamil Tigers who are known to have perfected the art of suicide bombing have carried out nearly 400 suicide bombing missions that included the assassinations of the President Premadasa of Sri Lanka, The Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of India and maiming of the Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaranatunga.
During this period, more than 140,000 people reported to have fled Sri Lanka and obtained refugee status in various countries, mainly in the western world, citing fears of being persecuted in Sri Lanka. Genuine refugees who wanted to flee the violence as well as the terrorist elements who wanted to operate from safe places have fled Sri Lanka. The violent conditions that prevailed in Sri Lanka during that period generally helped such applicants to be successful. This situation opened up opportunities to various illegal groups to organize refugee status for those who desired to leave the country. It is well known in Sri Lanka that clandestine agents often resorted to several fraudulent tactics to convince the asylum seekers their capability of “obtaining refugee status for them”. That is where the New Zealand environment of lax enforcement of asylum regulations and the benevolent qualities of New Zealanders have been used or rather abused by them. The statements of some political leaders of New Zealand, which support the asylum seekers have been heavily publicized in Sri Lanka to motivate more people to come out. Most of the boat people have sold all their properties and belongings to pay the human smugglers. If failed, they have to return to the country penniless. That is the desperation for them to agree even to a highly dangerous sea journey to New Zealand and not due to any fear of persecution as portrayed by some New Zealand politicians.
Sadly, as far as the situation in Sri Lanka is concerned, it has become a lucrative business for certain interested groups. Some of the so called “humanitarian organizations”, people smugglers and arms suppliers have invested large sums and reaped huge profits in return at the expense of innocent victims of terrorism in Sri Lanka. Their main sponsor, LTTE, rained terror on the Sri Lankan people, by resorting to suicide bombing, summary executions, ethnic cleansing, recruitment of child soldiers, drug smuggling, piracy, international money laundering etc. The LTTE resorted to these brutal tactics to perpetuate violence for years and years. Vast amounts of money that started flowing into their coffers by their illegal businesses have been used to coerce the influential people including some politicians around the world to support “their cause”. Violence, Asylum Status and Human Smuggling combined to be a well organized, inter connected cycle that benefitted all parties involved. Human smuggling emerged as a highly lucrative business that was linked to obtain refugee status. In fact, it became a shortcut to obtain resident visas to some countries. John Key’s statement on “queue jumping” should be considered in that context.
For the refugee business to be flourished, unfortunately, the violence should have continued in Sri Lanka. Suicide bombings, land mines, mass killings with high explosives etc. were used by LTTE to kill thousands of innocent civilians. The successive governments had to use force to curb such violence. Thousands died at the hands of terrorist attacks by LTTE and at the same time thousands claimed refugee status in western countries citing violence and fear of persecution.
Change of the situation
After a relentless and determined operation against the military might of the LTTE, the Sri Lankan Government forces finally annihilated them in May 2009. That was the culmination of the hopes of overwhelming majority of Sri Lankans who wanted to lead a peaceful life in their life time. Sri Lankans were fed up with the regular news of executions, bomb blasts and mass killings of innocents by the LTTE for the last 30 years. Violence perpetuated in Sri Lanka but the help of the world powers to curb it limited only to mere statements. Of course USA, Canada, EU Countries declared the LTTE as a terrorist organization, but did not go further than that. Even those declarations were merely to protect from spilling of the seeds of terrorism into their countries.
Sri Lanka had not sought to end the conflict militarily but was compelled to do so after being rebuffed repeatedly as it tried to negotiate a peaceful end to the conflict with LTTE. Finally, the military defeat of the LTTE on 18 May 2009 paved way for the hopes and aspirations of all Sri Lankans to come true.
The organizations and political establishments of some countries who advocated to adopt a soft policy on the LTTE terrorists have now started a campaign to tarnish the image of Sri Lanka citing a few flimsy, unsubstantiated charges that related to a couple of incidents during the last stages of war. They claim that Sri Lanka has violated humanitarian laws and has committed war crimes. As a community group that belongs to a nation that suffered at the hand of terrorism for 30 years, we vehemently condemn such claims.
The primary purpose of International Humanitarian Law is the protection of civilians. The Sri Lankan Armed Forces carried that duty during the last three decades by protecting its people from terrorists. They have been exposed to one of the deadliest terrorist groups the world has ever seen who have used child soldiers unconscionably; who have used suicide bombers to cause mindless destruction of property and deaths of thousands of innocent civilians and who have used hundreds of thousands of civilians as human shields. Therefore, as a conventional army of a nation state they had to deal with a multitude of complex situations. They had to face a ferocious group of combatants, when killed the blame comes for “civilian deaths”.
Majority of Sri Lankans honestly believe that the rules of war as exist today do not cater for a situation like that in Sri Lanka. Therefore, they value the honour of its security forces and do not wish to see the reputation of over 200,000 honest and decent men and women and who fought a brutal terrorist group bravely and at immense cost in lives to achieve peace, tarnished. That is why Sri Lankans have chosen to ignore the attempts by few interested parties to bring charges on alleged war crimes against the members of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces.
Post war Developments
With the annihilation of LTTE, the real peace dawned to Sri Lanka. There has not been a single terrorist attack in since May 2009. After nearly 30 years, the people of Sri Lanka, irrespective of their ethnicity, have started enjoying the real sense of security. They value the peace achieved by them against all odds.
The dividends of peace are visible through most of the social indicators which turned positive since the war. The Per capita Income rose to 2,399 US dollars in 2010, up 16.6 percent in dollar terms from 2009.
Colombo Stock Exchange ( CSE) indices increased rapidly creating new records. Market capitalization at the CSE reached record high on 06th October 2009 when it reached the Rs. 1 trillion mark for the first time in Sri Lanka’s history. All Share Price Index (ASPI) broke the record for its previous high by marking 3549.27 points on 11th January 2010. According to Wikipedia, CSE was the best performing stock exchange in the world in 2009 as it jumped 125.2 percent during that year.
The Sri Lankan society is slowly but surely raising the head now. When compared to the situations in neighbouring India, Pakistan and Afghanistan etc, Sri Lanka is free from terrorism and its people can proudly claim that they have eliminated the terrorism from their soil. It is interesting to note that Sri Lanka is the only democracy to have defeated a terrorist organization in recent memory.
Rehabilitation and Reconciliation Programme in Sri Lanka
It is well known that over 300,000 people have been displaced from their homes at the end of the war. Majority of them had been forced by the LTTE to move along with them when they retreated against the advancing Sri Lankan Forces.
Today, after two years, almost 95% of those people have been resettled. Only about 15,000 are still in the IDP camps and they will also be sent to their villages once the demining operations are completed. The massive task of de-mining over 3900 of 4600 square kilometers of land, including roadways, where the LTTE had laid almost two million landmines, has been achieved and UNHCR safety certifications have been issued for the people to move in.
About 11500 LTTE cadres that surrendered after the war had been provided with opportunities while in custody to further their education or vocational training that would give them new skills without having to wield AK47 guns again. Already, about 7500 of these cadres have been rehabilitated and allowed to rejoin with their families. Hundreds of LTTE cadres were even given the opportunity to get married while in custody and most of them have achieved their freedom now. Several cadres have sat for the exams and got selected for higher education in Universities.
People in the Northern and Eastern provinces had the opportunity to participate in several elections held after the end of the war. Eastern Province elected a former LTTE leader as their Chief Minister. He is supporting the Sri Lankan Government now. Northern Province had their local Government elections on 23 July 2011 and elected their representatives with out any incidents. During the Parliamentary elections held in ……… the main Tamil party, Tamil National Alliance won majority of the seats in the Northern Province. It is interesting to note that at the presidential election which was the first after the war, President Mahinda Rajapakse who provided the political leadership to the war against terrorism and his opponent Sarath Fonseka, the Army Commander who led the armed forces during the war, received …. of the votes in the northern province, where more than 95% are Tamil speaking.
Although it is slow, the national reconciliation process has started in Sri Lanka after the bitter but decisive intervention of armed forces. If Sri Lanka heeded to the calls of various advisers, specially from Norway, all communities would be still suffering from barbaric terrorism of LTTE.
Conclusion
We invite all New Zealanders to look at the above facts and see whether there is any justification for the arguments of the people like Keith Locke who says the boat people are fleeing for on going prosecution. If the Sri Lankan Government is not interested to prosecute ex combatants of LTTE who were in the custody for nearly 2 years, what is the motivation to prosecute the boat people including women and children.
It is interesting to note that on 23 July 2011 the people in Jaffna peninsula in Sri Lanka, who suffered from terrorism for 30 years, peacefully went to polls to elect their own representatives democratically. On the same day, the people in Oslo in Norway, who had never experienced violence in their history had to face barbaric terrorist attacks. The irony is that Norway is a country that advised Sri Lanka for decades to tolerate the terrorist LTTE while Sri Lanka is a country who decided to go against the advises of Norway and crushed the LTTE militarily. Norway allowed the people with LTTE connections to move freely in their country while Sri Lankans restricted their movements. Today all Sri Lankans enjoying their democratic rights while Norway has to start a war against the terrorists.
We earnestly appeal the New Zealand people and its political leaders to exercise utmost caution when granting asylum to people who sympathesize with terrorist movements as it is one of the prime sources for the undesirables to enter a country. Once entered , although they may not resort to violence themselves, they can influence others.
Last week we heard Canada claiming that they identified about 30 people with crimes against humanity have entered their country. This week we heard Norway, who tolerated the terrorist LTTE and their sympathizers, was attacked by terrorists. If New Zealand does not harden their asylum policies, tomorrow it could be New Zealand.
New Zealand Society for Peace, Unity and Human Rights in Sri Lanka
United Sri Lanka Association ( Auckland Branch)
Norway is the latest country that succumbed to terrorism. It is reported that nearly 100 people have been killed either by the bomb blast or the shooting incident. As members of two organisations of Sri Lankans living in New Zealand, we would like to express our heartfelt sympathy for the victims and their loved ones. Our organisations have fought against terrorism for decades and have highlighted time and again the dangers in tolerating the extremist movements who have resorted to terrorism. The objective of this press release is to appeal the New Zealand people to be extremely vigilant in providing safe haven for the sympathizers of the terrorist organisations.
At a recent session in the New Zealand Parliament, the Green MP Keith Locke vehemently opposed the Prime Minister John Key‘s rejection of the appeals of Tamil boat people, to come to New Zealand. Keith’s point was that it was against the New Zealand character to be so heartless to people who have probably experienced great tragedy in their lives and are fleeing ongoing persecution. He has also accused the Prime Minister for violating the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees.
We agree with MP Keith Locke that New Zealanders are kind hearted and compassionate people, who are willing to support others. However, the question here is whether such qualities of New Zealanders are deliberately abused by some interested parties. There are credible allegations to that effect in Sri Lanka and it is worth examining and placing the facts before the New Zealand people.
Like New Zealanders Norwegians are also kind hearted people. Like New Zealanders Norwegians also opened their doors to the asylum seekers. Like Keith Locke in New Zealand, Eric Solheim in Norway has tolerated the groups with terrorist connections and advised the respective governments to accept the sympathizers of these groups. Both countries did not believe that the terrorists could creep through their doors when left unchecked. Norwegian people may now realize the folly of the policies of their governments through this tragedy. Unless the asylum regulations in New Zealand are not tightened, New Zealanders also may have to realize it through the hard way.
That is why we agree with the Prime Minister John Key’s hard line stand to reject 87 Sri Lankan boat people, who are in Indonesian waters at present.
In Sri Lanka, hundreds of agents operate with various kinds of offers to arrange employment, education and refugee status in foreign countries. Some represent genuine agencies while many are either bogus or semi bogus entities. Some are connected to the people smuggling groups around the world. They offer “attractive packages” to take their clients to a western country and to obtain some kind of a visa for them. Destinations are mainly UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Out of these countries, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are considered as soft touches. Australia became less attractive some time ago due to Howard Government’s Pacific Solution policy, but it is becoming a popular destination again.
Refugees and terrorist violence in Sri Lanka
The war in Sri Lanka commenced around July 1983 and ended on 18 May 2009. Within this period the Sri Lankan community saw the Tamil Tigers ( LTTE) massacre tens of thousands of innocent un-armed civilian s - men, women, children, pregnant mothers and infants from Sinhalese, Muslim and Tamil communities. For almost 27 years the Tigers virtually controlled the day to day lives of 21 million people who were scared to step out sides their homes for fear of being shot or bombed to smithereens by them. Tamil Tigers who are known to have perfected the art of suicide bombing have carried out nearly 400 suicide bombing missions that included the assassinations of the President Premadasa of Sri Lanka, The Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of India and maiming of the Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaranatunga.
During this period, more than 140,000 people reported to have fled Sri Lanka and obtained refugee status in various countries, mainly in the western world, citing fears of being persecuted in Sri Lanka. Genuine refugees who wanted to flee the violence as well as the terrorist elements who wanted to operate from safe places have fled Sri Lanka. The violent conditions that prevailed in Sri Lanka during that period generally helped such applicants to be successful. This situation opened up opportunities to various illegal groups to organize refugee status for those who desired to leave the country. It is well known in Sri Lanka that clandestine agents often resorted to several fraudulent tactics to convince the asylum seekers their capability of “obtaining refugee status for them”. That is where the New Zealand environment of lax enforcement of asylum regulations and the benevolent qualities of New Zealanders have been used or rather abused by them. The statements of some political leaders of New Zealand, which support the asylum seekers have been heavily publicized in Sri Lanka to motivate more people to come out. Most of the boat people have sold all their properties and belongings to pay the human smugglers. If failed, they have to return to the country penniless. That is the desperation for them to agree even to a highly dangerous sea journey to New Zealand and not due to any fear of persecution as portrayed by some New Zealand politicians.
Sadly, as far as the situation in Sri Lanka is concerned, it has become a lucrative business for certain interested groups. Some of the so called “humanitarian organizations”, people smugglers and arms suppliers have invested large sums and reaped huge profits in return at the expense of innocent victims of terrorism in Sri Lanka. Their main sponsor, LTTE, rained terror on the Sri Lankan people, by resorting to suicide bombing, summary executions, ethnic cleansing, recruitment of child soldiers, drug smuggling, piracy, international money laundering etc. The LTTE resorted to these brutal tactics to perpetuate violence for years and years. Vast amounts of money that started flowing into their coffers by their illegal businesses have been used to coerce the influential people including some politicians around the world to support “their cause”. Violence, Asylum Status and Human Smuggling combined to be a well organized, inter connected cycle that benefitted all parties involved. Human smuggling emerged as a highly lucrative business that was linked to obtain refugee status. In fact, it became a shortcut to obtain resident visas to some countries. John Key’s statement on “queue jumping” should be considered in that context.
For the refugee business to be flourished, unfortunately, the violence should have continued in Sri Lanka. Suicide bombings, land mines, mass killings with high explosives etc. were used by LTTE to kill thousands of innocent civilians. The successive governments had to use force to curb such violence. Thousands died at the hands of terrorist attacks by LTTE and at the same time thousands claimed refugee status in western countries citing violence and fear of persecution.
Change of the situation
After a relentless and determined operation against the military might of the LTTE, the Sri Lankan Government forces finally annihilated them in May 2009. That was the culmination of the hopes of overwhelming majority of Sri Lankans who wanted to lead a peaceful life in their life time. Sri Lankans were fed up with the regular news of executions, bomb blasts and mass killings of innocents by the LTTE for the last 30 years. Violence perpetuated in Sri Lanka but the help of the world powers to curb it limited only to mere statements. Of course USA, Canada, EU Countries declared the LTTE as a terrorist organization, but did not go further than that. Even those declarations were merely to protect from spilling of the seeds of terrorism into their countries.
Sri Lanka had not sought to end the conflict militarily but was compelled to do so after being rebuffed repeatedly as it tried to negotiate a peaceful end to the conflict with LTTE. Finally, the military defeat of the LTTE on 18 May 2009 paved way for the hopes and aspirations of all Sri Lankans to come true.
The organizations and political establishments of some countries who advocated to adopt a soft policy on the LTTE terrorists have now started a campaign to tarnish the image of Sri Lanka citing a few flimsy, unsubstantiated charges that related to a couple of incidents during the last stages of war. They claim that Sri Lanka has violated humanitarian laws and has committed war crimes. As a community group that belongs to a nation that suffered at the hand of terrorism for 30 years, we vehemently condemn such claims.
The primary purpose of International Humanitarian Law is the protection of civilians. The Sri Lankan Armed Forces carried that duty during the last three decades by protecting its people from terrorists. They have been exposed to one of the deadliest terrorist groups the world has ever seen who have used child soldiers unconscionably; who have used suicide bombers to cause mindless destruction of property and deaths of thousands of innocent civilians and who have used hundreds of thousands of civilians as human shields. Therefore, as a conventional army of a nation state they had to deal with a multitude of complex situations. They had to face a ferocious group of combatants, when killed the blame comes for “civilian deaths”.
Majority of Sri Lankans honestly believe that the rules of war as exist today do not cater for a situation like that in Sri Lanka. Therefore, they value the honour of its security forces and do not wish to see the reputation of over 200,000 honest and decent men and women and who fought a brutal terrorist group bravely and at immense cost in lives to achieve peace, tarnished. That is why Sri Lankans have chosen to ignore the attempts by few interested parties to bring charges on alleged war crimes against the members of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces.
Post war Developments
With the annihilation of LTTE, the real peace dawned to Sri Lanka. There has not been a single terrorist attack in since May 2009. After nearly 30 years, the people of Sri Lanka, irrespective of their ethnicity, have started enjoying the real sense of security. They value the peace achieved by them against all odds.
The dividends of peace are visible through most of the social indicators which turned positive since the war. The Per capita Income rose to 2,399 US dollars in 2010, up 16.6 percent in dollar terms from 2009.
Colombo Stock Exchange ( CSE) indices increased rapidly creating new records. Market capitalization at the CSE reached record high on 06th October 2009 when it reached the Rs. 1 trillion mark for the first time in Sri Lanka’s history. All Share Price Index (ASPI) broke the record for its previous high by marking 3549.27 points on 11th January 2010. According to Wikipedia, CSE was the best performing stock exchange in the world in 2009 as it jumped 125.2 percent during that year.
The Sri Lankan society is slowly but surely raising the head now. When compared to the situations in neighbouring India, Pakistan and Afghanistan etc, Sri Lanka is free from terrorism and its people can proudly claim that they have eliminated the terrorism from their soil. It is interesting to note that Sri Lanka is the only democracy to have defeated a terrorist organization in recent memory.
Rehabilitation and Reconciliation Programme in Sri Lanka
It is well known that over 300,000 people have been displaced from their homes at the end of the war. Majority of them had been forced by the LTTE to move along with them when they retreated against the advancing Sri Lankan Forces.
Today, after two years, almost 95% of those people have been resettled. Only about 15,000 are still in the IDP camps and they will also be sent to their villages once the demining operations are completed. The massive task of de-mining over 3900 of 4600 square kilometers of land, including roadways, where the LTTE had laid almost two million landmines, has been achieved and UNHCR safety certifications have been issued for the people to move in.
About 11500 LTTE cadres that surrendered after the war had been provided with opportunities while in custody to further their education or vocational training that would give them new skills without having to wield AK47 guns again. Already, about 7500 of these cadres have been rehabilitated and allowed to rejoin with their families. Hundreds of LTTE cadres were even given the opportunity to get married while in custody and most of them have achieved their freedom now. Several cadres have sat for the exams and got selected for higher education in Universities.
People in the Northern and Eastern provinces had the opportunity to participate in several elections held after the end of the war. Eastern Province elected a former LTTE leader as their Chief Minister. He is supporting the Sri Lankan Government now. Northern Province had their local Government elections on 23 July 2011 and elected their representatives with out any incidents. During the Parliamentary elections held in ……… the main Tamil party, Tamil National Alliance won majority of the seats in the Northern Province. It is interesting to note that at the presidential election which was the first after the war, President Mahinda Rajapakse who provided the political leadership to the war against terrorism and his opponent Sarath Fonseka, the Army Commander who led the armed forces during the war, received …. of the votes in the northern province, where more than 95% are Tamil speaking.
Although it is slow, the national reconciliation process has started in Sri Lanka after the bitter but decisive intervention of armed forces. If Sri Lanka heeded to the calls of various advisers, specially from Norway, all communities would be still suffering from barbaric terrorism of LTTE.
Conclusion
We invite all New Zealanders to look at the above facts and see whether there is any justification for the arguments of the people like Keith Locke who says the boat people are fleeing for on going prosecution. If the Sri Lankan Government is not interested to prosecute ex combatants of LTTE who were in the custody for nearly 2 years, what is the motivation to prosecute the boat people including women and children.
It is interesting to note that on 23 July 2011 the people in Jaffna peninsula in Sri Lanka, who suffered from terrorism for 30 years, peacefully went to polls to elect their own representatives democratically. On the same day, the people in Oslo in Norway, who had never experienced violence in their history had to face barbaric terrorist attacks. The irony is that Norway is a country that advised Sri Lanka for decades to tolerate the terrorist LTTE while Sri Lanka is a country who decided to go against the advises of Norway and crushed the LTTE militarily. Norway allowed the people with LTTE connections to move freely in their country while Sri Lankans restricted their movements. Today all Sri Lankans enjoying their democratic rights while Norway has to start a war against the terrorists.
We earnestly appeal the New Zealand people and its political leaders to exercise utmost caution when granting asylum to people who sympathesize with terrorist movements as it is one of the prime sources for the undesirables to enter a country. Once entered , although they may not resort to violence themselves, they can influence others.
Last week we heard Canada claiming that they identified about 30 people with crimes against humanity have entered their country. This week we heard Norway, who tolerated the terrorist LTTE and their sympathizers, was attacked by terrorists. If New Zealand does not harden their asylum policies, tomorrow it could be New Zealand.
New Zealand Society for Peace, Unity and Human Rights in Sri Lanka
United Sri Lanka Association ( Auckland Branch)
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/07/26/bc-tamil-deported-mv-sun-sea.htmlSun Sea Tamil deported for alleged war crime
The Canadian Press
Posted: Jul 26, 2011 4:31 PM PT
The Canadian Press
Posted: Jul 26, 2011 4:31 PM PT
Nearly 500 Tamil migrants arrived in B.C. aboard the MV Sun Sea last year. (DND)
A Tamil refugee claimant who arrived off Canada's West Coast aboard the MV Sun Sea has been ordered deported over allegations he committed a war crime in his home country of Sri Lanka.
The migrant, who can't be identified, appeared before the Immigration and Refugee Board in April, and a written decision was issued this week.
The man admitted he was a member of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, or Tamil Tigers, and he testified at his hearing before the refugee board.
The written decision is heavily redacted and does not outline the specific allegations against the migrant, but he was accused of counselling others to commit a war crime.
It's also not clear whether the migrant offered any type of defence, although the refugee board adjudicator Geoff Rempel writes that his decision was based in large part on the migrant's own account of what happened.
Nearly 500 men, women and children arrived aboard the MV Sun Sea last year, and so far six have been ordered deported.
A Tamil refugee claimant who arrived off Canada's West Coast aboard the MV Sun Sea has been ordered deported over allegations he committed a war crime in his home country of Sri Lanka.
The migrant, who can't be identified, appeared before the Immigration and Refugee Board in April, and a written decision was issued this week.
The man admitted he was a member of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, or Tamil Tigers, and he testified at his hearing before the refugee board.
The written decision is heavily redacted and does not outline the specific allegations against the migrant, but he was accused of counselling others to commit a war crime.
It's also not clear whether the migrant offered any type of defence, although the refugee board adjudicator Geoff Rempel writes that his decision was based in large part on the migrant's own account of what happened.
Nearly 500 men, women and children arrived aboard the MV Sun Sea last year, and so far six have been ordered deported.
http://rajivawijesinha.wordpress.com/2011/07/25/what-darusman-and-weiss-fail-to-say/#more-3066
What Darusman and Weiss fail to say
July 25, 2011 in Post-Colonial Practices
The comparatively positive nature of the 2009 US State Department Report
Late in 2009 the US Department of State produced a ‘Report to Congress on Incidents during the Recent Conflicts in Sri Lanka’. The Report was shared in a very positive manner with the Sri Lankan government, and I regret very much that we did not immediately look into the matters it mentioned and produce a response to the US.
This was planned, and a Committee for the purpose was in fact appointed. I have no idea whether the general lack of urgency delayed things, but soon enough there were good reasons to feel suspicions about at least some Americans. The shenanigans with regard to General Fonseka were worrying, though I suspect we should realize that individual Americans may have exceeded their briefs in this regard. As with Sri Lankans, we cannot assume concerted policy in all cases where individuals go out on a limb, though again, as with Sri Lankans, the tendency to stand together leads to misunderstanding.
Still, we should understand that, at least in the American Defence establishment, there is a positive attitude to what we achieved. Indeed there is also awareness that excessive hypocrisy can be self-defeating, if ever international instruments subject America to the same relentless criticism some individuals apply to us, whether through self-righteousness or other more sinister motives.
Joanna van Gerpen meeting with S. P. Tamilselvan, the political leader of the LTTE, in Kilinochchi.
What was interesting about the State Department Report was that it was balanced and indeed made clear the contribution of the LTTE to any abuses that might have occurred. Whereas some of those working for the UN took pains to suggest that government also bore some culpability with regard to child soldiers, the Report records 18 allegations about this appalling practice of the LTTE. Indeed if any blame should attach to the UN for its activities in Sri Lanka, it is with regard to the condoning of this practice by the UN in the years after the Ceasefire Agreement. The conduct of Joanna van Gerpen, who connived at the continuing recruitment of children over 17, with her failure to ensure proper use of the 1 million dollars that were given to the LTTE for rehabilitation, seems to me deplorable, and she should be deemed guilty by association at least of War Crimes, with appropriate recompense paid to those who suffered.
LTTE responsibility for civilian casualties
More telling, because unusual for a State Department Report, is the record of LTTE responsibility for civilian casualties during the last months of the conflict. There are 36 reports (or 35, since one may be a duplicate) of the LTTE forcibly holding onto civilians and moving them into more and more constricted areas. Several of these involve firing, with injuries and even deaths resulting. Nearly 200 deaths were reported as arising direct from deliberate LTTE targeting of the civilians it had kept hostage. These included children, beginning with a 7 year old girl in February. Astonishingly, this was not highlighted at the time, though it seems the UN had the information, and produced it much later, ‘in a July 1 report by the UN Security Council Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict’, when it could serve no purpose in terms of restraining the LTTE.
It should also be noted that, though the State Department Report does not mention this, the Jaffna University Teachers for Human Rights recorded a much larger number of civilians killed when they tried to get away – ‘The LTTE also for the first time, on 14th May, announced that civilians who wanted to leave could leave. However, there were some instances after that where they had ordered would be escapees not to do so. We reported in Special Report No.32 that a large group of civilians, who went to a palmyra nursery near Nanthikadal Lagoon before dawn on the 14th to cross to the other side or to Vattuvakkal to the south, were shot at by the LTTE killing about 500 of them. We have had further confirmation of this’.
This is appalling, but there were even more insidious incidents of murder. The US Report records eleven incidents (or perhaps thirteen, since there were a couple of reports of shelling from less than 500 metres, from directions that could have meant the LTTE was responsible) in which it was reported that the LTTE fired from near civilians and hospitals, or actually fired direct on the civilians they were holding. These were obviously designed to provoke the Sri Lankan forces into reacting. The first instance of this is reported as having occurred on January 27th, for which an article in the New York Times cites witnesses as saying – ‘Our team on the ground was certain that the shell came from the Sri Lanka military, but apparently in response to an LTTE shell…The team on the ground had suspected that the rebels were firing at government forces from close to where civilians were taking shelter.’
Not entirely surprisingly, the Darusman report and Gordon Weiss, both of which make free with the New York Times to misrepresent something I wrote, omit this detail. The wording suggests that the witnesses were part of the UN team that had stayed on in the Wanni, and which Weiss cites as his chief source for horrors attributed to the Sri Lankan forces. Clearly the citations have been selective, though he does mention in passing that ‘the Tigers appeared to have ignored the brokered agreement meant to safeguard the wounded and medical staff’’.
Twice in February there were reports of LTTE fire coming from the Puthukkudiyirippu Hospital area, while in March, when the civilians had been herded into a strip on the coast, the LTTE was reported as having fired shells near the Puttumattalan Hospital. Meanwhile on February 18th the sources reporting on civilian casualties to the US embassy noted that ‘it could not be ruled out that the LTTE shelled civilian areas to assign blame to the SLA’. This suggests that the earlier technique, of provoking fire, had merged into actually doing the firing and then blaming the Sri Lankan army. This indeed is what the UN had suggested way back in January, on the first day on which there were reports of large numbers of civilian casualties. The UN Resident Coordinator informed us, having earlier thought that the Sri Lankan forces were responsible, that he believed most of the firing came from the LTTE.
The blind eyes of Weiss and Darusman
On April 22nd, it was reported that ‘a shell hit the roof of a small church packed with people…The witness sustained shrapnel wounds in his back. He believed the attack was committed by the LTTE’. This incident takes on added significance because the reference is probably to the Valaignamardam Church, which was used as a refuge for those escaping from LTTE conscription. UTHR recorded that in March the LTTE stormed the church to reclaim there victims but ‘ the victims evidently did not want to give up without a fight. The LTTE opened fire and killed four persons inside the church. As panic and terror spread the church emptied. One observer described the scene of wailing and mourning as one, whose profound imprint the shore and landscape would long remember. The LTTE brought a stream of buses, packed the young and moved them away in quick succession to Mullivaykkal’.
Gordon Weiss seems to ignore this incident completely, while the Darusman panel presents it in their usual anodyne fashion as far as the LTTE is concerned, with their usual lack of precision as to dates (unless indeed the incident occurred twice) – ‘On one occasion in mid-April, LTTE cadre, led by the former Trincomalee Political Wing leader known as Ezhilan, forcibly recruited hundreds of young people from Valayanmadam Church and put them on buses to Mullivaikkal’. The fact that the young people had initially gathered there for refuge under the protection of the clergy, and that some had been shot, is conveniently omitted.
Darusman also omits shelling of the church, which Tamilnet had alleged, claiming that ‘Rev Father James Pathinathar, a prominent Catholic priest was injured in SLA shelling that hit the Church in Valaignarmadam’. UTHR had a different take on what happened – Since the Army was expected to move south, many who wanted to get out of LTTE control remained in the church. Ilamparithy and Elilan once more came to the church and wanted the fathers to move to Mullivaykkal. The fathers refused. There was at this juncture nothing but mutual aversion between them and the LTTE. On an earlier occasion the fathers had wanted the LTTE to surrender in order to spare the civilians the enormous suffering imposed on them. The LTTE had become very angry’.
Tiger appropriation of nationalists until they offered resistance
It was in that context that UTHR reports that ‘On 22nd April a single shell fell in the church and Fr. James Pathinathar was injured’. About his they state that ‘Although wary of its totalitarian aims, nationalists generally avoided confrontation with the LTTE and were frequently cornered and appropriated by it’. Weiss evidently subscribed to this tactic of the LTTE, since he only mentions Pathinathan once, to say that despite problems with the LTTE he claimed that ‘”people here know they have more to gain from supporting the Tigers”’. The quotation is not dated, and nothing is said about the priest’s trials in March and April.
UTHR goes on to say that ‘After the last incident of shelling, a senior educationist who was a few hundred yards south of the church, told us that based on what the people gathered of the shell’s origin and trajectory, the general consensus was that the LTTE fired it. Another shell which fell the next day, led to the amputation of one of Fr. Vasanthaseelan’s legs. He and Fr. Pathinathar were subsequently removed by ICRC ship. Fr. Pathi is credited by several persons who were in the NFZ of having tried to protect would-be-conscripts.
The more than 3000 people remaining around the church and environs, including some Christian clergy and religious workers, were sent across once the Army moving south reached Valaignarmadam about 25th April. A person who stayed about 300 yards south of the church told us that on looking out of his bunker about 26th April, he saw a soldier near the church signalling him to come forward. Thus began his journey to an IDP camp and the end of the role played by Our Lady of the Rosary during those times’.
That narrative is perhaps the best comment on the relentless claims of TamilNet and Darusman and Weiss about government shelling of civilians. Given all this we should be thankful for the small mercies offered by the US State Department in bothering to record another side of the story.
LTTE shelling in the final days responsible for the majority of those killed
That Report goes on to say that, on May 9th, ‘Witnesses stated that the LTTE shelled from civilian areas. The SLA shelled, but once inside they helped to evacuate the civilians they had access to, including the injured. A local source confirmed that the casualties were mainly from SLA shelling, but the LTTE had also been firing at the SLA’. This is certainly not a war crime, and is a far cry from the tactics used in other areas where the struggle against terror is conducted. And with regard to the final days of the battle, the Report records the adherence to humanitarian and legal norms when it states that ‘An organization reported that, at the beginning of the final operation, the SLA used shelling that resulted in some civilian casualties. However, the IDPs to whom the organization spoke were uniformly emphatic that the SLA shelled only in reply to the LTTE’s mortar and gun fire from amont the civilians. Civilians also said that on May 15 the SLA stopped shelling when the LTTE began destroying its own equipment. The organization also reported that some LTTE cadres were going to bunkers where civilians were sheltered, asking “So you want to run away to the army do you?” and then opening fire against them’.
This is bad enough, but the Report has an even more damning account for May 17-18 – ‘An organization reported accounts from IDPs of heavy fighting from the night of May 17 into the morning of May 18. The IDPs were certain, based on the direction from which the shells were coming, that a large number, perhaps the majority, of those killed in the NFZ during the previous 12 hours of fighting were killed by LTTE forces’.
Now we have to remember that all these are reports. There are other reports which are critical of the forces. How much credit we give to each report will depend to some extent on our personal perspectives. But there seems to be no doubt about certain basic facts –
The LTTE kept civilians back forcibly
It was prepared to kill those who resisted or tried to escape
It conscripted civilians ruthlessly, including children
It was prepared to kill those who resisted
It fired from the midst of civilians and areas which should have been kept free of fighting
It did this to provoke the forces into firing back
It was prepared to have the civilians from amongst whom it fired killed
It was prepared to risk damage to hospitals with concomitant loss of civilian life
It fired into the midst of the civilians it was holding hostage
Killing of the hostages increased over the last few months
Army efforts to minimize civilian casualties
This has to be taken in conjunction with the following facts –
During the initial military operations, even taking TamilNet figures into account, there were hardly any civilian casualties
On the first day that many civilian casualties were reported, the UN thought most of the firing had come from the LTTE
There are several instances of the army refraining from firing on civilians even when provoked
The army in many instances facilitated the escape of civilians
It is possible that individual acts of abuse occurred and, if evidence about this is proferred, alleged incidents should be investigated. But the list proferred by the US State Department suggests that much of what is reported would come within the sphere of possible collateral damage resulting from the ruthless techniques adopted by the Tigers. I have looked elsewhere at allegations with regard to hospitals, and shown how repeated claims make it clear that hospitals themselves were not targeted, and indeed continued to operate after what were claimed to be several assaults. I believe comparison of the other incidents recorded with the pronouncements of TamilNet at the time of conflict will make it clear that in those instances too there is little evidence of culpability on the part of the forces. Taken as a whole the US State Department Report suggests that deliberate targeting of civilians did not take place, and the slow progress of our forces despite superior fire power makes it clear that we did our best to abide by basic norms.
Daily News 21 July 2011
http://www.lakbimanews.lk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2244:reconciliation-one-thing-retribution-is-vengeful-god-of-old-testament&catid=47:interview&Itemid=48
RECONCILIATION ONE THING, RETRIBUTION
IS VENGEFUL GOD OF OLD TESTAMENT
Professor Rajiva Wijesinha, National List MP and President’s advisor on reconciliation says the criticism of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission is prejudiced. In an interview with Ranga Jayasuriya, he defended the record of the LLRC, including its limited mandate and what many observers view, as the partisan nature of some of the key panelists. Excerpts:
During your BBC HARDtalk interview with Stephen Sackur, you said, referring to the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), that “things could have moved more quickly.” Don’t your remarks vindicate concerns earlier raised by many others, including the panel appointed by the UN secretary general that the LLRC was deeply flawed due to the limited mandate of the commission and partisan nature of the panelists?
Not at all. My remarks concerned speed of action, as to which I have always believed that one must work quickly in anything one does. Sadly this is not a principle that is followed by many, and rarely by bureaucrats or commissions, in other countries as well as in Sri Lanka. The concerns you refer to seemed to deal with possible findings, and seemed to me prejudiced, as I shall make clear later in discussing your concerns about the panelists.I should add that, while I continue to believe one must act speedily, I have often been criticized for this, on the grounds that my good ideas – about which criticism is rare – should have been implemented slowly.
According to your observations, what is causing the delay in the expected outcome of the LLRC?
A large number of persons have wanted to make representations, and these need to be heard. Incidentally, this refutes the claim of the ICG which attributes to Sri Lankans its own prejudices in asserting contrary to evidence that ‘Sri Lankans know better than anyone that such a commission is ultimately powerless.’
The LLRC, earlier, submitted to the President, an interim report, which also contained certain recommendations, which included, among others, publishing a list of names of those who are held in detention, creating a mechanism to examine cases of detainees and issuing a guarantee that private land would not be used for settlements by the government. However, as of now, there are no tangible results or any indications that those recommendations are being acted upon. What is preventing the government from implementing these recommendations?
The recommendations have been acted upon, and fulfilled subject to other considerations. For instance, the names of those undergoing rehabilitation were always known, and they were always open to visits. The large numbers involved here were confused with the far smaller numbers held at Boossa for instance, but those names are all now with the Human Rights Commission and open to anyone who inquires. Certainly, the development of suitable mechanisms was slow, but there were worries, which are understandable, about the political advantage taken of the situation. The mechanism to examine cases is in place, and seems to have resulted in a reduction of numbers – when I chaired such a mechanism, towards the end of 2009, we were able to expedite the release of several hundreds. With regard to land, there was never any question of private land being used for settlements by government. Acquisition of land for public purposes is a different question but given the general availability of land, this is not necessary – the question confused with this, of the High Security Zones, is not about acquisition, given that government plans to reduce these Zones, and has done so regularly, though again perhaps less swiftly than some would like. Problems remain about land which was squatted in, which is why several years back we tried to make suitable changes in the laws about prescription. Dealing with conflicting claims, which all have some basis in law and tradition is not easy, but it is being done gradually.
The general impression is that the LLRC was set up to engage international calls for a war crime investigation and that it is more a public relations stunt to repair the government’s image than a genuine effort to seek truth and reconciliation...?
This is not a general impression, on the contrary most Sri Lankans not involved in encouraging polarization believe it will fulfil its mandate, as is apparent from the number of those also critical of government who have appeared before it. You must remember though the range of its mandate, and its concern with Lessons Learnt as well as with Reconciliation, i.e. its obligation to make recommendations to strengthen peace and pluralism. Unfortunately many of those who criticize are concerned more with the past, and with retribution, which is the theme song of the Darusman Report. While justice has its part to play in promoting reconciliation, retribution seems to me to smack of the vengeful God of the Old Testament, which is a vulgarity the world has moved beyond, not just in Christianity but in all major religions.
Hasn’t the partisan nature of the handpicked panelists greatly compromised the independence of the LLRC?
I am astonished that you should describe the panelists as partisan. Most of the members, and obviously the Tamil and Muslim ones, are distinguished public servants. Dr. Rohan Perera is one of the most distinguished law experts we have, whose services continue in demand at the United Nations even though he has retired. Mr. Palihakkara was held in high regard at the United Nations, and was seen while in the Foreign Ministry here to uphold an internationalist approach. And while the former Attorney General was vilified for his role in a previous Commission, this was based on total misunderstanding of the role of the Attorney General in Sri Lanka, unlike in Britain or the United States, where the position is a political appointment.
The limited mandate and absence of any real powers to enforce the recommendations of the commission are meant that the commission could not achieve much in terms of truth and reconciliation...?
The commission was not intended to be a judicial body, and will not sit in judgment, unlike the Darusman panel which was supposed to be advisory, and has made sweeping judgments while ignoring evidence, justifying this on the grounds that it was not meant to investigate (so that its partisan pronouncements can be explained on the grounds that indeed it did not check). Its recommendations can certainly help with reconciliation, though not with retribution, which was not intended though others who have been consistently hostile to Sri Lanka continue to harp on this.
These multifaceted concerns have now been vindicated by the failure on the part of the government to act upon its very basic recommendations. Your comments please.
The government has acted. However it has certainly failed to communicate what it has done. In recognition of this, my appointment as Adviser on Reconciliation specifies that I should monitor disseminate progress. A mechanism to expedite this needs to be established swiftly.
There are also concerns that the ministry of defence and the defence secretary himself are standing in the way of implementing these recommendations. Do you believe security concerns could justify the non implementation of recommendations such as publishing a list of names of detainees?
Given the horrors this country has been through, security considerations must be paramount. This is the more obvious inasmuch as terrorists and their supporters had no qualms about abusing civilians ruthlessly to achieve their ends. What is desirable is to ensure that the basic aims of any recommendations can be fulfilled without any security risks, and this will usually be possible with any positive recommendations – as has been clear with the manner in which the list of detainees is now available, but not published in a manner that could lead to abuse.
The LLRC submitted an interim report to the president. Given the history of Presidential Commissions in this country, many of which became mere white elephants and their final reports gathering dust at Temple Trees, do you think the interim report of the LLRC should be made public?
Yes. I think the reports of many commissions have been made public, but regrettably there is no coherent use made of these, perhaps because often the language in which they are couched is not readily accessible. Certainly, there should be better mechanisms to ensure productive use of such reports, instead of what we now have, which is accusatory critiques - but I suppose that is par for the course, as with Bernadette Devlin’s sharp attack on the last British inquiry report on Bloody Sunday, which seemed to me a considerable advance on the previous whitewash, until I read her attack, which suggested a different perspective altogether. Not knowing enough about the situation, I will not pronounce, though I wish British critics of the LLRC would apply the same standards to their own commissions and reports, and register the worries of people like Bernadette Devlin.
You said in your BBC HARDtalk interview that about 5,000 civilians perished during the war. Your statement contradicts the government’s position of Zero civilian casualties...?
The question perpetuates a myth, which you will see has now begun to fade. Government insisted that its policy was one of no civilian casualties, but unfortunately questioning was so prejudiced, that when the obvious fact that there were civilian casualties was granted - which I did way back in 2009, having monitored TamilNet on a daily basis and checking with the forces as to any report that suggested excessive civilian casualties - it was immediately declared that we had admitted culpability. So obviously, when questions were raised that were essentially about culpability, spokesmen issued denials, which were then deliberately misconstrued and publicized, ignoring very clear statements such as those I had made.Again let me reiterate the distinction betweena) Civilian casualties which necessarily occur in any protracted conflict b) Civilian casualties caused by government action, which would obviously have occurred, given the tactics employed by the LTTE. These are regrettable, but they are general accepted (as we are told all the time by the West with regard to its operations against some Islamic nations). It must also be remembered that there is some evidence that the LTTE not only invited defensive action against heavy weapons it fired from the proximity of civilians, but also sometimes fired on those civilians itselfc) Civilian casualties caused by deliberate targeting of civilians, which I believe never occurred. A simple example to prove this is that, contrary to the claims of the Darusman report, about systematic shelling of hospitals, in the entire period from the beginning of January until the Puthukudiyirippu Hospital was vacated, there were only two instances of shells, not damaging the hospital, but falling into the compound. The allegations were, in the first instance, that two people were injured, in the second, that one person was killed and four injured. This is what the ICRC reported. TamilNet claimed with regard to the first incident that one woman was killed and six wounded about the first incident, and about the second that nine civilians were killed, ‘including patients and their family members in the ward’.Since the ICRC seems to have been present throughout, the contrast between their report and what TamilNet said suggests that reports propagated by the Tigers cannot be credited. The ICRC records that it had previously orally intervened with regard to ‘the proximity of shells at the hospital compound’, though it was also well aware that the LTTE had breached its commitments by employing heavy weaponry from the vicinity of the hospital. Clearly, if an army accused of systematically targeting all hospitals, managed to land only two shells in a month into the premised of the hospital, there must be something wrong, either with the army as a military force or with its accusers. I am sad that papers such as yours do not, by recourse to research, make clear the frivolity of the accusers, the totally arbitrary nature of their allegations, and their failure to communicate with responsible authorities. I am aware that the operations of the ICRC are confidential, but given how confidently they are quoted, they could certainly have been asked to confirm what appears in the Report.It should be added that there was one other report from the ICRC about two other hospitals in the vicinity. It said that one of these was hit by three shells, on two separate days, two of these exploding in the compound, altogether leading to five people killed and 22 injured. The TamilNet report on this incident gives different times and states that five were killed and 15 wounded, which suggests that the later ICRC report was based on different information.
RECONCILIATION ONE THING, RETRIBUTION
IS VENGEFUL GOD OF OLD TESTAMENT
Professor Rajiva Wijesinha, National List MP and President’s advisor on reconciliation says the criticism of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission is prejudiced. In an interview with Ranga Jayasuriya, he defended the record of the LLRC, including its limited mandate and what many observers view, as the partisan nature of some of the key panelists. Excerpts:
During your BBC HARDtalk interview with Stephen Sackur, you said, referring to the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), that “things could have moved more quickly.” Don’t your remarks vindicate concerns earlier raised by many others, including the panel appointed by the UN secretary general that the LLRC was deeply flawed due to the limited mandate of the commission and partisan nature of the panelists?
Not at all. My remarks concerned speed of action, as to which I have always believed that one must work quickly in anything one does. Sadly this is not a principle that is followed by many, and rarely by bureaucrats or commissions, in other countries as well as in Sri Lanka. The concerns you refer to seemed to deal with possible findings, and seemed to me prejudiced, as I shall make clear later in discussing your concerns about the panelists.I should add that, while I continue to believe one must act speedily, I have often been criticized for this, on the grounds that my good ideas – about which criticism is rare – should have been implemented slowly.
According to your observations, what is causing the delay in the expected outcome of the LLRC?
A large number of persons have wanted to make representations, and these need to be heard. Incidentally, this refutes the claim of the ICG which attributes to Sri Lankans its own prejudices in asserting contrary to evidence that ‘Sri Lankans know better than anyone that such a commission is ultimately powerless.’
The LLRC, earlier, submitted to the President, an interim report, which also contained certain recommendations, which included, among others, publishing a list of names of those who are held in detention, creating a mechanism to examine cases of detainees and issuing a guarantee that private land would not be used for settlements by the government. However, as of now, there are no tangible results or any indications that those recommendations are being acted upon. What is preventing the government from implementing these recommendations?
The recommendations have been acted upon, and fulfilled subject to other considerations. For instance, the names of those undergoing rehabilitation were always known, and they were always open to visits. The large numbers involved here were confused with the far smaller numbers held at Boossa for instance, but those names are all now with the Human Rights Commission and open to anyone who inquires. Certainly, the development of suitable mechanisms was slow, but there were worries, which are understandable, about the political advantage taken of the situation. The mechanism to examine cases is in place, and seems to have resulted in a reduction of numbers – when I chaired such a mechanism, towards the end of 2009, we were able to expedite the release of several hundreds. With regard to land, there was never any question of private land being used for settlements by government. Acquisition of land for public purposes is a different question but given the general availability of land, this is not necessary – the question confused with this, of the High Security Zones, is not about acquisition, given that government plans to reduce these Zones, and has done so regularly, though again perhaps less swiftly than some would like. Problems remain about land which was squatted in, which is why several years back we tried to make suitable changes in the laws about prescription. Dealing with conflicting claims, which all have some basis in law and tradition is not easy, but it is being done gradually.
The general impression is that the LLRC was set up to engage international calls for a war crime investigation and that it is more a public relations stunt to repair the government’s image than a genuine effort to seek truth and reconciliation...?
This is not a general impression, on the contrary most Sri Lankans not involved in encouraging polarization believe it will fulfil its mandate, as is apparent from the number of those also critical of government who have appeared before it. You must remember though the range of its mandate, and its concern with Lessons Learnt as well as with Reconciliation, i.e. its obligation to make recommendations to strengthen peace and pluralism. Unfortunately many of those who criticize are concerned more with the past, and with retribution, which is the theme song of the Darusman Report. While justice has its part to play in promoting reconciliation, retribution seems to me to smack of the vengeful God of the Old Testament, which is a vulgarity the world has moved beyond, not just in Christianity but in all major religions.
Hasn’t the partisan nature of the handpicked panelists greatly compromised the independence of the LLRC?
I am astonished that you should describe the panelists as partisan. Most of the members, and obviously the Tamil and Muslim ones, are distinguished public servants. Dr. Rohan Perera is one of the most distinguished law experts we have, whose services continue in demand at the United Nations even though he has retired. Mr. Palihakkara was held in high regard at the United Nations, and was seen while in the Foreign Ministry here to uphold an internationalist approach. And while the former Attorney General was vilified for his role in a previous Commission, this was based on total misunderstanding of the role of the Attorney General in Sri Lanka, unlike in Britain or the United States, where the position is a political appointment.
The limited mandate and absence of any real powers to enforce the recommendations of the commission are meant that the commission could not achieve much in terms of truth and reconciliation...?
The commission was not intended to be a judicial body, and will not sit in judgment, unlike the Darusman panel which was supposed to be advisory, and has made sweeping judgments while ignoring evidence, justifying this on the grounds that it was not meant to investigate (so that its partisan pronouncements can be explained on the grounds that indeed it did not check). Its recommendations can certainly help with reconciliation, though not with retribution, which was not intended though others who have been consistently hostile to Sri Lanka continue to harp on this.
These multifaceted concerns have now been vindicated by the failure on the part of the government to act upon its very basic recommendations. Your comments please.
The government has acted. However it has certainly failed to communicate what it has done. In recognition of this, my appointment as Adviser on Reconciliation specifies that I should monitor disseminate progress. A mechanism to expedite this needs to be established swiftly.
There are also concerns that the ministry of defence and the defence secretary himself are standing in the way of implementing these recommendations. Do you believe security concerns could justify the non implementation of recommendations such as publishing a list of names of detainees?
Given the horrors this country has been through, security considerations must be paramount. This is the more obvious inasmuch as terrorists and their supporters had no qualms about abusing civilians ruthlessly to achieve their ends. What is desirable is to ensure that the basic aims of any recommendations can be fulfilled without any security risks, and this will usually be possible with any positive recommendations – as has been clear with the manner in which the list of detainees is now available, but not published in a manner that could lead to abuse.
The LLRC submitted an interim report to the president. Given the history of Presidential Commissions in this country, many of which became mere white elephants and their final reports gathering dust at Temple Trees, do you think the interim report of the LLRC should be made public?
Yes. I think the reports of many commissions have been made public, but regrettably there is no coherent use made of these, perhaps because often the language in which they are couched is not readily accessible. Certainly, there should be better mechanisms to ensure productive use of such reports, instead of what we now have, which is accusatory critiques - but I suppose that is par for the course, as with Bernadette Devlin’s sharp attack on the last British inquiry report on Bloody Sunday, which seemed to me a considerable advance on the previous whitewash, until I read her attack, which suggested a different perspective altogether. Not knowing enough about the situation, I will not pronounce, though I wish British critics of the LLRC would apply the same standards to their own commissions and reports, and register the worries of people like Bernadette Devlin.
You said in your BBC HARDtalk interview that about 5,000 civilians perished during the war. Your statement contradicts the government’s position of Zero civilian casualties...?
The question perpetuates a myth, which you will see has now begun to fade. Government insisted that its policy was one of no civilian casualties, but unfortunately questioning was so prejudiced, that when the obvious fact that there were civilian casualties was granted - which I did way back in 2009, having monitored TamilNet on a daily basis and checking with the forces as to any report that suggested excessive civilian casualties - it was immediately declared that we had admitted culpability. So obviously, when questions were raised that were essentially about culpability, spokesmen issued denials, which were then deliberately misconstrued and publicized, ignoring very clear statements such as those I had made.Again let me reiterate the distinction betweena) Civilian casualties which necessarily occur in any protracted conflict b) Civilian casualties caused by government action, which would obviously have occurred, given the tactics employed by the LTTE. These are regrettable, but they are general accepted (as we are told all the time by the West with regard to its operations against some Islamic nations). It must also be remembered that there is some evidence that the LTTE not only invited defensive action against heavy weapons it fired from the proximity of civilians, but also sometimes fired on those civilians itselfc) Civilian casualties caused by deliberate targeting of civilians, which I believe never occurred. A simple example to prove this is that, contrary to the claims of the Darusman report, about systematic shelling of hospitals, in the entire period from the beginning of January until the Puthukudiyirippu Hospital was vacated, there were only two instances of shells, not damaging the hospital, but falling into the compound. The allegations were, in the first instance, that two people were injured, in the second, that one person was killed and four injured. This is what the ICRC reported. TamilNet claimed with regard to the first incident that one woman was killed and six wounded about the first incident, and about the second that nine civilians were killed, ‘including patients and their family members in the ward’.Since the ICRC seems to have been present throughout, the contrast between their report and what TamilNet said suggests that reports propagated by the Tigers cannot be credited. The ICRC records that it had previously orally intervened with regard to ‘the proximity of shells at the hospital compound’, though it was also well aware that the LTTE had breached its commitments by employing heavy weaponry from the vicinity of the hospital. Clearly, if an army accused of systematically targeting all hospitals, managed to land only two shells in a month into the premised of the hospital, there must be something wrong, either with the army as a military force or with its accusers. I am sad that papers such as yours do not, by recourse to research, make clear the frivolity of the accusers, the totally arbitrary nature of their allegations, and their failure to communicate with responsible authorities. I am aware that the operations of the ICRC are confidential, but given how confidently they are quoted, they could certainly have been asked to confirm what appears in the Report.It should be added that there was one other report from the ICRC about two other hospitals in the vicinity. It said that one of these was hit by three shells, on two separate days, two of these exploding in the compound, altogether leading to five people killed and 22 injured. The TamilNet report on this incident gives different times and states that five were killed and 15 wounded, which suggests that the later ICRC report was based on different information.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
http://www.dailynews.lk/2011/07/25/news21.asp
Like Tigers Norwegian massacre suspect used fertilizer to make bombs
Walter Jayawardhana in Los Angeles
Norwegian terrorist bombs that killed more than 90 people - mostly young summer vacationers have been ironically made with fertilizer , a method popularized by the Tigers in Sri Lanka during the heyday of the LTTE terrorism.
Police drag a trailer on a quad bike as they collect bodies at Utoeya island some 40kms south west of Oslo on July 23,. At least 91 were killed in July 22 attacks in Norway, a bombing in central Oslo and a shooting spree on an island just outside the capital. AFP
Norway has allegedly become a safe haven for the ex-LTTE terrorists but there is no indication that the most recent bombing incident is directly connected with the Tigers who allegedly received the sympathy of the ruling Labour Party of Norway.
In fact, the alleged sympathies of the alleged suspect of the bombing were with the Norwegian conservative wing opposition. When Sri Lankan government banned artificial fertilizer to the North and East the State Department officials expressed shock and dismay against the decision saying it could be described as an anti-Tamil move. It was Sri Lankan officials who told them fertilizer could be used to make devastating bombs. This was later proved to be true in the terrorist bombings in the United States.
The suspect of the bombing incident later appears to have moved out of the city and established Breivik Geofarm, a company Norwegian media is describing as a farming sole proprietorship set up to cultivate vegetables, melons, roots and tubers.
A supply company has come forward to say that it delivered six tons of fertilizer to this company in May - an ingredient used in bomb-making.
The Norway Post said: “Norwegians went to bed following serious terrorist attacks Friday night, and woke up to a national tragedy: Saturday morning it became clear that 84 young people had been massacred at a political youth camp, while seven had been killed in an earlier bomb blast in Oslo.
The bomb blast Friday afternoon partly destroyed major parts of two large government buildings, while windows in a number of nearby buildings where shattered. Seven people were reported killed, and 10 were taken to hospital.
A few hours later, reports started coming in of shooting at the annual Labour Party youth camp a few miles west of Oslo, at Utoya. First reports said at least ten people had been shot and killed by a man dressed in a police uniform, and a number of people had been seriously wounded and airlifted to hospitals in the Oslo area.
Ironically, the tiny tear shaped island of Utoya slightly resembles in shape Sri Lanka where the Norwegians were trying to establish a warm water station allegedly with the cooperation of Tigers posing as peace negotiators.
The Norway Post added: “The terror police arrested a 32-year-old man on the island, and charged him with the shooting.
“By Saturday morning it became clear that at least 84 people had been killed in the shooting, and police feared that this number may rise. “The arrested man is said to have expressed extreme right wing political views, and to have expressed opposition to a multiracial society in Norway.
“Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg quickly went on national television to assure the public that although the government offices had been severely damaged, the Government was still functioning, and would coordinate all operations.”
And the BBC added, “Anders Behring Breivik, the 32-year-old suspect in Friday’s attacks, held right-wing views, say police.
“Police chief Sveinung Sponheim said his internet postings “suggest that he has some political traits directed toward the right, and anti-Muslim views”.
“But whether that was a motivation for the actual act remains to be seen,” he told Norwegian broadcaster NRK.
“On the Facebook page attributed to him, he describes himself as a Christian and a conservative. The Facebook page is no longer available but it also listed interests such as bodybuilding and freemasonry.
Mr Breivik was a member of a Swedish neo-Nazi internet forum called Nordisk, according to Expo, a Swedish group monitoring far-right activity. Police say they are investigating whether there was a second attacker, as witness statements appear to suggest.
Like Tigers Norwegian massacre suspect used fertilizer to make bombs
Walter Jayawardhana in Los Angeles
Norwegian terrorist bombs that killed more than 90 people - mostly young summer vacationers have been ironically made with fertilizer , a method popularized by the Tigers in Sri Lanka during the heyday of the LTTE terrorism.
Police drag a trailer on a quad bike as they collect bodies at Utoeya island some 40kms south west of Oslo on July 23,. At least 91 were killed in July 22 attacks in Norway, a bombing in central Oslo and a shooting spree on an island just outside the capital. AFP
Norway has allegedly become a safe haven for the ex-LTTE terrorists but there is no indication that the most recent bombing incident is directly connected with the Tigers who allegedly received the sympathy of the ruling Labour Party of Norway.
In fact, the alleged sympathies of the alleged suspect of the bombing were with the Norwegian conservative wing opposition. When Sri Lankan government banned artificial fertilizer to the North and East the State Department officials expressed shock and dismay against the decision saying it could be described as an anti-Tamil move. It was Sri Lankan officials who told them fertilizer could be used to make devastating bombs. This was later proved to be true in the terrorist bombings in the United States.
The suspect of the bombing incident later appears to have moved out of the city and established Breivik Geofarm, a company Norwegian media is describing as a farming sole proprietorship set up to cultivate vegetables, melons, roots and tubers.
A supply company has come forward to say that it delivered six tons of fertilizer to this company in May - an ingredient used in bomb-making.
The Norway Post said: “Norwegians went to bed following serious terrorist attacks Friday night, and woke up to a national tragedy: Saturday morning it became clear that 84 young people had been massacred at a political youth camp, while seven had been killed in an earlier bomb blast in Oslo.
The bomb blast Friday afternoon partly destroyed major parts of two large government buildings, while windows in a number of nearby buildings where shattered. Seven people were reported killed, and 10 were taken to hospital.
A few hours later, reports started coming in of shooting at the annual Labour Party youth camp a few miles west of Oslo, at Utoya. First reports said at least ten people had been shot and killed by a man dressed in a police uniform, and a number of people had been seriously wounded and airlifted to hospitals in the Oslo area.
Ironically, the tiny tear shaped island of Utoya slightly resembles in shape Sri Lanka where the Norwegians were trying to establish a warm water station allegedly with the cooperation of Tigers posing as peace negotiators.
The Norway Post added: “The terror police arrested a 32-year-old man on the island, and charged him with the shooting.
“By Saturday morning it became clear that at least 84 people had been killed in the shooting, and police feared that this number may rise. “The arrested man is said to have expressed extreme right wing political views, and to have expressed opposition to a multiracial society in Norway.
“Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg quickly went on national television to assure the public that although the government offices had been severely damaged, the Government was still functioning, and would coordinate all operations.”
And the BBC added, “Anders Behring Breivik, the 32-year-old suspect in Friday’s attacks, held right-wing views, say police.
“Police chief Sveinung Sponheim said his internet postings “suggest that he has some political traits directed toward the right, and anti-Muslim views”.
“But whether that was a motivation for the actual act remains to be seen,” he told Norwegian broadcaster NRK.
“On the Facebook page attributed to him, he describes himself as a Christian and a conservative. The Facebook page is no longer available but it also listed interests such as bodybuilding and freemasonry.
Mr Breivik was a member of a Swedish neo-Nazi internet forum called Nordisk, according to Expo, a Swedish group monitoring far-right activity. Police say they are investigating whether there was a second attacker, as witness statements appear to suggest.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
http://rajivawijesinha.wordpress.com/2011/07/23/norway-under-threat/#more-3053
Norway under threat
July 23, 2011 in Comments
The terrorist attacks in Norway are profoundly upsetting. The number of those killed may be familiar to us, having gone through such anguish frequently in the past, but nothing should make us fail to register the enormity of such horrors, the brutal extinguishing of so many lives, the deep suffering for those that remain.
Sadly I fear that there will be a few people in Sri Lanka who see what has occurred as some sort of retribution, for what seemed excessive indulgence to terrorism. I do not believe that was the case at all, as far as Norway as a country was concerned. What seemed encouragement was part of a mindset that some Sri Lankans too shared and, though that mindset was betrayed, we cannot morally fault those who tried to promote solutions based on mutual understanding. There was certainly a failure of intelligence and understanding when indulgence continued long after it was clear that Tiger terrorists were incapable of compromise. But I believe many Norwegians too realized that things had gone wrong, and some of them certainly tried, though not with much success, to restrain Tiger brutality.
In this regard we should not forget how former Ambassador Mr Brattskar was firm with the Tigers about child recruitment, and how former Ambassador Tore Hattrem rebuked the Tigers for glorifying suicide killers on the website that had been set up with Norwegian as well as UN assistance, with the approval of the then Sri Lankan government. The UN at the time refused to act, which I thought obnoxious, but that also emphasized the greater decency of the Norwegian Foreign Office. And, though I continue suspicious of Mr Solheim, and regret the pronouncements both he and other senior figures have made, following the conclusion of the war, I believe the official position of the Norwegian government has been much less self-centred than that of other countries.
But, even if Norway had been nasty, we should regret what has happened, and make our horror and our sorrow clear. The killing of the innocent is not acceptable under any circumstances, and that is what makes terrorism so abhorrent. That is why it is vital that the world works together to eliminate terror, and does not allow it to develop, to flourish, to be revived.
Initial reports suggest that the main tragedy, that of the killing of so many youngsters at an island youth camp, was the responsibility of a single individual. He was tall and blond, which will I hope make it clear to Westerners obsessed with terrorists they can treat as aliens, that evil comes in all forms.
The association of that attack with the bomb blast in Oslo however suggests that there may be grounds for greater worry. The gunman is supposed to have claimed when travelling to the island that he was a police officer going ‘to do research in connection with the bomb blasts’. Though this may be a case of a deranged individual using a tragic incident to further his own private plans, it is possible that the juxtaposition of the two incidents, by increasing the impact of both, was part of a deliberate plan.
It is the more important therefore that the bombing incident be thoroughly investigated. Whilst it is possible that a gunman could have acted on his own, a massive bomb in the centre of a city requires careful planning, and suggests coordination between several people. Such coordination could have included the cooption of an individual with a different agenda – the ‘links with right-wing extremists’ that local media reported – to fulfil a larger purpose.
For what is all too often forgotten is the manner in which terrorist groups interact, and feed on and off each other. That is one reason the European Union was silly in terms of its own interests, let alone morally deficient, when they told me that, with limited funds to deal with terrorism, they – or at least some countries about whom I had complained – were concentrating on Islamic terrorism and gave low priority to dealing with Tiger terrorists. I believe more countries than previously have now learned how dangerous the Tigers could be, which is why there is greater pressure on them in more countries than previously. But that makes it all the sadder that in Britain and the United States politicians are playing to the agenda of those who previously financed terrorists, almost as though they would not mind if we had once again to face a terrorist problem, which they have no reason to think could ever affect themselves adversely.
But terrorism is no longer restricted. We saw how Al Qaeda, used initially by the Americans to combat the Soviets, was also training terrorists for Kashmir. This was not taken seriously until it started to attack America too. Similarly India suffered from Tiger terrorism, not only in the appalling murder of Rajiv Gandhi, but also in the gang warfare that hit the streets of Tamilnadu. That is why Jayalalitha has continued firm in her criticism of the Tigers, even though recent political developments have led to her seeming to support the agenda of those who want to revive the Tigers. Given how corrosive Tiger influence in Tamilnadu has been though, I have no doubt that positive engagement with her will ensure that terrorism will not be granted support there.
Norway recently, along with the Netherlands, has taken steps to limit the activities of more extreme terrorists. The present incidents should however encourage them to try to eliminate all terrorism, and control those who fund terrorism or encourage it. Thorough investigation is of course necessary to establish the rationale and the methods of those who perpetrated the two incidents that occurred. But remedial action should not be confined to those responsible for these, since we all need to be constantly vigilant, relentlessly aware of the enormities perpetrated by those who justify their own viciousness through recourse to emotion not reason. All countries should realize that they cannot continue to indulge those who emphasize their own agendas, rather than the rules that facilitate social interaction, and they should also realize that when they privilege their own agendas above such rules, when they pervert those rules and take matters into their own hands because of private predilections, they are encouraging the type of anarchy that has now hit Norway so hard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)