A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Will UNHRC Initiatives End the Lankan Genocide Despite the Re-Invigorated South Block Captive India
August 29, 2012
Vssubramaniam Special to Salem-News.com
(GRAPHIC PHOTOS) The end
of Sinhala oppression is only feasible once its military occupation of the North
is ended.
Special thanks to dbsjeyaraj.com and other
sources for the graphic photos of the Tamil victims of state terror in Sri
Lanka's north and east coastal regions in 2009.
|
(COLOMBO, GroundReports) - Colombo boastfully hawks its National
Action Plan (NAP) implementing all the inconsequentials in the Lessons Learnt
and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) proposals but omits the crucial political
element. The NAP is a diversion to tire out the international community away
from efforts to hold Lanka accountable for its grave crimes against
humanity.
Once the NAP fails to provide the space to effectively deal with the
crucial political component that led to the conflict in which Lanka committed
the crimes, all the hog wash in LLRC and NAP to bring about long-term
reconciliation and lasting peace in Lanka is no different from what the Sinhala
regimes promised and never delivered for over the past six decades and allowed
the oppression of the Eelam Tamils to continue without any redress. In summary
the NAP here amounts to a ‘No Action Plan’.
Lanka devious efforts to evade UNHRC accountability have the support
of the South Block captive Delhi/Sonia who also supported Lanka’s war overtly
and covertly until the Tamils were defeated in May 2009. After that Delhi
continues to support the Lankan genocide to eliminate the Tamil homelands from
the Lankan soil completely by fighting international efforts through the UNHRC
to bring Lanka before the courts for the crimes it committed. The lessons from
Lanka’s war against Tamils is that lives of Tamils are at the Lankan mercy once
the life saving umbrella that the LTTE provided was lost in May 2009.
Mullivaykkal massacre is not the only killing in the war, there were
many many more mini-Muliivaykal massacres and other killings details of which
will surface only when independent international courts investigate. It is
foolhardy to expect much from a LLRC or any locally appointed courts to
investigate. Colombo and Delhi dread independent investigation by international
courts; fearing dreadful and embarrassing cans of worms to appear.
Killings of Tamils though shocking to civil humanity is only one
aspect of the Lankan genocide. It also involves other brutal forms of cruelty
under Lanka’s official ‘winner takes all’ (Kohona) policy; it rapaciously
snatches away from Tamils their homeland, assets, homes, land, livelihood and
even human dignity (including the modesty of women) under the Sinhala
supremacist’s military occupation. The why for the Delhi mandarins not for once
condemning these brutal acts is difficult to fathom.
Such atrocities that cause distress to many do not stir the rock
like hearts of the mandarins in Delhi. They observe a novel form of dharma under
the label ‘secularism’ pretending to be neutral and not condemning the brutal
killings and oppression right under its nose. Lankan genocide is now about
ridding the Tamil homelands in Lanka.
This outrageous plan in action shocks all except the South Block
mandarins and their captive UPA leaders. Delhi’s sneaky actions to hinder
international efforts go beyond curbing the excesses of Lanka to redress the
Eelam Tamil’s sufferings to the South Block instigating Delhi to sabotage
international action to bring the Lankans to account for their crimes.
Shiv Shankar Menon is reportedly now the chief architect of the
South Block policies. Every one of his visits to the Rajapakses is dreaded by
the Tamils fearing what more brutal crimes this South Block emissary has planned
for with his counter-parts to harm the Tamils in Lanka. The fear was born out of
the South Block’s past record of the cozying emissaries who frequented Colombo
to calibrate the Rajapakse devastating attacks on the LTTE.
These produced the Mullivaykal and many mini-Mullivaykal massacres.
Civilians were not spared. The Delhi trio was involved according to Gothbhaya
Rajapakse in the Mullivaykal tragedy. Confirmation by independent agencies that
the Delhi trio was deeply associated in the Lankan crimes using the ‘no fire
zone’ to entrap tens of thousands for the kill and ‘barb wire fenced open air
detention of over 300 000 displaced civilians whose release took as long as 3
years would be most embarrassing.
Though Gothabhaya openly hinted at the ‘in the loop’ involvement of
the Delhi trio and Delhi’s astonishing stilled silence on this creates fears
that the trio had a definite role in crimes. The ‘no fire zone’ and the ‘mass
detention prisons’ are inerasable blots on the dharmic heritage of a great
country though these were caused by its adharmic bureaucrats.
Hariharan a one-time hardcore anti-Tamil South Block apologist in ‘A
tale of two interventions’ in Hindu 28 July and ‘25 years of India-Sri-Lanka
Agreement in South Asia Analysis Group (23 April 2012) attempts to auction
Delhi’s support for Lanka for the 13th Amendment as a bonanza to Eelam Tamils to
restrain the restive Tamil Nadu (TN) Tamils from acting(despite Pranab’s 2009
ultimatum to Karunanithi not to) and precipitate a crisis that could have ended
the UPA rule in May 2009 itself.
Hariharan rightly mourns the absence of a dynamic Indraji class
national leadership who delivered a neat and clean Bangladesh for the oppressed
Bengalis unlike a Sonia who is still struggling with the Rajapakses to implement
its Indo-SL Accord 13th Amendment as a political solution to the Eelam Tamil
issue. Sonia afflicted by a legendary South Block dependency syndrome is no
match to Indraji who created Bangladesh to end Pakistan’ oppression of the
Bengalese. Apparently Soniaji encourages through Delhi’s inaction the Rajapakses
to kill off the rest of the Eelam Tamils, with it the Tamil homelands and Eelam
Tamil problem.
The end of Sinhala oppression is only feasible once its military
occupation of the North is ended. Bangladeshi was desperate for this in pre-1971
East Pakistan. NAP has no definite timetable for phasing out its military
occupation of the North. Delhi’s Soniaji like Indraji has to create the
equivalent of Bangladesh in Tamil Eelam, However on this Hariharan engages in
semantics pointing to irrelevant differences between the oppression the
Bengalese suffered and what the Eelam Tamils suffer from.
Hariharan stops at lament over the painfully slow Lankan substance
less NAP roadmap to achieve the elusive ‘..rehabilitation and reconciliation’ in
the war ravaged Lanka. It also offers no solution for Delhi to extricate itself
from the South Block created imbroglio.
The logic that drives the excellent writings of the reputed
independent political analyst (Dr Imityaz) ‘Sri Lanka: Ethnic Conflict, LTTE and
Future ‘does not have the shortcomings found in Hariharan’s writings namely
conflict of interest. “it is now crystal clear that the Sinhala leaders will
never put forward a just resolution to the Tamil national question’ once
they reject any form of devolution be it the federal or any other to accommodate
Lanka’s cultural pluralism.
(thesundayleader 22 July 2012). Hence the NAP Sinhala solution is
politically incorrect when ‘it demands a particular community to forcefully
cohabit with the majority..without any space for political accommodation..more
so for minorities who claim geographical domination in certain areas (Tamil
homelands)’.
Instead Sinhala chauvinism is bent on altering the demographics to
erase the existing geographical domination that some minorities have that
protected their lives and identity when threatened in areas outside the North
and East. For this reason many Tamils like Prabhaharan believe that
uncompromising Sinhala chauvinism would never deliver justice to the Tamils out
to destroy the territorial pluralism to end ethnic tensions not political
autonomy.
Also the highly reputed independent intellectual Arundhadi Roy even
months before the Mullivaykal pointed out that the Lankan genocide under way was
causing ‘a colossal tragedy’(1 April 2009 in the Guardian). It did, the
Mullivaykal massacres occurred soon after.
A remedy for genocides is deterrence; the international community
holding Lanka accountable for its genocide crimes. The anti-Tamil prejudiced
South Block Delhi and its apologist Hariharan do not rate the Rajapakses’
massacres as a ‘colossal tragedy’ as Arundhati does and to readily join up with
the international community to bring Lanka accountable before the international
courts.
The outright prejudiced anti-Tamil views of Hariharan were analysed
by this author in ‘Some thoughts on LTTE’S military response by Hariharan – a
critique’ in Sulekha.com 4 August 2008. Hariharan’s two recent pieces refer to
‘the Tamil resistance (LTTE) in milder terms as ‘affected communities (not the
customary reference to them as ‘terrorists’) rising up to fight their
states’.
This is a change for the better perhaps out of sensitivity for the
sufferings of the Eelam Tamils but clearly to alleviate the pain Delhi endures
in explaining to the world why the 13th Amendment along with the 1987 Indo-SL
Accord it promised to the Tamil is held in limbo and possibly destined to ‘the
archives’. The Lankan obduracy is most painful to both Delhi and Hariharan.
Delhi divesting the influence of the South Block activists from Indo-Lanka
policy making in becoming a necessity.
Hariharan’s analysis of the events leading to the Indian
interventions in Bangladesh in 1971 and in Lanka 1987, referred to events that
‘preceded by the affected communities rising up to fight their state
forces and omits the use of the much maligned word ‘terrorism’.
He refers to the Tamil resistance (LTTE) in the same breath he
refers to the respected Mukti Bahani fighting oppression. Hariharan does not
peddle South Block Delhi’s stock in trade ‘sovereignty’ or ‘close friendship’
platitudes to explain India’s reluctance to intervene in Lanka but reminds
Indians that ‘ ..India has sent a strong message in power assertion in
South Asia and the nation applauded the achievement. .. The Indo-SL Accord sent
home a strong message to all stakeholders; India would not ignore strategic
developments in its close proximity in Sri Lanka, and would support the
minority demand for an equitable deal. The most significant achievement of
the Accord was the introduction of the 13th Amendment.. which
provided a degree of autonomy to the newly created provinces?
And it still exists as the only constitutional tool available to
redress Tamil grievances…The Accord failed to achieve its strategic goals in
full. The devolution of powers to the Tamil minority promised in the
Accord retains the potential as an instrument of Indian influence in
the region..What Indiadoes not have is a dynamic national
leadership.’
Hariharan has to be applauded here for reminding others
India’s power assertion experience to produce a salutary effect especially when
the Rajapakse appeasing South Block captive Sonia leadership is feeling the
political earth beneath moving under for UPA Delhi. Dehi’s inaction on
implementing the 13th Amendment is bound to continue to as Lanka
plays truant with a meek and corrupt Delhi that most Indians now detest.
That Hariharan downplays the sovereignty logic in the context of
India’s power assertion for Delhi’s failure to intervene when the massive
Mullivaykal massacres occurred in May 2009 suggests Delhi’s serious concerns
over the damage caused by the Narayanan/Menon ‘in the loop’ advisory/ supportive
roles that led to the massacres.
The Rajapakses play hard ball to test the extent to which Delhi
would go to save the Delhi trio and consequently in its own image on account of
the involvement (direct or indirect) in the notorious Mullivaykal massacres.
Lanka’s snub by refusing to implement the ‘made in India’
13th Amendment amounts to Lanka playing brinkmanship against Delhi.
South Block/Sonia club worked scrupulously to restrain Delhi from censuring the
perpetrators (the Rajapakses) for the massacres purely to avoid Indian public
pressure building up not merely in TN but India wide for Indian
intervention.
Accordingly Hariharan is forced to blame the absence of a ‘dynamic
national leadership’ for the colossal tragedy to occur under Delhi’s
eyes. Indraji would have intervened in Lanka many years earlier, saved the
massacred Tamils and created an Eelam state in the same manner she created a
neat and clean Bangladesh. Even in post May 2009 the leadership in Delhi fell
far short of Indraji’ caliber.
Rajapakses is taking advantage of Delhi’s weakness stalling in
implementing the Indo-SL Accord including the 13th Amendment to
create the present impasse. Delhi has good grounds to suspect the role Menon
played when he visited Colombo last.
Eelam Tamils including perhaps Prabhaharan would have trusted the
13thAmendment feeling safe under an Indraji regime (not under South
Block manipulated Rajiv) acting to protect the lives of Tamils.
Hariharan’s yearning over the absence of a dynamic national
leadership condemns the present meek leadership and obligated to appease the
Rajapakses preventing India from returning to ‘power assertion’; that is
a legitimate expectation of patriotic Indians.
Sinhala leaders and apologists have not reacted kindly to
Hariharan’s recent thinking. In following the Rajapakse line, in a piece ‘It is
time to abrogate the 13th Amendment’ in the Nation.lk an apologist
quotes Hariharan expensively to ridicule Delhi’s professions of friendship
(sugar coated silly terms) to mask Delhi’s intervention as an instrument
of Indian influence in the region..“India lovers have bent backwards to tell Sri
Lankans that India is a friend and was here to help us.’ Instead Hariharan
concedes that it was not a love affair, but one informed by strategic
goals.
“Hariharan laments that the Accord failed ..the devolution of powers
to the Tamil minority promised in the Accord remains unfulfilled despite the
13th Amendment . But the Accord retains the potential as an
instrument of Indian influence in the region’. According to the Sinhala
apologists the 13th Amendment helped to legitimize Eelam
mythmaking, turning randomly drawn provincial boundaries into territories of
a fictional homeland.
‘The debate should not be about 13 plus or minus, but when (and
not if) the 13th will be abrogated. ..Fiction doesn’t help. The
13thAmendment caused blood to flow. Our children need not bleed to
keep alive that discredited document and certainly not to satisfy India’s
strategic interests. China uses this line of argument in its border disputes
with India claiming that the randomly drawn boundary lines are not real
boundaries between India and China. Wars were fought over these boundaries and
blood flowed in consequence.
The Rajapakses’ open and subtle wars are about erasing the ‘Tamil
homelands’. Apologists like Dayan Jayatilleke a Ph.D from Griffith, Brisbane in
his Critique of Political Fundamentalism in Sri Lanka uses semantics to masks
his lackluster intellectual credentials and strongly argues against any
accommodation with Tamils, especially over the mythical Tamil homelands. P Ivan
claiming (Delhi 13 Plus that the Tamil homelands are a myth’ that the myth
behind Tamil homelands makes all the debate about devolution and the
13th Amendment a futile exercise. With such obstinacy from the Lankan
side is Hariharan or Delhi wasting their time without asserting its power
position?
Delhi’s and Hariharan’s enigma, the absence of progress on the
13th Amendment more so after Delhi invested heavily on the 13
Amendment (ExpressBizz 29 Jun 2012) promising a political solution to the Eelam
and TN Tamils. On the basis of Delhi’s promise the South Block trio visited
Colombo frequently claiming to protect the lives of Tamils but in the end they
it turned out to be plots to support SL genocide using massacres to weaken the
Tamils.
Narayanan’s ‘no fire zone’ was a death trap to kill tens of
thousands civilian Tamils. Hariharan has almost given up on the
13th Amendment with an outspoken Sonali Waduge (a close associate of'
'tom tom' Raman) in ‘How India and Sri Lanka Handle the Headache of Tamil Eelam’
in Eurasia Review June 30 to make an outrageous statement ‘No country treats the
natives of another country (who came with Cholas/Pandyan armies as far back as
the 5th century) TN/India that invaded (over a thousand five hundred
years ago) as equals’.
She further states ‘If India claims to have chipped in to help in
the final stages of the war in 2009..the plan has everything to do with choking
the Sinhalese leadership into eventually annexing Sri Lanka on the pretext of
looking after the welfare of the Tamils.’ Do these words express the deep
feelings of friendship that Lanka has for Indians; words that Manmohan and S M
Krishna shamelessly repeat as mantras to the Indians.’
For a fuller discussion on Delhi’s dilemma, readers are encouraged
to read the authors ‘Does Delhi needs to appease Sri Lanka any further..’ in
groundreport July 08. The fear that all Tamils and the majority of Indians have
is the pitifully meek UPA Delhi flagging the irrelevant 13 Amendment allowing
Lanka keen on buying time to plant sufficient Sinhalese to deprive the Tamils of
their homelands and ‘do nothing’ to redress the Tamils core fears; which is
their lives, livelihood, Tamil homelands and identity.
Hariharan mourning the absence of a dynamic national leadership at
this juncture to save the 13th Amendment also calls for India’s power
assertion in the region. In effect he is yearning for a change in leadership
away from UPA for India to go back to its assertive leadership role. The UPA has
failed on all fronts to bring India to such a parlous state that the puny Lanka
rubs it nose at Delhi all the time.
First published here: groundreport.com/World/WILL-THE-UNHRC-INITIATIVES-END-THE-LANKAN-GENOCIDE/2947502
Special thanks to GroundReport.com