Peace for the World World ! Your War Our Lives
The Dalai Lama
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)
Back to 500BC.
Wednesday, March 31, 2021
Photograph: US and Chinese delegations in Alaska this month.
Article Author:
Earlier this month the United States and China publicly clashed, capturing global attention as the first face-to-face talks between the two superpowers since the Biden administration came into power, descended into a chaotic opening day.
The meeting in Alaska saw US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken exchange sharp words with Yang Jiechi, director of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission Office of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). “As US and Chinese officials landed in Anchorage this week, the temperature was well below freezing,” said the Financial Times. “But when they sat across the table at the Hotel Captain Cook, another brutal chill hit the room.”
What was supposed to begin as a short opening exchange, descended into more than an hour of traded barbs.
“Our administration is committed to leading with diplomacy to advance the interests of the United States and to strengthen the rules-based international order,” began Blinken.
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said the US was “particularly proud of the work that we’ve done to revitalize our alliances and partnerships, the foundation of our foreign policy,” pointing to US President Biden’s hosting of the Quad leaders’ summit with India, Australia and Japan. The summit “spoke to the can-do spirit of the world’s democracies and committed to realize the vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific,” he added.
Yang hit back in a lengthy opening statement, declaring “it is important for the United States to change its own image and to stop advancing its own democracy in the rest of the world”. “On some regional issues, I think the problem is that the United States has exercised long-arm jurisdiction and suppression and overstretched the national security through the use of force or financial hegemony, and this has created obstacles for normal trade activities,” he added.
The exchange made global headlines. The AP reported,
“At the Alaska meeting, Blinken affirmed U.S. solidarity with its allies in pushing back against China’s increasing efforts to spread its authoritarian mode of government through political and economic pressure. Yang responded with a list of Chinese complaints, accusing Washington of hypocrisy for criticizing Beijing on human rights and other issues at a time when the United States itself has been roiled by domestic discontent.”
The Guardian reported Blinken and Sullivan “said the Biden administration and its allies were united in pushing back against China’s increasing authoritarianism and assertiveness at home and abroad”.
“In response, Yang angrily demanded that the US stop pushing its own version of democracy at a time when it was dealing with discontent among its own population,” it added.
Familiar names for Sri Lanka
Whilst the exchange and US-China relations were debated in the international press, the meeting was also closely watched in Sri Lanka. Both names are not unfamiliar to the island.
In our profile on the US Secretary of State in December, we outlined Antony Blinken’s previous extensive comments on Sri Lanka.
Speaking at the US Holocaust Museum in 2010, Blinken spoke on Sri Lanka, stating that there were “thousands and probably tens of thousands of civilians killed in the final months of the war”. “Holding accountable those responsible is necessary… and it will speed national reconciliation,” he added.
Following the defeat of Mahinda Rajapaksa at the 2015 presidential election, Blinken hailed it as the “most successful election in your country’s history”. “I believe it is time for your country to return to its rightful place as a respected member of the international community,” he continued.
Blinken at the UN Human Rights Council in 2016
And in 2016, Blinken told the UN Human Rights Council that the global body “has an obligation and a mandate to shine a bright light on grievous violations of human rights and help hold perpetrators accountable” – a speech that rings even more poignant 5 years on, as yet another resolution on accountability was passed by the global body this week.
Since his remarks, however, almost no progress on accountability has been made. Rajapaksa has returned to office as Sri Lanka’s prime minister, with his younger brother and former defence secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa now president. Both are accused of directing mass atrocities.
.jpg)
Yang with Gotabaya Rajapaksa in Colombo, October 2020.
Yang Jiechi on the other hand is a figure that will be more familiar to Sri Lanka’s current ruling regime.
Yang visited Sri Lanka just a few months ago as part of a high-level delegation to the island, meeting with both Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Mahinda Rajapaksa, which sought to foster closer relations between Beijing and Colombo. This was not his first visit to Sri Lanka he noted, recalling an earlier trip to the island some 35 years ago.
“Being the first-ever Chinese visit in the South Asian region, since the global coronavirus epidemic, the visit is expected to strengthen cooperation between Sri Lanka and China,” said a statement before the visit. According to an official Chinese press release, Yang said “China and Sri Lanka are good friends and partners who always support and help each other firmly on issues concerning each other's core interests”.
As an indicator of how close relations between the two states may be, the statement highlighted the “important consensus reached by the heads of two states”, Xi Jinping and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who had spoken directly earlier in the year.
“China will continue to maintain close high-level exchanges and consolidate the political trust,” the statement continued, outlining several different areas of "long-term" co-operation.
Meanwhile, Gotabaya Rajapaksa claimed, "China has been a long-standing friend who supported Sri Lanka irrespective of the government in power”. “China extensively supported us to defeat terrorism,” he added, alluding to the military offensive he led which killed tens of thousands of Tamil civilians and has now been the subject of several UN resolutions. Yang meanwhile pledged to defend Sri Lanka at the global body against resolutions that aimed to bring about justice for the crimes committed during that offensive. “Bilateral relations reached a higher level following the end of the armed conflict,” said Rajapaksa.
After the visit, China announced a $90 million grant for Sri Lanka, with more financial assistance for Sri Lanka's straggling economy reportedly on the way.
Closer ties with Beijing
The clash between the two diplomats in Alaska comes at a particularly pivotal juncture for Sri Lanka. Not only has Colombo captured global attention for its refusal to prosecute for previous atrocities and for the rapidly declining space for human rights on the island, but the Rajapaksa regime has also actively sought to foster closer ties with Beijing.
Pompeo in Sri Lanka last year.
Just weeks after Yang’s visit, then US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also travelled to Sri Lanka, where he took aim at China’s relationship with Sri Lanka, stating that Beijing’s interest in the region “is quite a contrast”.
“We see from bad deals, violations of sovereignty and lawlessness on land and sea that the Chinese Communist Party is a predator and the United States comes in a different way,” said Pompeo in Colombo. “We come as a friend and as a partner.”
The message may not have been entirely well received. Not only did the Chinese embassy in Sri Lanka react to the visit by posting memes on its official Twitter account, but the day before Pompeo’s arrival there was also a protest outside the US Embassy in Colombo by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and several Sinhala Buddhist monks. Meanwhile, the elder Mahinda Rajapaksa reportedly snubbed a meeting with the senior US official, whilst other Sri Lankan officials were left seething over the US focus on human rights. “It is not for outsiders to tell Sri Lankans how to run their country,” a senior Sri Lankan official was quoted as stating.
Meanwhile, Sri Lanka’s foreign secretary expressed his own concerns about US presence in the region – pointing specifically to the Quad military alliance that the Biden administration is attempting to revive.
“Do we really need a quad?” asked Foreign Secretary, and accused war criminal, Jayanth Colombage. “We are observing the rise of Quad as an exclusive military alliance. That is the problem.”
'America is back'
Biden at the White House in March 2021
“The United States relationship with China will be competitive where it should be, collaborative where it can be, adversarial where it must be,” began Blinken’s opening remarks at Alaska. “Our intent is to be direct about our concerns, direct about our priorities, with the goal of a more clear-eyed relationship between our countries moving forward.”
“We do not seek conflict,” added Sullivan. “But we welcome stiff competition and we will always stand up for our principles.”
Though the United States stressed it is not seeking confrontation with Beijing, the new administration has repeatedly spoken on how it will look to lead global order. “I’m sending a clear message to the world,” said Biden earlier this year. “America is back.”
With the new US administration has reiterating its commitment to tackling the rise of authoritarianism around the world, the events of Sri Lanka over the past year will not have gone amiss. Since being elected to office in 2019, Gotabaya Rajapaksa has steadily increased the already rampant militarisation of the island, particularly in the Tamil North-East, clamped down on critics and passed constitutional amendments that rolled back checks on his power as president. Concerns have been echoed by the UN human rights chief, who said the “seeds of violence” were being sown in Sri Lanka. “Sri Lanka’s experience illustrates the global trends,” said Freedom House late last year.
Though the US president himself spoke of the Chinese premier’s autocratic leanings, he spoke of “stiff competition”, not conflict, with China. “We’re going to reestablish our alliances,” he told reporters last week. “And I’ve been very clear with [Xi Jinping], it’s not anti-Chinese.”
Biden went on to state,
“Look, I predict to you, your children or grandchildren are going to be doing their doctoral thesis on the issue of who succeeded: autocracy or democracy? Because that is what is at stake, not just with China.”
“It is clear, absolutely clear — and most of the scholars I dealt with at Penn agree with me around the country — that this is a battle between the utility of democracies in the 21st century and autocracies.”
"That’s what’s at stake here. We’ve got to prove democracy works."
Address issues posed by Geneva togetherax
By Jehan Perera-2021/03/30
So far, it appears that the implications of the resolution on Sri Lanka passed at the UN Human Rights Council last week against the Sri Lankan government’s objections, have been taken with a pinch of salt. Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena’s reaction to the passage of the resolution by a 22-11 margin was to take note that 14 countries had abstained and, therefore, a majority of the countries had not given their support to the resolution. Two of the countries that abstained, India and Japan, are powerful and important ones to Sri Lanka, as indeed they are in the world, which makes them well suited to play a bridge-building role in the future within the UN Human Rights Council. The relative equanimity with which the passage of the resolution was received within the country as a whole would be on account of the upbeat assessment of the situation by the government. The majority of the population who voted the government into power continue to feel that it is looking after the national interest where this issue is concerned.
However, there is a difference between domestic politics and international realities. The fact that there is no immediate adverse fallout from the resolution needs to be considered carefully. There are three serious problems that can arise in the future. First, the resolution specifies that Sri Lanka will be on the agenda of the UNHRC for the next one and a half years. As this body meets three times a year, this means that Sri Lanka will be under regular scrutiny by the international community. It is liable to suffer reputational damage if critical observations against it are being constantly made which can impact negatively on the country’s attractiveness as a location for economic development projects. As the government is focused on economic development it would be in the national interest to make the Geneva process a constructive one that gives confidence to potential investors about the future of the country.
SERIOUS PROBLEMS
Second, the previous UNHRC resolutions on Sri Lanka were limited to getting the Sri Lankan government to act in accordance with the recommendations of the international community. Even when the last resolution, which was co-sponsored by the former government, had accepted a role for foreign judges, it was the Sri Lankan government that was to be in charge of the special courts. The onus was on Sri Lanka to be the party to act and to be in charge. However, the present resolution gives the power to act and to be in charge also to the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. The significance of the resolution is enhanced by the fact that it empowers the High Commissioner’s office to look also at the present and ongoing situation in the country and not limit itself to the issue of war time violations and immediate post-war violations only.
This resolution gives the High Commissioner’s office the authority to set up a special unit to gather information and evidence on human rights violations taking place in Sri Lanka. That is to “strengthen the capacity of the Office of the High Commissioner to collect, consolidate, analyse and preserve information and evidence and to develop possible strategies for future accountability processes for gross violations of human rights or serious violations of international humanitarian law in Sri Lanka, to advocate for victims and survivors, and to support relevant judicial and other proceedings, including in Member States, with competent jurisdiction” (operative Clause 6) and a budget of USD 2.8 million to implement it.
The possibility of punitive action is implicit in the fact that the recently passed resolution welcomes the report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. The report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, which was released in late January this year, set out facts from a perspective that indicates that Sri Lanka is heading in the direction of contracting space for political freedom, weakening of checks and balances in governance and increased conflict between ethnic and religious communities. The recommendations given in the UN High Commissioner’s report range from freezing of assets, travel bans and targeted sanctions against public officials suspected of human rights violations and referral of such cases to international tribunals including the International Criminal Court and an invitation to individual countries to take action under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
CONSTRUCTIVE EFFORTS
Third, if Sri Lanka is seen as not complying with the resolution, another sanction could be the loss of the European Union’s GSP Plus tariff concession currently given to Sri Lankan exporters. As the EU is Sri Lanka’s largest export market, the denial of the GSP Plus would have a negative impact on the country’s economy and on employment opportunities. When Sri Lanka lost its GSP Plus concession in 2010 due to allegations of human rights, it resulted in a loss of export revenues of an estimated Rs 150-250 billion till its reinstatement in 2017. Especially in a context in which there is an economic downturn in the aftermath of the first and second waves of the Covid pandemic, the loss of the GSP Plus needs to be strenuously resisted. One of the conditions of granting the GSP Plus concession is that human rights violations should cease and the Prevention of Terrorism Act should be replaced with a counter terrorism law that is in conformity with international standards.
None of these worst case scenarios need to come about if the government looks at the recommendations in the resolution and makes a good faith effort to implement them. In the run up to the vote on Sri Lanka in Geneva, a European ambassador said that regardless of the way the vote went, their relations with the Sri Lankan government would continue as before. This was followed by a discussion in which a balanced assessment was made of the problems of democratic politics worldwide where nationalist forces are getting increasingly powerful. In Europe, for instance, there are political parties that espouse nationalism against ethnic and religious minorities who are seen as interlopers. Those from the international community who are self-critical will have an appreciation about Sri Lanka’s own challenges of governance.
Sri Lanka’s encounter with nationalism has been central to its existence as a democratic polity. Sri Lanka has not been able to relegate nationalism to the margins as Western countries have done, and which many East European countries have still failed to do. This may explain the European ambassador’s affirmation of a continued constructive engagement with the Sri Lankan government regardless of the outcome of the UNHRC resolution on Sri Lanka. But the best answer will come if the government, together with the Opposition meets the Geneva challenge. It is encouraging that leader of the main Opposition party, Sajith Premadasa, has made this constructive offer. Similar offers by leaders of the ethnic and religious minority parties and an acceptance of the same by the government are called for. We need to reform our polity to ensure fairness in governance not so much for the sake of Geneva or future Geneva, but to be at peace with ourselves to develop our country and its people.
UNHRC Resolution On Sri Lanka Has Failed To Uphold Justice: Wiggy
 |
MARCH 30, 2021
“The UN Human Rights Council resolution on Sri Lanka has failed to uphold justice,” says Jaffna District Parliamentarian Justice C.V. Wigneswaran.
Responding to a question asked by a journalist he said: “It is disappointing that the resolution failed to prescribe any clear cut measures to ensure justice and human rights in Sri Lanka. In this way, the international community has given Sri Lanka yet another chance and still more time to amend its behaviour, despite Sri Lanka having withdrawn its earlier commitment to cooperate with the UNHRC.
“The resolution has directed the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to collect, preserve and analyse evidence for future war crimes’ investigations. This is to be welcomed. But it remains to be seen how this will unfold.
“My concern is that in the two years given to Sri Lanka, the government will commit serious human rights violations against our people. The same night India abstained from voting in Geneva, Sri Lanka Navy arrested 52 Indian fishermen. This is Sri Lanka’s way of retaliating. In particular I am worried that our lands will be plundered. Already organizations and individuals have been branded as persona non grata. Next step would be harassing those said to have had connection or communication with those in such organizations or those individuals so named.
“I need hardly say that the member countries of the Human Rights Council would be responsible for the dangers that will befall the Tamil people during these two years. They are responsible for the safety of our people. Unless they show vigilance you cannot control the Sri Lankan government now under an Ex Army officer, going berserk.”
Read More
UNHRC resolution is a tragedy The Government’s reaction is a tragicomedy
30 March 2021
It is a fool’s errand to make-believe that the UN Human Rights Council Resolution titled, “Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka”, and adopted last week would help promoting human rights in the country.
It is unlikely that the most vocal backers of the resolution think that the resolution would serve that. Instead, for the UK, Canada, and other members of the Western European and other Group and the United States that had returned to the fold under the Joe Biden administration, the resolution was one way of taking a swipe at the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government after an uneasy relationship.
For the Tamil diaspora groups, many of which were run by the apologists and accessories of the defeated LTTE, who lobbied for the resolution, it was sort of a consolation prize for losing the separatist war.
The resolution was primarily built on a report delivered by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet. Ms Bachelet, who is more likely to give ear to Yasmin Sooka of the International Truth and Justice Project than the government of Sri Lanka, presented a damning report. She nonetheless raised worthwhile concerns on the increasing militarisation of the civilian bureaucracy, politicisation of independent institutions, including the judiciary under the 20th amendment, discriminatory policies against religious and cultural rights of ethnic minorities, political obstruction of investigations into some of the high profile crimes in the past, surveillance of the civil society activists and the shrinking democratic space.
As much as those concerns deserve attention, they are not yet a full-blown eventuality. This is also not a situation unique to Sri Lanka; from Modi’s India to Bolsanaro’s Brazil and Trump’s America, countries have been experiencing momentary ups and downs of democracy. And the alarmist presumptions alone would not warrant a UNHRC resolution.
Ms Bachelet however used these concerns as a pretext to revive a previous bid to punish the Sri Lankan security forces for defeating one of the most egregious terrorist groups. Much of the allegations of war crime, in the form of deliberate shelling of hospitals and civilians, and a back of envelope number of civilian casualties are a retelling of the LTTE propaganda. Marzuki Darusman and his peers who were denied a visa to visit Sri Lanka, spoke to the relatives of dead terrorists and the Tiger rump in the West, and concocted a report that provided credence to those inflated numbers.
The Sri Lankan government at the time rejected those claims. But, with Mahinda Rajapaksa having turned the Sri Lankan state into his fiefdom through the 18th amendment, a politicised judiciary and a rubberstamp parliament, the government lacked the moral high grounds to make others believe its version of the story.
As the younger brother, Gotabaya has taken the same road, under the 20th amendment, Ms Bachelet exploited the structural weakness of the Sri Lankan government and its international standing.
However, would the UNHRC resolution serve the interest of Sri Lanka? Hardly.
Instead, Ms Bachelet had managed to burn bridges. In that sense, the UNHRC resolution is a tragedy. It serves no one, not even the geopolitical interests of the major powers that supported it.
However, the government’s reaction to it need not become a tragicomedy. But, it was what had been unfolding during the past week. Soon after the resolution was passed, the foreign minister Dinesh Gunawardene, who said it was illegal, added, voting was ‘ a great victory ’ for the country. His logic is as skewed as it can get. He observed that only 22 countries out of 47 have voted in favour of the resolution. Those who had abstained were 14 countries. Thus, by his implication, more countries, (11 voted against and 14 abstained) supported Sri Lanka, than those who supported the resolution.
Not to be outgunned, State Minister of Money Market Ajith Nivard Cabraal number crunched with an infographic and tweeted “The 11 countries that voted AGAINST the #UNHRC resolution represent 43% of the popn of the UNHRC members: 14 with 39% of the popn ABSTAINED: and 22 with only 18% of the popn said YES. #SriLanka says THANK YOU to the 25 nations with 82% of the popn who didn’t say Yes. #lka “
This charade did not end there. An English newspaper owned by a businessman affiliated to the government reported that the ‘Government is planning to protect military officials from international prosecution through the introduction of laws that would purportedly grant military officials international immunity.”
How does Sri Lanka make laws that are enforceable in other countries was not explained. The fact of the matter is that immunity provisions even adopted to local law would not have the slightest effect if any country chooses to pursue universal jurisdiction. Worst still, in such an eventuality, the domestic immunity would further strengthen the calls to prosecute the alleged perpetrators in foreign courts.
The UNHRC resolution is a milestone of this government’s serial failure of a foreign policy. But, it seems to have only hastened the race to the bottom.
Sri Lanka’s predicament is a classic cautionary tale as to why foreign policy should not be pursued with an eye on achieving domestic political calculations. It was what Gotabaya Rajapaksa did when his government withdrew the co-sponsorship of the previous UNHRC resolution which was supported by his predecessor. The UNP -led Yahapalanaya government, though was not as forceful enough in manipulating domestic public opinion as the Rajapaksas are, were smart in their dealing with the world. The allegations of war crimes were a major distraction and irritant in the country’s foreign relations. By co-sponsoring the resolution (30/1), the previous government kicked the can down the road. By Sri Lanka taking ownership of the collective effect, a once vocal international campaign was forced to a sideline. The Gotabaya Rajapaksa government consciously picked up and opened that can of worms. And, that thin brained decision now risks the Sri Lankan military personnel and perhaps civilian leaders being subjected to universal jurisdiction in some countries.
How the government can come out of this predicament is not clear. What is clear though is a majority of its interlocutors lacked the commonsense foreign policy awareness to navigate these challenges. Their overreaction would do further damage to Sri Lanka’s relations with the West and potentially provoke India at one point.
A potential economic fallout, if the situation further deteriorates can not be overlooked. Nor can the Sri Lankan economy withstand such pressure. Their racist dog whistlings have marginalised the minorities and could potentially rekindle the ugly side of minority extremism in this country, which has done more harm than any of the Sinhala Buddhist majoritarian rhetoric that Sri Lanka’s Western friends fret about.
This government has put Sri Lanka on a dangerous trajectory. It should do whatever to extricate the country from this predicament.
Follow @RangaJayasuriya on Twiiter
Amnesty International’s Questionable Approach to Human Rights?
 |
What is this shift in approach that Power is talking about?
by Dr Laksiri Fernando -March 29, 2021
Amnesty International (AI) was the first to express its jubilation, among the international NGOs, when the UNHRC resolution was passed against Sri Lanka on 23 March. That is no surprise as from its inception the Amnesty has characterized their main approach as ‘naming and shaming.’ This is like ‘stoning and caning’ the perceived enemies. Who has unashamedly unleashed this approach this time against Sri Lanka is Hilary Power, Amnesty’s representative to the UN in Geneva (‘Sri Lanka: Landmark UN Resolution,’ AI, 23 March 2021).
Naming and Shaming?
Amnesty may be unaware or just ignoring the studies conducted by independent scholars about the counterproductive nature of these approaches particularly to culturally and religiously different countries, without employing a balanced and a constructive way of engagement. The latter is called human rights diplomacy. Jack Snyder was one among thecriticson ‘naming and shaming.’As he said in a study on ‘Backlash Against Naming and Shaming,’
“Neither activists nor the scholars who study them have paid much attention to the emotional dynamics of the targeted group, and in particular to the emotions of shame and shaming, nor to the sociological mechanisms that underpin the politics of status and status competition.”
Snyder drew his conclusions based on political sociology/psychology. However, this is not only about psychology, but against the whole spirit of human rights. This is exactly what happened in Myanmar even after the military opted to hold elections and form coalition governments with Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD (National League for Democracy) since 2008. The naming and shaming went on even against Suu Kyi and the result was a terrible backlash today even against her.
It is possible that these Western advocates are trying their best, knowingly, or unknowingly, to turn Sri Lanka into another Myanmar. But I hope that Sri Lanka’s democratic and state institutions are resilient and firmer, the leaders are sensible, and the people in Sri Lanka would not get caught up in this trap the Western governments and NGOs are placing on them. I am talking based on my research and experience. What Sri Lanka should do is to campaign firmly within the UNHRC and the UN against these approaches, exposing the motives and deception of the Western countries and western dominated NGOs.
Vindictiveness
Hilary Power of Amnesty has talked as a colonial madam declaring the following. “This is a significant move by the Human Rights Council, which signals a shift in approach by the international community. Years of support and encouragement to Sri Lanka to pursue justice at the national level achieved nothing. This resolution should send a clear message to perpetrators of past and current crimes that they cannot continue to act with impunity.”
What is this shift in approach that Power is talking about? It is very clear that it is about the ‘interference in internal affairs.’ It is an absolute lie to talk about ‘years of support and encouragement.’ On the contrary, it was maximalist demands year after year that discouraged accountability and national reconciliation. Why then the same policy of ‘support and encouragement’ allegedly continued if nothing achieved at the national level during the last 12 years?
What are the ‘current crimes’ that she is talking about? She should listen to Lord Nasby if she cannot believe the colored people. As an independent academic, I believe that her attitudes are conditioned by ‘white racism’ believing that Sri Lankan people cannot understand human rights. These are the same people or her predecessors that supported and encouraged LTTE terrorism in the name of human rights.
Exaggerations and Misinterpretations
In the first sentence of the statement, it was completely wrong to characterize the war as a ‘30-year civil conflict.’ It was a terrorist war against a legitimate government and people in the country. The LTTE killed not only the Sinhalese or the government soldiers but also the Tamil innocents and their intellectuals. I lost some of the close friends and relatives. They were not killed by the soldiers or the police. Then elected governments had every legitimate right to fight against terrorism and this was required by the constitution.
One major defect in the international human rights system today is that it does not have a clear definition or understanding of terrorism. They are clueless or complicit.
Has Amnesty ever written against terrorism in Sri Lanka or elsewhere? Hilary Power should show us any evidence. Why cannot the Amnesty characterize terrorism as a human rights violation? Perhaps they were funded by some terrorist organizations worldwide. They claim they have seven million members who fund their activities. To my information Amnesty is significantly funded by the British government discretely. I have been to the Amnesty international office in London in late 1980s. They had their own regional scabbles with Africans that time.
I have also been to the Amnesty meetings in Sydney in early 1990s when I was doing my PhD research on human rights. From one meeting to the other people were changing while few were running an office on a paid basis. I also wrote to the Amnesty office in London asking whether they had made any statement on the Burmese coup in 1962. Because one of my concerned countries was Burma. They wrote back saying ‘No’ they were working only on death penalty! From amnesty to capital punishment, now they are working on amnesty to terrorists it seems. Because Amnesty type human rights advocacy is a big business today.
Prior to the statement on “Sri Lanka: Landmark UN Resolution” there were two reports issued by the Amnesty International. One was dated 14 January 2021on “The UN Human Rights Council Must Step Up Efforts” in Sri Lanka and the other lengthy Report was in February, without a clear date, titled “Old Ghosts in New Garb: Sri Lanka’s Return to Fear.” When you go through these two reports and the Report by the so-called office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the contents, the language, recommendations, and even paragraphs are, more or less, the same.
Arrogance and Nonsense
Perhaps the Amnesty or Hilary Power does not know what they are talking aboutas follows. “We urge Sri Lanka to engage constructively with the OHCHR, to implement the recommendations of the report and to allow full and unfettered access to the country. Failing this, the Human Rights Council may take more robust action, including the establishment of an independent accountability mechanism, said Hilary Power”(Colombo Telegraph, 23 March 2021).
Perhaps the British colonial arrogance is behind her. Who is she to ‘urge’ Sri Lanka to engage with the OHCHR? She also ‘urge’ Sri Lanka to ‘allow full and unfettered access to the country.” To do what? She should know the colonial history of the country before talking about human rights today. She is also trying to blackmail the country by saying “Failing this, the Human Rights Council may take more robust action.”
Recommendations
I recommend the Sri Lanka government to completely prohibit anyone from the OHCHR to step into the country.
To campaign within the members of the UNHRC and the UN member countries in general to change the lopsided human rights approaches of the West and to promote human rights with human duties worldwide. To prohibit or limit the dubious organizations like Amnesty International influencing the activities of the UNHRC.
To strengthen the national security without allowing anyone to undermine, challenge or subvert the country’s independence, sovereignty and integrity as guaranteed in the UN Charter.
To promote human rights and human duties among the citizens of Sri Lanka through education based on the international conventions and covenants, and the traditions and customs of the country.
To complain to the UN Security Council and the General Assembly regarding the illegal nature of the UNHRC resolution and allow the country to carry forward its own processes of promoting accountability, reconciliation and human rights and report to the UNHRC only on a periodic basis.
Human rights: Solving two major HR issues with UNHRC assistance
The balance three stages of the Moragahkanda project need to be completed simultaneously along with the Upper Elahera Canal tunnel in four years. The countries such as UK, USA, Germany and Canada who sponsored the UNHRC motion in support of the Tamil community could be requested to fund the project
Tuesday, 30 March 2021
Last Tuesday, United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) accepted allegations of human rights violations against Sri Lanka, brought by a group of Western countries. Under the resolution, Sri Lanka is expected to submit proposals to address the human rights issues, to be monitored by the Council.
The real reason for the allegations was the jealousy over Gotabaya who defeated LTTE, while mighty America failed to win the war with Vietnam. Japan, India and Muslim countries stayed neutral from the vote. Japan a longstanding friend was hurt by the abrupt cancellation of the Light Rail Transit Project under progress. Also, East Container Terminal in Colombo Port promised to India and Japan by the previous Government under an MOU, was cancelled. The compulsory cremation of corona-infected dead bodies violated Muslim religious beliefs and the proposed ban on burka created serious concerns among Middle-East countries.
Above was the result of poor handling of international relations, sensitive issues, relationships, project evaluation and the failure to maintain good and balanced relations keeping with claimed non-aligned policy. But poor knowledge of politicians, foreign office officials and senior government staff, the result of poor education system.
How did this happen?
History of education
Locals were fortunate to enjoy free education while under British rule, presented by the Minister for Education C.W.W. Kannangara and passed by the State Council in 1944.
The bill recommended that:
The mother tongue be used as the medium of instruction in primary schools.
Education be free from kindergarten to university.
English should be taught in all schools from Standard III.
He emphasised that everyone should learn English in order to operate in the modern world. When the country received independence in 1948, the administration and education were of extremely high standard. But British established proportionately more schools in the north ensuring a better education, allowing Tamils higher quantum in government service.
Human rights violations
Unknown or neglected by the UNHRC, most serious and longstanding human rights violations in the country, also neglected by the local politicians, resulting the present economic mess are:
First: Our education system ensures that children are separated on community basis, without allowing personal contact between communities. Also, higher education is extremely poor, depriving children of advancement in future life. The pathetic situation, the result of transfer of education to mother tongue, violates basic human rights and the situation continues irrespective of government changes.
Second: The country’s development is concentrated in the south, implemented with taxes collected from every citizen irrespective of location. The major project proposed to support northern citizens, Moragahakanda was deliberately modified, scope reduced and delayed by the southern politicians.
Above policies resulted in the 30-year-long war, it forced the poor towards low-level employment abroad, leading to a bankrupt country, forced to control imports and printing money for day-to-day survival.
Bandaranaike policies
S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike promised a Sinhala-based government to become the Prime Minister in 1956. He converted the administration and medium of instruction in schools to Swabasha from 1957. Although the transformation of administration helped the masses, the education system got disrupted, standards crashed, university degrees were no longer recognised abroad and the educated left the country.
Communal riots in 1983
With Sinhala-based administration, Tamil employees lost opportunities of advancement, new recruitments got curtailed. Opening of imports under JRJ government disrupted agricultural production in the north, resulting in the creation of LTTE.
On 23 July 1983, an attack by LTTE cadres in Jaffna caused the death of 13 Sri Lankan Army soldiers, led to massive riots in Colombo and spread to other parts as well, where mobs attacked, burned, looted and killed unarmed Tamils estimated over a thousand. Thereafter, communal issues escalated over the years, forcing large numbers of Tamils to leave the country. The reports from foreign embassy staff who witnessed the massacre, resulted in those who left the country being welcomed by Western countries.
Propaganda against Sri Lanka
The hardworking Tamil community, faithful to their superiors, saved their income, were able to gain stability and advance in their adopted countries. They educated their children on killings and loss of their property (exaggerated) in the hands of Sinhala rioters, but not the autocracies of Tamil militants. The Tamil diaspora fighting against Sri Lanka are members of this second generation.
International schools
International schools were in the country prior to 1980s, catering mostly to children of expatriate families. JVP riots in late 1980s resulted in long closure of government schools; parents found solace in private schools.
Today, private schools have multiplied throughout the country, resulting in two streams of education, government schools in Sinhala/Tamil and private schools in English. Students from private schools do not expect government employment, but of those who leave for further education abroad some fail to return.
Problems of Muslims
Earlier problems were between Sinhala and Tamils, now Muslims too have entered the problem scene. The separation of communities enabled extreme organisations from the Middle-East to enter the Muslim community claiming to educate religion; they are spreading a modified Islamic ideology aiming destruction; results were clearly seen with the Easter Sunday attack.
Indian intervention
When Indian Air Force dropped dhal to Jaffna, followed by signing the Indo-Lanka Peace Accord in 1987, training and arming LTTE, escalating ethnic war, made the Sinhala population look at India as an enemy. But when Rajiv Gandhi was killed by a woman LTTE cadre, the Indian government’s help to LTTE stopped. During the final years of war, India gave military and diplomatic support to defeat LTTE.
After the war, India assisted Sri Lanka with the rehabilitation of railway, housing for war victims, ambulances countrywide and educational scholarships. But for majority Sri Lankans, the forced 13th Amendment now disabled due to legal issues, continues to be a thorn in the flesh, with wounds opening up with occasional reminders from India.
Economic crash
When the British left, the country was economically healthy, with a positive foreign currency balance. But the rising population, increase in oil prices in the world market brought economic problems. With educated higher officials having left the country, the politicians were interested only in meeting day-to-day issues, and were unable to suggest alternate development models.
Meanwhile, Singapore received independence in 1959 with a population of Malay, Chinese and Tamil; Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew declared that parents were free to educate their children in their mother tongue, at home, but school education would be in English, leading to current status. The advancement was supported by educated politicians.
Moragahakanda waters to north
Maithreepala Senanayake born in Medavachchiya, studied in Jaffna and married to a Tamil girl was well-aware of problems of northerners. In 1971, he proposed Moragahakanda water be diverted and delivered to north of Medavachchiya. J.R. Jayawardana government implemented the Accelerated Mahaveli Project in 1977; generating power and delivering water to farmers all within six years. Moragahakanda project was expected immediately afterwards, having funding negotiated with Japanese; but communal violence in 1983 resulted in the project being postponed.
Moragahakanda project
The project was based on a dam on Amban Ganga, a major tributary of Mahaveli collecting water from Matale and Kurunegala (part) districts. Moragahakanda waters were expected to be delivered to the north, carried over a nearly 200 km long trans-basin canal terminating at Iranamadu Tank near Kilinochchi. The waters were to satisfy farmer needs of the driest region of the country.
Feeding Polonnaruwa reservoirs
After decades of delays Moragahakanda dam foundation was laid in 2007, construction commenced in 2011, water filling in 2016 and releasing stored water in January 2017, with President Sirisena in power.
Many centuries ago, Amban ganga had been diverted at Elahera, located 2 km downstream of Moragahakanda dam, conveying water to Minnerlya, Giritale and Kantale reservoirs. Angamedilla anicut also on Amban Ganga midway between Elahera and Manampitiya feeds Parakrama Samudraya with a 24-mile-long canal.
In addition, 50-mile-long Minipe Yoda Ela, carries Mahaveli waters for irrigation and finally merges with Amban Ganga downstream of Angamedilla anicut. Thus, Polonnaruwa paddies are fed with the most comprehensive irrigation system in the country. But President Sirisena was only concerned about supplying water to Polonnaruwa farmers and neglected Moragahakanda.
Moragahakanda waters to north
The project carrying Moragahakanda waters to north is expected completion under 3 Phases.
Phase 1
The Upper Elahera Canal, 65.5 km canal conveying 974 MCM (million cubic meters) of water annually northwards from Moragahakanda reservoir terminating at Yakalla (south of Anuradhapura) and trifurcate delivering water to existing Huruluwewa on Yan Oya (128 MCM), Manankattiya/Mahakanadarawa Reservoirs (159 MCM) and NCP canal (640 MCM).
Phase 2
The first section of North Central Province Canal (NCPC) Project, commencing from Yakalla, extending 30 km northwards to Kahatagasdigiliya.
Also, pumping of 240 MCM of Mahaveli water at Kalinga Nuwara to Angamedilla. The water will supplement irrigation needs of Minneriya, Giritale, Kaudulla tanks terminating at Kantale tank.
Phase 3
Water supply to north, the canal from Kahatagasdigiliya extended to Chemmadukulum via Kabitigollawa; the 92 km long canal would flow into Kanakaran Aru delivering water to Iranamadu tank.
The NCP canal will also issue irrigation water to Pavatkulam located south of Vauniya with 30 MCM, Parangi Aru passing through Omanthi and to Pali Aru both in Vauniya district and flow westward into Kilinochchi district.
Modifications to project
The Rajapaksa government having won the war, was not supportive of delivering water to the north and water distribution plans were changed. The original Moragahakanda proposals were modified to accommodate requests from local politicians; including feeding nearly 1,000 minor tanks in the North Central Province.
Phase 1
A major modification is the inclusion of ‘North Western Province Canal’ diverting water from Dambulu Oya to new irrigation systems in the NWP. But water from Dambulu Oya really is Mahaveli waters diverted through Bowatenna tunnel on the way to Kalawewa. The NWPC has no relevance to the main project, would be the first sub-project completed.
Phase 2
The Upper Elahera Canal trifurcates at Yakalla, will deliver water to Manankattiya/Mahakanadarawa reservoirs; this water is expected to replenish water in Anuradhapura tanks due to transfer of water to NWPC.
Phase 3
The 60-km-long canal from Kabitigollawa and Chemmadukulum will fall into Kanakanarayan Aru feeding Iranamadu tank. The canal in addition will issue irrigation water to Pavatkulam located south of Vauniya. Due to various diversions of the 251 MCM of diverted water only 100 MCM will reach Iranamadu.
The canal proposed under Phase 1 had to be modified as a tunnel due to environmental concerns and President Gotabaya inaugurated the construction of a 28-km-long irrigation tunnel in early February 2021, funded by ADB, completion expected in four years. Delivering Moragahakanda waters to north would require completion of all three phases.
Conversion to English language
The 80-year-old philosophy of C.W.W. Kannangara, ‘The mother tongue be used as the medium of instruction in primary schools’, could still be valid for rural primary schools, employing elderly teachers near retirement. But converting teaching to English medium would require retraining majority of teachers.
First, current lecturers in teachers’ colleges need be converted into English medium. Meanwhile, 49% of current teachers are graduates who studied in Sinhala/Tamil, ignorant of teaching methods. Clearly, capacity of current teachers’ colleges is insufficient, needing expanding manyfold, at least till the backlog is cleared.
But some teachers with their family involvements may not avail themselves to full-time retraining, and could be given the option of part-time, weekend, school vacations, etc., also private sector participation with state assistance. Thus, implementation would require a detailed program.
Use Indian assistance
For implementation, if the President requests the Indian PM for the required lecturers for teachers’ colleges, India would certainly oblige. India could also help Sri Lanka by setting up 1. Improving school curricula to international standards. 2. A facility to train lecturers in teachers’ colleges in English and IT, 3. Provide additional lecturers to teachers’ colleges until current school teachers become proficient and confident. While the backlog of converting school teachers into English is achieved, existing teachers in teachers’ colleges could continue on their own.
Schoolchildren were the most affected group from the corona pandemic, with schools closed for a whole year. The education system had to be modified, and was delivered online. The children of well-to-do parents had computers, laptops and internet connections and joined happily. Others had to purchase, but some were unable with financial difficulties. Others in far-away locations were unable to connect, had to search for signals on hills tops, etc.
With the change, children and parents were forced to realise the importance of IT and English. Thus, transferring education to English medium would be welcomed by students also parents, except by the foolish politicians and the JVP.
With English-based education, admission to schools will not be based on ethnicity and children of all communities would mix. Also, school leavers would find enormous opportunities ahead and finding employment would not be an issue. Thus, having to recruit graduates to heavily over-staffed institutions will end.
Discussion
Human rights restrictions placed on the country by the UN Council was the result of poor handling of the situation by immature foreign ministry officials, without respecting protocol, who studied Arts subjects in Sinhala/Tamil medium, but topped the university batch.
Under the UNHRC resolution Sri Lanka is expected to submit proposals to address the existing human rights issues, to be monitored by the Council. The Council has been empowered by the resolution to establish an office in Colombo and be watchful of the country’s developments and report to UN, and Sri Lanka would be answerable.
The country’s biggest human rights issues are the separation of students under community basis, brought in by education based on the mother tongue, leading to distrust and infighting among communities, dividing the country; also, long delay in completion of the Moragahakanda project. Comparatively, all other issues raised by the Human Rights Council are minor. Thus, conversion of education to English medium as pre-1957 and acceleration of the Moragahakanda project would settle major issues, and can be implemented within five years.
Thus, reports of two projects could be submitted to UN Council and request UN assistance for implementation. For upgrading of curriculum and English education Indian assistance would be helpful. In addition, printing of new textbooks in English would be expensive and UN assistance could be sought.
The balance three stages of the Moragahkanda project need to be completed simultaneously along with the Upper Elahera Canal tunnel in four years. The countries such as UK, USA, Germany and Canada who sponsored the UNHRC motion in support of the Tamil community could be requested to fund the project. Both projects would be under the supervision and monitoring by the UNHRC.
The human rights allegations against Sri Lanka were unfair, but was accepted by the UNHRC at the insistence of Tamil diaspora. Addressing the basic issues that created the situation, would enable SL citizens to bond together and move forward understanding each other. Delivering water from south to north will address water issues of northerners, making the country independent of imported agricultural products.
With respect to Indian demand of the 13th amendment, a year after the implementation of both projects, a referendum could be called from northerners whether they still require Provincial Councils. But the north becoming dependant on water from the south, would never demand separatism.
In addition, rich Tamil diaspora could be requested to support the war-affected families in the north, under the eyes of UNHRC for the disabled, physically handicapped, who lost family members, houses damaged, but without means of reconstruction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)