Archive for October, 2007

Non-Violent Approach Can Lead To Positive Political Changes

By His Holiness The Dalai Lama

The thousands of people who marched in the cities of Eastern Europe in recent decades, the unwavering determination of the people in my homeland of Tibet and the recent demonstrations in Burma are powerful reminders of this truth.

Freedom is the very source of creativity and human development. It is not enough, as Communist systems assumed, to provide people with food, shelter and clothing. If we have these things but lack the precious air of liberty to sustain our deeper nature, we remain only half human.

In the past, oppressed people often resorted to violence in their struggle to be free. But visionaries such as Mahatma Gandhi and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. have shown us that successful changes can be brought about non-violently.

I believe that, at the basic human level, most of us wish to be peaceful. Deep down, we desire constructive, fruitful growth and dislike destruction.

Many people today agree that we need to reduce violence in our society. If we are truly serious about this, we must deal with the roots of violence, particularly those that exist within each of us. We need to embrace “inner disarmament,” reducing our own emotions of suspicion, hatred and hostility toward our brothers and sisters.

Furthermore, we must re-examine how we relate to the very question of the use of violence in today’s profoundly inter-connected world.

One may sometimes feel that one can solve a problem quickly with force, but such success is often achieved at the expense of the rights and welfare of others. One problem may have been solved, but the seed of another is planted, thus opening a new chapter in a cycle of violence and counter-violence.

From the Velvet Revolution in the former Czechoslovakia to the popular pro-democracy movement in the Philippines, the world has seen how a non-violent approach can lead to positive political changes. But the genuine practice of non-violence is still at an experimental stage. If this experiment succeeds, it can open the way to a far more peaceful world.

We need to embrace a more realistic approach to dealing with human conflicts, an approach that is in tune with a new reality of heavy interdependence in which the old concepts of ‘we’ and ‘they’ are no longer relevant. The very idea of total victory for one’s own side and the total defeat of one’s enemy is untenable. In violent conflicts, the innocent are often the first casualties, as the war in Iraq and Sudan’s Darfur crisis painfully remind us.

Today, the only viable solution to human conflicts will come through dialogue and reconciliation based on the spirit of compromise.

Many of the problems we confront today are our own creation. I believe that one of the root causes of these manmade problems is the inability of humans to control their agitated minds and hearts — an area in which the teachings of the world’s great religions have much to offer.

A scientist from Chile once told me that it is inappropriate for a scientist to be attached to his particular field of study, because that would undermine his objectivity. I am a Buddhist practitioner, but if I mix up my devotion for Buddhism with an attachment to it, my mind will be biased toward it.

A biased mind never sees the complete picture, and any action that results will not be in tune with reality. If religious practitioners can heed this scientist’s advice and refrain from being attached to their own faith traditions, it could prevent the growth of fundamentalism. It also could enable such followers to genuinely respect faith traditions other than their own. I often say that while one can adhere to the principle of “one truth, one religion” at the level of one’s personal faith, we should embrace at the same time the principle of “many truths, many religions” in the context of wider society. I see no contradiction between these two.

I do not mean to suggest that religion is indispensable to a sound ethical way of life, or for that matter to genuine happiness. In the end, whether one is a believer or a nonbeliever, what matters is that one be a good, kind and warmhearted person.

A deep sense of caring for others, based on a profound sense of interconnection, is the essence of the teachings of all great religions of the world. In my travels, I always consider my foremost mission to be the promotion of basic human qualities of goodness — the need for and appreciation of the value of love, our natural capacity for compassion and the need for genuine fellow feeling.

No matter how new the face or how different the dress and behavior, there is no significant division between us and other people.

When I first saw a photograph of Earth taken from outer space, it powerfully brought home to me how small and fragile the planet is and how petty our squabbles are. Amid our perceived differences, we tend to forget how the world’s different religions, ideologies and political systems were meant to serve humans, not destroy them.

When I traveled to the former Soviet Union in the late 1970s, I encountered widespread paranoia, even among ordinary people who feared that the West hated them so much that it was ready to invade their country. Of course, I knew this was mere projection.

Today, more than ever, we need to make this fundamental recognition of the basic oneness of humanity the foundation of our perspective on the world and its challenges. From the dangerous rate of global warming to the widening gap between rich and poor, from the rise of global terrorism to regional conflicts, we need a fundamental shift in our attitudes and our consciousness — a wider, more holistic outlook.

As a society, we need to shift our basic attitude about how we educate our younger generation. Something is fundamentally lacking in our modern education when it comes to educating the human heart. As people begin to explore this important question, it is my hope that we will be able to redress the current imbalance between the development of our brains and the development of our hearts.

To promote greater compassion, we must pay special attention to the role of women. Given that mothers carry the foetus for months within their own bodies, from a biological point of view women in general may possess greater sensitivity of heart and capacity for empathy. My first teacher of love and compassion was my own mother, who provided me with maximum love.

I do not mean to reinforce in any way the traditional view that a woman’s place is confined to the home. I believe that the time has come for women to take more active roles in all domains of human society, in an age in which education and the capacities of the mind, not physical strength, define leadership. This could help create a more equitable and compassionate society.

In general, I feel optimistic about the future. As late as the 1950s and ’60s, people believed that war was an inevitable condition of mankind and that conflicts must be solved through the use of force. Today, despite ongoing conflicts and the threat of terrorism, most people are genuinely concerned about world peace, far less interested in propounding ideology and far more committed to coexistence.

The rapid changes in our attitude toward the Earth are also a source of hope. Until recently, we thoughtlessly consumed its resources as if there were no end to them. Now not only individuals but also governments are seeking a new ecological order. I often joke that the moon and stars look beautiful, but if any of us tried to live on them, we would be miserable.

This blue planet of ours is the most delightful habitat we know. Its life is our life, its future our future. Now Mother Nature is telling us to cooperate. In the face of such global problems as the greenhouse effect and the deterioration of the ozone layer, individual organizations and single nations are helpless. Our mother is teaching us a lesson in universal responsibility.

The 20th century became a century of bloodshed; despite its faltering start, the 21st century could become one of dialogue, one in which compassion, the seed of nonviolence, will be able to flourish. But good wishes are not enough. We must seriously address the urgent question of the proliferation of weapons and make worldwide efforts toward greater external disarmament.

Large human movements spring from individual human initiatives. If you feel that you cannot have much of an effect, the next person may also become discouraged, and a great opportunity will have been lost.

On the other hand, each of us can inspire others simply by working to develop our own altruistic motivations – and engaging the world with a compassion-tempered heart and mind.


Editors Note:The 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, is the spiritual leader of Tibet. Since 1959, he has been living in Dharamsala, in northern India, the seat of the Tibetan government in exile.

Comments (7)

The Cry of the Nation

by Rt.Rev Duleep de Chickera

This article is excerpted from the Anglican Bishop of Colombo, Rt.Rev Duleep de Chickera’s Address at the 122nd session of the Diocesan Council meeting of the Church of Ceylon’s Colombo Diocese on 19th october 2007.

The National Crisis

Several connected trends have heightened our National Crisis. At least eight of these need immediate arrest and transformation if we are to raise our heads as a democratic and just people. These are:

The sustained alienation and humiliation especially of the Tamils, the largest minority Sri Lankan community.

Several converging actions against the Tamils convey that Tamils are less important and are even dispensable. Relentless strategies that geographically and ideologically segregate the Tamils could well be part of a wave of majoritarianism. All this happens without a word of explanation, regret or apology and further compounds the Tamil grievance and crisis. Consequently many, perhaps most, within the Tamil Community have lost faith in the State. The conflicts and power struggles among politico-militant Tamil groups has further aggravated this situation. To our utter shame and despite the rhetoric to the contrary, the Sri Lankan Nation has collectively signalled that the well being of the majority towers above the rights, dignity and safety of the Tamils

The failure to investigate human rights violations.

No one so far has been brought to book for hundreds of continuing assassinations and abductions of civilians, relief workers and even Clergy. The silence that follows promises of investigations is incompatible with the somewhat proven State prowess in intelligence and security. One way or the other the State is responsible for these happenings. The judicial system, adequately equipped with competent persons, is unable to deliver justice to the afflicted. There is a clear line of investigation and prosecution that few are ready to cross. This has led to a state of unprecedented impunity and breakdown in law and order and crime; and the people are crushed by the vindictiveness and greed of the violent. The brazen violation of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution has re-politicised the organs of democratic governance. Nothing else seems to work, other than the moral integrity of the people and what is left of the conscience of the country’s political leadership.

The stifling of dissent and opinions that could make a difference.

This includes the intimidation of voices of dissent and the media, the refusal to hear independent views, the arbitrary dismissal of student and worker concerns and a disregard for world opinion. Successive Sri Lankan Governments and the LTTE are guilty of this trend. Much more seriously, the dismissal of these views as unpatriotic, simply because they are different or dissenting, is unacceptable and even inflammatory when voiced by persons holding responsibility. On the other hand the ability to listen to these voices is the real test of the spirit of democracy and inevitably paves the way to dialogue and a negotiated settlement.

The failure to probe allegations of corruption and the unauthorised use of large sums of public funds.

As some are caught up in the euphoria of beating the enemy, and others driven to silence in a culture of rewards and punishments and intimidation and impunity, persons in authority have seemingly robbed our poor Nation through the abuse of officially entrenched power. Even responsible reports from Parliamentary Committees like the COPE are now being sidelined.

The deliberate procrastination and the ridiculing of political consensus and a negotiated settlement.

Most Sri Lankan Governments and the LTTE are guilty of this breach. This includes frustrating double standards of flaunting power sharing as the democratic face to good governance and then shooting down any and all constructive proposals by imposing impossible pre-conditions. It is now obvious that this is a feet dragging exercise so that more extreme agendas could fall into place .

LTTE intransigence and disregard for the sufferings of the Tamils.

It is now clear that the priority on the LTTE agenda is the uncompromising retention of its own power base. Whether its intransigent stance and strategies directly or indirectly add to the endless suffering and sorrow of the Tamils do not seem to matter. Consequently its concern for the rights, freedom, dignity and safety of the Tamil people is questionable. Its harsh policy of child and compulsory conscription of one cadre per family specially in the area under its control has added to the misery of a people already under the oppression of war. Several live in fear, are in hiding to avoid conscription and want to get out. Some justify the conscription policy, often from safe and far off places; others raise questions about the rights of the Tamils to dissent and whether this is a foretaste of the promised liberation.

This power agenda explains the reluctance and even inability of the LTTE to negotiate with purpose for constitutionally entrenched devolution within a united Sri Lanka; perhaps the most prudent political settlement for us all.

A system of rewards and punishments and the ensuing politics of confrontation.

A worrying system of rewards and punishments dominates and determines our political culture. Few stand up to this culture and some exploit it for gain. Those who enter the system lose their right to disagree and those who with-stand it become the enemy.

This system also has the capacity to convert previous opponents into friends and previous friends into opponents. When this happens confidentialities are leaked and political encounter shifts from the goal of good governance to endless confrontation and mud slinging. Consequently the democratic right of the people to good governance is usurped. The people’s right to participate in the political destiny of the country through the declared manifestos of their elected representatives also becomes meaningless.

The spiralling cost of living that impacts on the quality of life of the poor.

Further complicating this oppressive climate is the unprecedented and uncontrollable rise in the island-wide cost of living. The war budget, corruption, waste and mismanagement of public funds, and the absence of visible economic policies to improve the quality of life, especially of the poor, collectively contribute to this trend. War policies that restrict the supply of essentials to certain Northern parts of the country add to the hardship of those in these areas. The poor continue to be arbitrarily exploited and abandoned.

Gospel and Church

Change comes in such situations of political crises in three ways. It occurs when political leaders come to their senses and change direction, or through the democratic process of fresh elections or through pressure exerted by the people. While it is desirable that all Sri Lankans should work for the transformation of our political culture, it is imperative that communities of faith do so. The values of our great religions adequately enrich and equip us in this task.

The Gospel calls us as disciples of Christ to work for justice, reconciliation and peace. Repentance and forgiveness are a central part in this process. To be faithful to this call is to sustain hope. It is expected that our Bible studies tomorrow and the day after, will challenge us to be even more faithful to this our calling. I also commend the resolution on the agenda to set up Peace and Justice Committees in all our Congregations and hope it will receive our unstinted support. If we organise and commit ourselves with faith and passion in our work with Christ we will make a difference for peace and justice in Sri Lanka.

The inter-ethnic identity of our Church needs affirmation with thanksgiving in this task. We are by God’s grace a visible symbol of hope in today’s polarised society. Also by God’s Grace only, have we stayed together over these turbulent years, sharing life and recognising each others value and dignity as a community of equals in Christ. Our common worship, witness and decision making, have enriched us. Without the other we are the poorer. Consequently we are called to share this priceless gift with others; but we must never take this privilege or the other for granted. To watch and pray and address moments of hurt and frustration with mutual trust will enable us to move forward with integrity.

Comments (8)

Campaign to Restore the Rights of the Ethnically Cleansed Northern Muslims

NEEDS AND ASPIRATIONS OF ETHNICALLY CLEANSED NORTHERN MUSLIMS

The highlights of the Fact Finding – 2007

by Shahul Hasbullah

(On behalf of research team*)

FACT FINDING MISSION

In October 2007, a month long campaign to “restore the rights of the ethnically cleansed Northern Muslims” was launched. In pursuance of this a team of researchers set up a fact finding mission to investigate the current conditions, future needs and aspirations of displaced Muslims, living mainly in Puttalam district, and to highlight the above in order to find durable solutions to this problem. The fact finding mission attempted to answer the following questions: What prevents Northern Province Muslims to return homes? What impact has the 17 year long displacement made in the lives of the displaced?

BACKGROUND

Forcible Expulsion and inability to return home: Seventeen years ago, the LTTE forcibly evicted the Muslims of the Northern Province at gunpoint. Continuing war and conflict in the north and the absence of meaningful efforts to facilitate return has meant that the internal displacement of Northern Muslims has continued to present day. As a consequence, the probability of return en-masse in the near future is remote.

The impacts of 17 years of displacement: The northwestern coastal area of Puttalam district has been the temporary home of the majority of the Muslim displaced for the last 17 years. With an influx of nearly 100,000 displaced, the total population of this region doubled. Over the period, displaced Northern Muslims have moved from temporary shelter (for six months) to camp lives (for 6 years or more) and then to semi and permanent self-settlements. While about half of Puttalam displaced do not own any land, the rest are confined to a standard land piece which is commonly 10 perches. The quality and quantity of relief and rehabilitation assistance to Puttalam IDPs has declined over a period. The changes in the strategies in assisting the Puttalam displaced has forced the displaced seek alternative income sources which have created stiff economic competition and tension between displaced and host communities in the above areas. The tensions between these two communities have further spread into larger social, educational and political spheres as well.

The condition of the place of origin: About 5 per cent of evicted Muslims returned home to the government controlled areas of the north. Movable and immovable properties and other social and cultural interests left behind in the north by Muslims after Eviction have now been either taken by others or have been abandoned. The 2002 Peace Talks did not make any significant break-through especially concerning the return of Muslim displaced to their original places. For Northern Muslims, the strong bond that Northern Muslims and the majority Northern Tamils had prior to Eviction continues to provide strong hopes for the possibility of future return to their homes.

FINDINGS ON THE NEEDS AND ASPIRATIONS OF NORTHERN MUSLIMS

October opinion survey reveals that the Northern Muslims want

  • To secure and stabilize their lives during this prolonged displacement
  • To seek assistance to protect assets and properties in their place of origin
  • The recognition of their right to return and the facilitation of return when the time is appropriate.

Key words:

  • Secure and stabilize lives during displacement
  • Protect assets and properties in the place of origin
  • Recognize right to return and
  • Facilitate return when appropriate

DETAILS OF THE FACT FINDING (DURING DISPLACEMENT)

Reasons to secure and stabilize lives during displacement: There is little indication of an end to current displacement. The last seventeen years has created profound uncertainly about the future. Unless the war ends and the conflicting parties reach consensus on ethnic question, the possibility of the return of all Northern Muslim is remote. To date, those representing Tamil nationalism (e.g., LTTE) have not spelled out their stand on the right to return of expelled Muslims. However, the displaced cannot continue to live in uncertainty forever. They were faced with many problems. One of the major problems has been the possibility of suitable dwelling places. Nearly half of the displaced do not possess their own land for living and continue to live in camp-style settlements. Those who do own land are restricted to land 10 perches or under. One premise of 10 perches may contain many families, including parents, married children and their children. Population has continued to grow in these displaced settlements through natural growth and in-migration. At the same time, displaced people are faced with economic problems. Jobs are not available for men and whatever available jobs there are for women in cash-cropping vegetable gardens are for very low wages. Local schools are overcrowded and faced with shortage of educational, physical, and human resources. While the children of both communities (displaced and host) faced immense hardships, the quality of education of children of those schools has continued to decline. In addition, displaced people are faced with social, psychological and cultural problems. Women and children were affected most by these. Naturally, displaced people feel these negative trends must be arrested. Thus, they wish to secure and stabilize their lives in the place of displacement until they return home or find alternatives to return.

Challenges faced by displaced in the place of displacement

Shrinking employment opportunities is one of most important challenges that are faced by IDPs and the host community together in Puttalam. Similarly, the non-availability of land for housing and economic activities, limited public services such as medical, educational, transport are also major challenges for both. This is exacerbated by the fact that both populations are concentrated in the most limited resource area of the northwestern coastal areas of Puttalam. The above issues naturally invite tensions and confrontation between IDPs and the host community in Puttalam. So far, the frictions have not escalated to dangerous levels, but unless the larger issues are addressed and arrested the possibility of higher levels of tension and conflict seem likely.

How these problems should be addressed: In order to prevent further aggravation in the present situation, there is an urgent need for development initiatives in the areas where the IDPs are living. The local community and the IDPs share not only physical space but also religious and cultural space in the region. So far, both communities have found ways of accommodating each other. This relationship could be further strengthened if the increasing tensions between these two communities over the use of the limited resources and over the employment opportunities are minimized through proper economic development initiatives.

DETAILS ON THE ASPECT OF RETURN TO THE PLACE OF ORIGIN

Protection: The right to return to northern homes is the inalienable right of displaced Muslims. The assurance of future protection will make future return for displaced people more possible. At the same time, the places of origin of the Northern Muslims which had been abandoned for nearly 17 years will have to be prepared for the return of displaced upon their decision to return.

Challenges in the place of origin: Long term abandonment has taken its toll on Northern Muslims’ former homes and environments. Thus, these places of origin require considerable preparation and development before return can be effected. Moreover, the social fabric of the north has also changed in the last seventeen years. Younger generations of the Northern Tamils have no memories or experiences of the formerly multi-ethnic northern communities where Tamils and Muslims co-existed peacefully for hundreds of years. There should be attempts to revive such memories and undertake initiatives to promote the renewal of relationships between Tamils and Muslims.

The way to address these problems: The protection and preservation of the assets and properties of Northern Muslims, the restoration of political, economical, social and cultural rights, and the re-establishment of Tamil-Muslim relationships are some of the steps that should be taken to ensure the smooth return of Northern Muslims.

DURABLE SOLUTION

The inability of Northern Muslims to return to their former homes is a national not local problem and must be solved as such. It is not advisable to find permanent solution for them in the resource poor northwestern Puttalam district. Therefore, the problem of the Muslim refugees has to be considered as a national problem and a durable solution has to be found in consultation with all parties concerned. In this respect, an effective resolution must be discussed and politically resolved in a broader arena that includes displaced Muslims and parties to the conflict.

“Peace with justice to all”

* October campaign was undertaken by Shahul Hasbullah (University of Peradeniya) and his team, S.H.M. Rizni, M.A.C.Rafeek, A.G. Aneis, M.M. Thawfeek, M.S. Thameem, A.C. Nawfeer, M.M. Niyas, D.M. Foumeen, Ms. M. Juwairiya, Ms. M.S. Janoofa, Ms. K.M. Sifana, Ms. A.G. Jesmi, Ms. S. Sabeera and Ms. M.K. Sharmila in association with Research and Action Forum for Social Development (RAAF), Nuraicholai, Puttalam and was financially supported mainly by National Peace Council.

Comments (5)

Terrorism conference: The refusal to learn from the past

By Jehan Perera

The LTTE’s synchronized ground and air attack on the Anuradhapura air force base came two days after the Sri Lankan government played host to a galaxy of international experts on terrorism and counter terrorism at an International Conference on Countering Terrorism. The theme of the conference was “Terrorism: A Challenge to Democratically Elected Governments.” The selection of this theme showed a perfect synchrony with the concerns of the dominant countries in the world today. The three day conference was attended by academics and media personnel from 23 countries. When the focus of the global media is on the war against terrorism led by the world’s superpower, the conference was geared to make the news. Ironically, the LTTE attack on Anuradhapura has created even more news.

Among the renowned terrorism experts at the conference who made presentations were Jean Louis Bruguiere, Chairman of the French Anti Terrorist Judges, Dr Gerard Challiard, also from France and former head of the European Centre for the Study of Conflicts, Dr Rifaat Hussein from Pakistan who heads the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies, Dr Irka Kuleshnyk from the UN’s Terrorism Prevention office, General V P Malik, former commander of the Indian army, Prof. Zhang Lijun of the China Institute of International Studies, Prof. P Chandrasekharan, who pieced together the forensic case that convicted the LTTE assassins of Rajiv Gandhi and Dr Som Pudaisani who has been active in bringing in the Maoists of Nepal into the peace process.

Addressing the conference, Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama said he hoped that the deliberations would focus on the need for states to convert conventions into enabling legislation and tangible actions that would prevent terrorist front organizationsfrom their soil. He also emphasized the urgent need to develop ways and means of combating the growing threat of terrorism in the Indian Ocean region.

The emphasis was on combating terrorist organizations by collective action of the international community, rather than through political reform within countries that had given birth to such organizations. Issues discussed included the internal structure of terrorist organizations, their international linkages and the role of intelligence agencies in counter terrorism.

The ability of the Sri Lankan government to mobilize this array of international expertise to focus their attention on the Sri Lankan conflict is indicative of a renewed sense of purpose that exists in the government to defeat the LTTE’s challenge to the Sri Lankan state. The talent that the government has harnessed from the ranks of academia, media and civil society to confront the LTTE has found expression in engagement with the international community.

The new breed of Sri Lankan government representatives have sought to shift the focus of international attention away from the ethnic conflict that gave birth to terrorism, and instead focused on terrorism.

History’s lessons

However, aspects of history may be repeating itself as pointed out by independent Sri Lankan scholars such as Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda of Colombo University.

In the 1980s too, the Sri Lankan government sought to suppress the Tamil militancy utilizing a combination of military and diplomatic initiatives. There is a parallel to an earlier era, more than two decades ago, when the late Lalith Athulathmudali took over the overall conduct of war against the LTTE as the Minister of National Security. He sought Israeli assistance and drew on his contacts made when he was teaching in Singapore. There were allegations that his enthusiasm was so great that he flew on air force bombing missions to the north.

Minister Athulatmudali also used his position to mobilize the finest legal brains in the country to counter the Tamil position at that time in partnership with the then President J R Jayewardene’s younger brother Harry, himself a legal luminary. This was the dream team of lawyers that negotiated with the Tamil parties in Thimpu, Bhutan in 1985, and rejected their negotiating position as being akin to separation.

The Sri Lankan government’s efforts in the 1980s to quell the Tamil militancy did not succeed. The international climate at that time was more favourable to rebels with a cause than to governments that waged air raids against their own country’s citizens.

Neither the Sri Lankan government’s diplomacy nor its military strategy could succeed in the face of opposition by the Indian government and the propaganda campaigns by the LTTE and Tamil diaspora in western countries. By the time of the Indo Lanka Peace Accord of 1987, international opinion was largely sympathetic towards the Tamil cause and critical of the Sri Lankan government. The period that followed saw the LTTE expand its territorial control even taking control over Jaffna.

On the other hand, the Sri Lankan government faces a more favourable international climate today, especially in the aftermath of the 9/11 terror attack on the United States. Hardly any country in the world today is prepared to publicly declare sympathy for a rebel group that uses terrorism as a weapon in its arsenal, even if its proclaimed cause can be considered to be just. The just cause of the Tamil people in Sri Lanka has suffered a major setback internationally as a result of the LTTE’s use of terrorism to achieve their objectives and its simultaneous claim to be the sole representative of the Tamil people.

In the currently favourable global context, key decision makers in the Sri Lankan government appear to believe that they have the LTTE on the defensive and close to total collapse. The public statements of government spokespersons show that their sights are now set on the north, after the victory over the LTTE in the east. Although the ethnic conflict came before the LTTE, the present government leadership appears to believe that the defeat of the LTTE is essential for the ethnic conflict to be resolved.

Therefore the best minds in the government are working hard to shift the focus of the conflict from being an ethnic conflict to being a terrorist one. This was evident at the international conference on countering terrorism, where the primary focus of most speakers was how best to deal with the LTTE, rather than with the ethnic conflict.

Missing dimension

However, even at the international conference on countering terrorism, there were cautionary voices that warned against an over reliance on military means of ensuring victory. Shanaka Jayasekara, a Sri Lankan expert on terrorist financing now based in Australia, calculated that up to 75 percent of the LTTE’s re-supply capacity had been disabled due to the successful interception and destruction of LTTE cargo vessels in recent weeks. Unless the Sri Lankan government acted fast to come up with a just political solution and thereby motivated the western countries to take concerted action against LTTE fund raising on their soil, he warned that the LTTE would be back in strength in about a year or even less.

Dr Gerard Challiard who was the keynote speaker at the conference was even more skeptical about the long term viability of the government’s militaristic approach to the LTTE. In his keynote address at the conference he said that “The independence they (LTTE) ask cannot be granted and should not be granted, not only because no state is willing to accept such a blow to its sovereignty but also because, like the Shining Path (Peru) or the Khmer Rouge (Cambodia), the LTTE under the leadership of V Prabhakaran is a totalitarian movement, which has transformed its groups into a killing machine.” On the other hand, in an interview with Reuters news agency he opined that the Sri Lankan government would not be able to defeat the LTTE through military means.

Unfortunately, successive governments in Sri Lanka have shown that they have little or no institutional memory. New governments, with new ministers and advisers at the helm of affairs, do not learn from or build upon the lessons of the past, but want to do things newly. The same holds true of the ethnic conflict. A new government leadership, with new ministers and advisers, is seeking to accomplish what was tried and failed before. They appear to be confident that they will succeed, but the rest of the world is skeptical.

The international conference on countering terrorism would be constructive to Sri Lanka if the government were to adopt a multi track approach that brings in the currently missing dimension of political reform as the dominant element. As the terrorism expert Dr Challiard said in his keynote address, “The grievances of the Tamils are legitimate, they are a part of this country, they should have a place in it as a recognized minority, whether it is in the framework of political autonomy or a federation.” A political solution to the ethnic conflict, together with respect for international human rights, that enjoys a measure of international credibility has to be generated if the military and political challenge of the LTTE is to be overcome with international support. [Courtesy: Daily Mirror]

Comments (13)

Who’s Afraid of Louise Arbour and the UN Human Rights Council?

by D.B.S. Jeyaraj

Who’s afraid of Louise Arbour the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights?

Very few in Sri Lanka if reported responses to her visit are any indication!

Mahinda Samarasinghe rules out emphatically the questions of establishing a UN country office and setting up a field mission in Sri Lanka; the indefatigable peace secretariat chief Rajiva Wijesinghe says she is being kicked about like a political football and urges her to issue a statement.

Rohitha Bogallagama is miffed that she was too tired to have dinner with him;First brother Basil advises her not to “police” Sri Lanka on human rights despite her being UN Human Rights Commissioner; A newspaper editorial depicts Arbour as a knight slaying Komodo dragons;

The saffron brigade takes Arbour’s former student at Osgoode hall along and asks the UN official to look into animal rights; The Crimson comrades accuse her of being an American stooge and also link Arbour to the tigers; Selvi of the LTTE queries whether Louise Arbour can see through the government propaganda smoke screen.

This 60 year old eminent French – Canadian jurist and law professor was at one time a Canadian Supreme court judge and prosecutor at the International Criminal Court. She became UN human Rights Commissioner when her predecessor Sergio Veire de Mello was killed in the Canal hotel explosion in Baghdad.

The TV movie Hunt For Justice: The Louise Arbour Story chronicled her attempts to bring Bosnian war criminals to justice after a decades-old civil war. The movie starred Canadian Wendy Crewson as Louise Arbour.

Her Sri Lankan visit has aroused much expectation. Louise Arbour issued a press statement at the end of the trip. She scrupulously avoided any direct references to what was probably the primary purpose of her visit namely the setting up of a UN field mission and country office for Sri Lanka.

Yet most news reports revolved around that aspect alone despite it being a non – issue in the statement. This caused Rajiva Wijesinghe to rail against the media and state that Arbour never, ever made such a request. If that was the case one is perplexed as to why the usually diplomatic Samarasinghe came out with a strong public refusal of a request that was never made according to Wijesinghe.

In her statement Arbour laments thus – ” I was struck in my discussions by the fact that broader human rights issues affecting all communities on the island have largely been eclipsed by the immediate focus on issues related to the conflict. These include issues of discrimination and exclusion, gender inequalities, the low participation of women in public and political life, the rights of migrant workers and press freedom”.

Unfortunately the focus has not only been on conflict related issues but also in the final analysis got whittled down further to a solitary issue alone.The forest seems to have been missed for trees.

The tendency to view and even portray her trip as one of UN versus GOSL has distorted the scenario. Sinister motives are attributed unfairly. In this political frenzy about the Rajapakse regime’s culpability in human rights violations the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam dimension has been ignored or overlooked.

Human rights violations in this Country are not perpetrated by Government agencies, security forces, Police and para – militaries of the state alone. Human Rights are violated with impunity by the LTTE also.

A silver lining in the dark cloud as far as the Government controlled areas are concerned is that many of the incidents are reported even if culprits are not penalised. But incidents in the LTTE controlled areas are seldom reported.

The Tamil people of this country are caught between two terrors. One is state terror and the other is tiger terror. Louise Arbour did not intend focussing only on one aspect during her trip but the Government did not allow her to visit the Wanni and meet LTTE leaders. What would she have done had she gone to Kilinochchi?

This is what she said “I also regret that I did not have the opportunity to visit Killinochchi, where I would have liked to convey directly to the LTTE my deep concern about their violations of human rights and humanitarian law, including the recruitment of children, forced recruitment and abduction of adults, and political killings.”.

The response of the LTTE and fellow travellers towards her visit – before and after – is extremely revealing. The LTTE did not evince great interest in getting her down to their areas. Seious efforts were not made presumably because the LTTE anticipated criticism. But when it became definite that she was not coming to the Wanni the tigers exploited the issue by publicly requesting her to visit the Wanni.

Subsequently the LTTE adopted a lofty attitude and advised Arbour to look beyond the propagandistic smokescreen of the state and not to be deceived by government propaganda. LTTE media organs also played up the visit and highlighted instances of the security forces preventing people from meeting her.It was as if human rights violations were from one side only and that the LTTE were pure white like a jasmine flower.

The “pappadam” crumbled when Louise Arbour explicitly stated what she would probably have told the tigers if she had an opportunity of meeting them. With that disclosure the tigers clammed up and their propagandists began downplaying Louise Arbour. Suddenly her visit became a non – event.

The setting up of a UN field mission and country office in Sri Lanka is being viewed as a “problem” for the Government alone. But it is a problem for the LTTE also. The Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission was not allowed into the LTTE controlled Kilinochchi and Mullaitheevu districts and other tiger dominated areas of Vavuniya ,Mannar , Batticaloa and Trincomalee districts. The Sri Lankan Human Rights Commission does not have representatives in LTTE controlled regions.

Establishing a UN field mission could lead to an International presence in LTTE areas also. This could be a great boon to the suffering Tamil civilians. Abductions, forced recruitment and incarceration of civilians by the LTTE could come under spotlight. The long suffering Tamil people would have an “ear” to voice complaints. So the LTTE too like the Government does not like a UN field mission

The LTTE response should be differentiated from the general Tamil response. The beleagured Tamil people have no one of stature to seek solace from. They are like drowning souls ready to clutch at straws.

The visit of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights was to many Tamils a godsend. They looked up to her hopefully as ray of bright light in a dark, gloomy situation.

There was a strong element of spontaneity in the large crowds that sought to line up the streets of Jaffna. Thousands thronged the Jaffna Bishop’s house to see her. Hundreds crowded outside the UN office in Colombo too.

The families of the disappeared and the detained were particularly anxious to meet her. So too were the Tamil detenues who went on a hunger strike demanding a meeting.

Louise Arbour met representatives of all those sections seeking to meet her. She promised action and possible redress to the detenues by December.

Arbour also went out of her way to reach out to the suffering people by going to the gates at Jaffna Bishops house and Colombo UN office. It was a commendable humane gesture that touched the hearts of many.

The victims of human rights violations and their loved ones had high hopes of Louise Arbour’s visit. It was seen as a prelude to a permanent UN human rights presence here. Some may have even thought that the UN could impose its will on Colombo and unilaterally set up an office here.

Arbour’s frank admission that such a course was impossible without Colombo’s concurrence would have disappointed quite a few people.Likewise others may be elated at this recognition of sovereignty.

What is at stake here are not merely issues like sovereignty or face – saving bluffs or scoring brownie points. What is at stake here is that a major crisis of human rights violations prevails. This is what Louise Arbour said -

” However, in the context of the armed conflict and of the emergency measures taken against terrorism, the weakness of the rule of law and prevalence of impunity is alarming. There is a large number of reported killings, abductions and disappearances which remain unresolved. This is particularly worrying in a country that has had a long, traumatic experience of unresolved disappearances and no shortage of recommendations from past Commissions of Inquiry on how to safeguard against such violations. ”

“While the Government pointed to several initiatives it has taken to address these issues, there has yet to be an adequate and credible public accounting for the vast majority of these incidents. In the absence of more vigorous investigations, prosecutions and convictions, it is hard to see how this will come to an end. ”

“While Sri Lanka has much of the necessary human rights institutional infrastructure, critical elements of protection have been undermined or compromised. The application of treaties in domestic law has been questioned by the Supreme Court in the Singarasa case. ”

Against this backdrop the need of the hour is to recognize that there is a problem on either side of the ethnic divide in this respect. It is not a case of responding or not , to global pressures. The problem is that of ours !

Such flagrant human rights violations strike at the root of our collective humanity. A country boasting of a 2500 year civilization and of being an abode to four major religions cannot let this state of affairs continue

Colombo’s current refusal cannot and should not be treated as a full stop. There has to be more forward movement on this issue. Arbour herself keeps the door open in this regard -

” I am aware that there is a lively national debate about the need for international support in human rights protection. In light of the gravity of the reported ongoing abuses, and in particular of threats to life and security of the person, I believe that we should urgently resolve our ongoing discussions about the future of a productive relationship between OHCHR and the Government of Sri Lanka” , she says.

What stands in the way? A realistic answer would be fear! Three – pronged fear!!

Firstly there is a feeling that the LTTE is on the verge of a defeat. It is tacitly recognized that deliberate human rights violations have contributed to this state of affairs. Given the ruthless manner in which the JVP insurgencies were defeated it is felt that large scale human rights violations are a necessary evil to defeat the tigers. The end justifies the means. A UN field mission at this point of time will conscrict such activity and perhaps let the LTTE off the hook is one fear.

Secondly there is the fear that the state and its armed forces will be blamed and shamed by the UN for such violations. National pride and the nation’s welfare is at stake here.

Thirdly there is a question of soverignty and international intervention. The UN field mission could lead to a greater UN presence here is the fear. A peace mission accompanied by UN troops could create two de facto states it is feared.

Resistance to a UN field presence and country office stems from these fears. Fear that victory over the LTTE will be denied, fear that the Country will be disgraced and fear that de – facto secession would occur. These fears may sound irrational but they are very much a reality.

The bitter irony in this is that by stubbornly resisting instead of accomodating international concerns to some extent at least, Sri Lanka may be precipitating negative international intervention. The thing that is greatly feared may come upon the country due to its uncompromising intransigience.

The UN Human Rights Council of which Sri Lanka is a member will meet this December. Louise Arbour’s report on Sri Lanka will be presented then. If Colombo continues to be defiant then there is a strong possibility that the report would come down hard.

This in turn will strengthen the hands of those human rights conscious nations seeking a condemnatory resolution on Sri Lanka. There is also the chance that a special session could be convened to discuss Sri Lanka. Only 16 of 46 member Countries are needed for to set this up. If that happens further international intervention is likely.

There may also be a sense of confidence prevailing in Colombo that no punitive repercussions are likely. Countries like India, China and Pakistan for reasons of their own will ensure that Sri Lanka is not condemned. The western nations desiring action will be outnumbered.

Besides member states will not like to rap a fellow member. Earlier attempts to bring about a resolution did not succeed it is pointed out. Just as the world is allowing Sri Lanka to prosecute a brutal war, the International community will not restrict its pursuit of that war through reprimands is the feeling.

This line of thought may or may not prove to be wrong. Countries may go through the motions of censuring but there may be no censure. A lot of hot air may blow but ultimately everything could turn out real cool. But the important question is whether that risk or gamble could be taken. Is Sri Lanka capable of withstanding resultant pressure if its bluff is called?

More importantly what does happen to the question of human rights violations regardless of international action? Is the Country to continue in this fashion violating right after right and de – humanising itself in the process? Can this nation go on sacrificiing the rights of a weak segment of its society on the altar of a military victory mirage?

The problem will not go away unless constructive action to address it is taken.!

Against this backdrop the prudent course appears to be that of flexibility. Regardless of the seemingly inflexible positions there is room for positive forward movement.

For one thing there is already a limited but active UN human rights presence in the form of a senior human rights adviser (SHRA) on ground in Sri Lanka since June 2004. The earlier SHRA Rory Mungoven completed his term and has been replaced by Jyothi Sangkheira. The possibility of enhancing the SRHA’s role is worth exploring

What would be more feasible is to engage in more quiet discussions with Louise Arbour. The Minister for disaster management and human rights is one of the few ministers in this government who has impressed me.

Mahinda Samarasinghe is one of the few assets acquired by Mahinda Rajapakse from the UNP elephant kraal. His tact and tactical approach has been immensely useful in containing negative fall – out against Sri Lanka. But there are limits to crisis management.

Why Samarasinghe resorted to a blunt refusal instead of adopting his customary conciliatory approach puzzles me. It may have been due to directives to that effect from minister Mahinda’s “lokka” President Mahinda. Whatever the reason for wielding the sledgehammer it is time now for damage control.

Samarasinghe must interact with Louise Arbour and arrive at an understanding. This should not only be a device to stave off international pressure but also that of getting the UN’s aid to improve the human rights situation in the Country. A UN field mission and Country office for Sri Lanka is a must if the human rights situation is to improve.

So who’s afraid of Louise Arbour? There was a picture in the papers of an enormous Samarasinghe towering over Arbour who seemed diminutive in contrast. But appearances are deceptive.

The lady ain’t no pushover! Ask ex – Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, French anti – terror magistrate Jean -Louis Bruguirre or former US envoy to the UN John Bolton!

DBS Jeyaraj appreciates your responses on the federal idea.

DBS Jeyaraj can be contacted on: djeyaraj@federalidea.com

Comments (22)

The true position of UNP’s repositioning

By Austin Fernando

The special statement issued by the UNP last week has created a fresh dialogue on peacemaking and constitutional redress for the national problem.

One of the main themes revolves around the ethic of policy repositioning.

This is not the first time the UNP or other political parties have repositioned their policies. In 1977 J.R. Jayewardene repositioned his ‘capitalist stance’ by declaring the UNP’s ’socialist stance.’ In 1994, Chandrika Kumaratunga who opposed ‘privatisation’ repositioned the SLFP for ‘privatisation with a human face.’

The JVP demanded ’self determination for Tamils in 1971,’ opposed the 13th Amendment (1987), and later repositioned and contested the provincial elections.

Therefore, repositioning of a policy stance is not evil. These repositionings were consequential to emerging political environments.

Ranil Wickremesinghe too has considered the political environment and repositioned his stance having considered field realities and political developments mooted by the President and the LTTE.

What’s in a word

Though the words ‘unitary,’ ‘federal’ and ‘federalism’ do not appear even once in the statement, critics are at Ranil’s throat accusing him of giving up ‘federalism.’ The Oslo Declaration which agreed to explore a federal structure is being hurled at him.
Critics forget that currently the LTTE communicates with internationals demanding their sovereignty status be considered on par with East Timor and Kosovo. (The Sunday Leader 30/9/2007). Against that background, if Ranil sticks to the Oslo Declaration, he will be criticised for hanging on to ‘federalism’ when the LTTE is exploring a ’separate state.’

Hence, not being a heckler for tags, he expresses the substantial position of the UNP – i.e. credible sharing of power. For him substance is priority. Therefore, it is worthwhile examining whether the proposed substance is appropriate for peacemaking.

Let us look at the substance summarily:

UNP (i) opposes separatism (ii) considers terrorism requires a military option, (iii) considers causes for separatism need to be addressed by a political solution. This is the government’s thinking and CFA’s stipulation too.

The UNP government opposed separatism and this was why a peace process was initiated where territorial integrity and sovereignty were safeguarded by CFA Article 1.3. The Mahinda Chintana states “I will not permit any separatism,” (pp 26) and the UNP repositioning confirmed this statement.

Territorial integrity

CFA’s ’separation of forces’ is often criticised as selling Sri Lankan territorial integrity/sovereignty. Separation of Forces was first agreed by President Chandrika Kumaratunga with Velupillai Prabhakaran, by signing an agreement on January 5, 1995 when President Rajapaksa was a Minister in the same Cabinet. (Refer Anton Balasingham’s ‘Politics of Duplicity’ pp 64-66 and Presidential Secretariat Press Statement of 9/1/1995)

The UNP responded to LTTE militarily (e.g. killing nearly 30 Sea Tigers and seven cadres at Kanjirankudah) while peacemaking and President Rajapaksa has a bagful of killings (more than 5,000) due to waging war. Nevertheless, the approach is similar.
At the UN, the President committed to a political solution and it is confirmed by the UNP before and after repositioning.

Repositioned UNP states that a solution is based on
(i) renunciation of violence, (ii) human rights, (iii) democracy. These are incorporated in the UNP’s CFA. The Mahinda Chinthana does not speak of human rights at all; therefore, the repositioned UNP is one up. CFA Article 1.2 renounced violence of all sorts and is repeated in the repositioned statement.

The UNP’s CFA and pre-CFA relaxations on movement, removal of embargoes, release of PTA detainees not liable for prosecution, return of displaced and refugees etc showed commitment to alleviate rights problems.

During negotiations, rights issues were discussed (e.g. Ian Martin’s interventions) but violations were not eliminated though reduced. The UNP performed best between 2002 and 2003 in comparison to many years up to 2006 on disappearances, according to the IGP, with a total of 1679 for two years. (Irida Lankadeepa June 24, 2007).

Agreements reached at negotiations for pluralism (Oslo Peace Talks Decision 4) and holding local elections (Hakone Peace Talks Decision 14) confirm UNP’s interests for democracy. Repositioning reiterates it.

The acceptance of a political solution is reflected by sustainability. The UNP received international support to the extent that the LTTE became suspicious, as seen from LTTE statements on their fear of the ‘International Safety Net.’ The UNP has reiterated the same international stance with repositioning. The President also expects international support.

The unit of devolution was considered the ‘merged north and east’ due to the Indo- Lanka Accord. However, the Supreme Court invalidated it on technical grounds. If the UNP adheres to the same unit, the criticism would be on ‘handing over the north and east to the LTTE on a silver platter!’ Therefore, the UNP had to change. The UNP has kept the demarcation unit open and depends on the outcome of a political solution. The unit of devolution will become a constitutional issue. Therefore, it has to follow a political solution that obtains acceptance at a referendum. Hence, the unit issue will remain until a political solution emerges.

Credible power sharing

Most important is Section 6 which gives priority to a ‘credible power sharing’ between tiers of government. One major suspicion of the minorities is the withdrawal of shared power. Under the 13th Amendment, the UNP and SLFP/ PA governments have played truant on power sharing through withdrawal of shared power e.g. schools, hospitals, land. What the repositioned UNP states in Section 7 is that the ‘Principle of Subsidiary’ would be implemented and safeguards against any countermanding will be introduced to make power sharing credible. The President has not settled this score with his political allies and he is one down on this point.

Like the President, the UNP is also interested in resuming Peace Talks. Human rights, investigations on abductions and disappearances, removing the culture of impunity and guaranteeing of democratic rights are highlighted by the UNP, which are novel improvements. This will naturally include corruption, rule of law etc. Therefore, none should object to these unless they want to violate human rights, carry on abductions and disappearances, violate democratic rights, be corrupt and not be above the law. This is a positive approach against these ills that plague the country, which is not outlined in the peace plan of the government.

The CFA is in shambles. Though the UNP’s repositioning thinks of amending, it may not be easy, if tried under CFA Article 4.3. However, the international facilitators should consider strategies to make essential amendments as and when necessary.
A Muslim delegation was accepted in principle at the Fourth Session of Peace Talks (Decision 7), but conditionally. Now, with eastern environmental changes sticking to such conditional decisions is unrealistic, hence the UNP repositioning is for the greater good of Muslims. This will be attracting Muslims to UNP proposals.

Restructuring peace talks is another reposition of the UNP. This is an improvement as the UNP previously discussed only with the LTTE. Even the EPDP, PLOTE etc will have their stake with UNP proposals. Talks centred around all parties at the APRC have not brought the desired results. However, the Mahinda Chintana stated “… in doing so, the fundamental platform that I would base my initiative on would be an undivided country, a national consensus and an honourable peace.” (pp 31).The UNP repositioning has travelled a bit far compounding international contributions.

Dropping federalism

However, the UNP bashers remain nasty on repositioning for ‘dropping federalism.’ For two reasons these criticisms have to be negated. One is that any dynamic political party has to go shoulder to shoulder with the emerging field situations. Two is, if the UNP succumbs to these critics it cannot be dynamic, because when they try to change they are criticised for trying to be dynamic and when they do not change they are criticised as static! They will therefore be static forever.

When the UNP repositions, the criticism is “Why did the UNP reposition?” One should genuinely appreciate Athureliye Ratana Thera for being happy on the UNP repositioning, though the reason for change cannot be as he thought. (The Nation 30/9/2007)

The true reason for criticism is that repositioning has created new problems for other parties. The JVP suspects that grassroots support may shift towards the UNP as the repositioning could be acceptable to youth. The JHU too may face a similar problem. The JHU may even fear that the large number of UNPers who voted for them may return to the UNP fold with repositioning.

If Tamil problems are addressed as a common right and Indians gain a bigger responsibility and role for peacemaking, even the estate labour force may shift allegiance. As the CWC has a voting input from the UNP through election pacts, any criticism from the CWC has to be considered in that light.

Fears of SLFP

The SLFP must be worried that the UNP has come closer to majority thinking which was virtually ‘monopolised’ by them. Now it will be ‘Oligopoly!’ With the troubled status of the economy and political problems, the SLFP may suspect that their support base would erode due to policy repositioning and minorities might tilt towards the UNP. The SLFP may be specifically worried over Muslim gains through repositioning due to the SLMC factor. This should irk them.

Otherwise, the SLFP should be happy when the major Opposition comes closer to their thinking on separatism, military action against terror, consideration of the majority view etc. because these are close to the much sought after consensus. The new thinking of the UNP cannot allure the LTTE because they are better off with the current CFA.

Anyone should be happy that the UNP has found a practical working arrangement unlike the Mahinda Chinthana, which planned for initial talks to be completed within three months (pp 32), obtaining majority consensus, direct talks with the LTTE, a specific time frame (pp 33), an Asian cooperation and frank discussions with the co-chairs, other powerful countries and facilitators (pp 34) etc. These have totally collapsed. However, the crux of intentions is incorporated under Section 10 of the repositioning statement that envisages a ‘political solution acceptable to all communities’ accepted ‘at a Referendum.’ The ‘Constitutional amendment incorporating a political solution will be passed by Parliament,’ and it ‘will have to be approved … at a second Referendum.’ Such clarity was missing even in the CFA.

As a safety valve, the UNP proposes ‘contingency plans to deal with any breakdown in negotiations or when there are obstacles to a political solution.’ This was one important arrangement that was absent for peacemaking by the UNP/SLFP and assisted the LTTE to drop out of talks. Hence, this will be of common interest to the SLFP too.

In a nutshell, the repositioned proposals continue with some previous nuances, revise some stipulations, improve where required, introduce new approaches, drop tags for peacemaking and propose reasonable working arrangements. It could be considered a move to develop consensus, if the parties are willing to have consensus, rather than to win kudos all alone. I think Sri Lankan political parties should discuss these proposals without jealousies and try to further improve with specifics and make use of it rather than to be extremely critical and find loopholes. [Courtesy: The Nation]

[The writer is a former Defence Secretary]

Comments (5)

« Previous Page« Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries »Next Page »