Tuesday 31 August 2010

Sri Lanka Tamil Genocide and the failure of UN and IC to Protect

The UN have been playing a very dangerous game with Sri -Lanka in not addressing the Tamil Genocide, War Crimes and Real causes of the conflict - which is Race Hate.


The UN and IC have been avoiding to label the Tamil conflict as Genocide so as to avoid their mandatory obligation (and failed) responsibility to proactively act to prevent! ...be in no doubt as to whats happening to Sri Lanka Tamils is Genocide and the ethnic civil war and war-on-terror being pretext to Genocide. On the grounds of UN Genocide Convention, the comprehensive list of acts of crimes against the Tamil community categorically falls under the section of, Genocide 'in-part'. Refer to detailed works conducted by Tamils Against Genocide (TAG); Professor Francis Boyle; Genocide Prevention Project; et al.

Genocide statistics

* Over the 60-year conflict circa 150,000 Tamils have been Killed

* The realistic figures for Vanni massacre in 2009 surfacing with ABC News report on 9th February 2010. Gordon Weiss UN’s former Colombo spokesman put the figure to be much as 40,000 civilians slaughtered.

* Ethnic Cleansing; Over 1 Million Tamils have fled the Country and many on refugee status all over the world Over ½ million Tamils internally Displaced

* Circa 300,000 Tamil IDP's (inc 80,000 children) had been held in Nazi-style concentration camps with horrific reported stories of rape, torture, disappearance. Untold thousands of IDPs still secretly imprisoned and tortured...

The Permanent Peoples Tribunal (PPT) findings

The PPT held court proceedings to address the horrific final stages of the war between the Sri Lankan Armed Forces and the LTTE [Dublin on 14th and 15th January 2010]. The PPT tribunal officially concluded on the following (disturbing) findings:

(01) That the Sri Lankan Government is guilty of war crimes

(02) That the Sri Lankan Government is guilty of crimes against humanity

(03) That the charge of genocide requires further investigation

(04) That the IC, particularly the UK and USA, share responsibility for the breakdown of the peace process

The PPT went on to further conclude on the following (recommended) next steps:

01. We call on the Sri Lankan Government to all the UN to conduct an inquiry into war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated during the final stages of the war between the Sri Lankan Armed Forces and the LTTE, and during the war's aftermath.

02. We call on the Sri Lankan Government to release all those being detained in concentration camps and the estimated 11,000 people being held secretly at unknown locations.

03. We call on the Sri Lankan Government to end the use of extra-judicial killings, sexual violence and the deprivation of food and water as weapons against a civilian poulation.

04. We call on the Sri Lankan Government to end the suppression of political dissent by violence or other means.

05. We call on the Sri Lankan Government to fully implement human rights for all citizens of Sri Lanka and a political solution involving the full participation of the Tamil population, ending the systematic historical discriminatory measures of the Sri Lankan state against the Tamil people.

Failure of UN and International Community (IC) to protect.

The UN to date has been impotent in addressing the Genocidal issues with the recent Tamil Humanitarian crisis, due to Security Council political folly - China and Russia had previously been blocking at the Security Council. India's mastermind influence behind the scene with the whole so-called war on terror.

Factual Milestone Statements/ Developments:

(01) The UN and IC responded in a lukewarm manner to the genocide and only moved to opinion ate dissatisfaction when obvious mass slaughter and war crimes evidence was being leaked. The International Crisis Group (11th January 2010) have stated "India and Western governments may yet come to regret giving Sri Lanka the green light - and even assisting it - to fight a "war on terror".

GoSL primary supporters in UN preventing Human Right Council War Crimes Investigation - India, China, Russia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Philippines, Qatar, Senegal, South Africa, Uruguay, Zambia.

(02) James Ross, legal and policy director at Human Rights Watch, said at the time of slaughter: "This 'war' against civilians must stop. Sri Lankan forces are shelling hospitals and so-called safe zones and slaughtering the civilians there." Sri Lankan armed forces have repeatedly struck hospitals (30 incidents) in the northern Vanni region in indiscriminate artillery and aerial attacks, according to Human Rights Watch (8th May 2009).

(03) UNOSAT satellite images for the period February 5 and April 19 (2009) in a leaked United Nations report showed evidence of aerial bombing on the safe zone, or “no-fire zone”. US military satellites secretly monitored Sri Lanka’s conflict zone during the latter stages of the war and American officials were examining images for evidence of war crimes during 1H 2009. Human rights activists said the images need further examination and enquiries, but could constitute the strongest evidence yet of violations of international humanitarian law or war crimes.

(04) David miliband, UK Forerign Secretary had previously referenced 'Acts of Genocide' by GoSL in parliament and was made aware of the war crimes by GoSL/ SLA principally via Satellite Imagery of their indiscriminate bombings in the No Fire Zone area. David Milliband raised clear doubts about whether Colombo could be trusted in this matter

(05) GoSL presidential top aide Lalith Weeratunga confirmed on 14th January 2010 [what was widely known by the IC at the time] that Rajapaksha's government mislead the UN over the use of heavy weapons over densely confined civilians in the 'No Fire Zone' area and that "Colombo ordered a halt to the use of heavy weapons only in April [2009], two months after a UN envoy was promised that such armaments would not be used".

(06) Gordon Weiss the former UN Spokesperson has stated on 9th February 2010 - "The Sri Lankan government said many things which were either intentionally misleading, or were lies".

(07) The UN and in particular Ban-Ki moon has been internationally criticised with his reluctance to act and prevent the genocide and implicit support with GoSL conduct of the Genocidal-War. The TIMES revealed, United Nations Secretary-General was told in advance that at least 20,000 Tamil civilians were killed in the Sri Lankan Government’s final offensive against the Tamil Tiger rebels. Mr Ban-Ki Moon never mentioned the death toll during his tour of the battleground on 23rd May 2009... and "Mr Ban never mentioned this figure to his Sri Lankan interlocutors" (GulfDailyNews, 7th June 2009). Steve Crawshaw a UNHRC expert is quoted saying "I hope Mr Ban Ki-Moon will make explicit his backing for the creation of a commission of inquiry, and that the Security Council will wake up in a way that it has failed to wake up during the last three months."

(08) Professor Boyle stated on 8th May 2009, "UN Secretary General has an obligation to act to prevent criminal activity and either refuses or fails to do so, that would render him 'complicit' with the underlying criminal activity - in this case genocide. Article III(e) of the 1948 genocide Convention prohibits, criminalizes and calls for the punishment of:'Complicit in Genocide'."

(09) Further disturbing UN involvement - revelation by The Times that Vijay Nambiar chief of staff to Ban Ki-moons role as UN envoy dealings with GoSL had come into question since his brother Satish has been a paid consultant to the Sri Lanka army since 2002 and close supporter of General Sarath Fonseka (Commander of SLA forces). Tamilnet reported on 30th May 2009, the French paper Le Monde, quoted Vijay Nambiar as telling UN representatives that the UN should "keep a low profile" and play a "sustaining role" that was compatible with the government". Professor Boyle commented "in other words, both the United Nations Organisation itself and its highest level officials are guilty of aiding and abetting Nazi-type crimes against the Tamils by the GoSL."

ICP's Matthew Lee asked UN spokesperson Martin Nesirky on Mr Nambiar involvement [23rd Dec 2009] "..what was the UN’s role in these attempted surrenders?" And went on to ask "where does it stand on Mr. Ban’s call for accountability or some type of an outside investigation or panel of inquiry into possible war crimes?"

(10) Following the 'bloodbath' and overthrow of Tigers during Q2 2009, the Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) imprisoned ~ 300,000 Tamil civilians in Nazi-style concentration camps which according to Professor Boyle can be charged further with "the international crime of genocide as defined by Articles II(b) and (c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention". "Furthermore, for the United Nations Organization and Western States to continue to finance these Nazi-style concentration camps renders them complicit in this instance of the GoSL's genocide against the Tamils in violation of Genocide Convention Article III(e) that criminalizes "Complicity in genocide."

(11) On UN failure with R2P in Sri Lanka, Norman Chomsky, Professor Emeritus of linguistics at MIT said at the UN General Assembly the "hypocrisy was so profound, it was suffocating."

War Crimes and failure of UN to investigate

Factual Milestone Statements/ Developments:

(01) Professor Boyle, professor of International Law at the University of Illinois College of Law on 22nd April 2009 - "This same type of deliberate stalling, delaying and obfuscation by United Nations Officials preceded and occurred during the course of the genocide massacre at Srebrenica"; and further stated on 30th May 2009 - "By comparison, today the GOSL's genocidal massacre of the Tamils in Vanni could be about four times Serbia's genocide massacre of the Bosnians at Srebrenica."

(02) Professor Boyle statement on the unprincipled UN Human Rights Council Resolution [27th May 2009] - "This Resolution simultaneously gives the imprimatur of the U.N. Human Rights Council to the ethnic cleansing, genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes that the Government of Sri Lanka has already inflicted upon the Tamils in the past, as well as the Council's proverbial "green light" for the GOSL to perpetrate and escalate more of the same international crimes against the Tamils in the future," ..."Sri Lanka, together with these other [in favour] Council States, are contracting parties to some or all of these International Criminal Law Conventions and therefore must be held accountable for their violation and international crimes against the Tamils," ..."History shall so judge them all!"

(03) Prof Noam Chomsky on UN's R2P forum said "what happened in Sri Lanka was a major Rwanda-like atrocity, in a different scale, where the West didn't care". Further during SOAS conference in London October 2009, he added the way the West acts, "there is no protection for any people who it doesn't do any good [to the West] to protect, and basically Sri Lankans [Tamils] are in that unfortunate position."

(04) Philip Alston, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has formally commented that there is catgorical strong indications that the British News Channel 4 video of alleged extrajudicial executions by Sri Lankan soldiers to be authentic. Mr Alston has called on the GoSL to respond to the war crime allegations and for the relevant UN heads to take note of the war crime findings.

(05) Brad Adams, Human Rights Watch (HRW) said on 8th November 2009 "the SL government has no interest in holding human rights abusers accountable, as it showed with the last presidential commission of inquiry. That was a farce and so will this latest evasive action" [in relation to GoSL sudden turn around after US Dept published report on SL War Crimes, October 2009 and alarm over Gen Sarath Fonseka being questioned]. "Its time for Ban [Ki Moon] to realise that Mahinda Rajapaksha lied to him when he promised a serious national investigation and to do what he has done elsewhere [as in Africa] and establish an independent commission to investigate possible war crimes".

(06) Sarath Fonseka (retired) Army General had openly revealed [as part of political infighting, Dec 2009] that Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa ordered troops to kill LTTE leaders when they raised white flags to surrender. BBC Sinhala reported Sarath Fonseka comments on 8th February 2010, prior to his arrest - "I am definitely going to reveal what I know, what I was told and what I heard. Any one who has committed war crimes should definitely be brought into courts".

(07) Canadian Tamil Congress spokesman David Poopalapillai told IANS "From day one we knew that war crimes were being committed by the Sri Lankan army, but the international community asked us: where is the proof? Now the proof has come from the top army guy,'' "What more proof do world leaders and the international community now need to try the Sri Lankan president and his men for crimes against humanity?'' "Rajapaksa is a war criminal. He should be taken to The Hague to face trial for war crimes. No nation has violated the Geneva Convention as flagrantly as Sri Lanka. No nation [in civilised period following the GC] ever killed the surrendering enemy.''

(08) Brad Adams HRW, stated on 27th January 2010 "Ban [Ki-Moon] and key goverments should not fall for the same trick again and instead should call for an indpendant international investigation. The ball is now in Ban's court"

(09) The Independent on 12th February 2010 reported that Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, the country’s defence secretary has openly stated, “I will not allow any investigation by the United Nations or any other country. There is nothing wrong happening in this country? Take it from me, we will not allow any investigation”.

(10) BBC Sinhala reported on 12th February 2010, "Navi Pillai, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has told a gathering in Dublin, in Ireland that her office is in a clear understanding that national investigations "have not worked so far".

(11) Prof Boyle has commented on 21st February 2010 - "Now that Defense Minister Rajapaksa has rejected such an investigation by the GOSL itself, under international law the onus is now upon U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to appoint a war crimes investigation body with respect to Sri Lanka as he has recently done in Africa".

(12) ICP reported France Gerard Araud attributed Ban's reticence to pressure from India and China [5th March 2010]

(13) The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon does not need the permission of the Security Council to initiate such an investigation - i.e. there is no option here for China to to utilise again its great-power veto. Its important to note reports on China's strategy with 'String of Pearls' and their disregard for human rights consideration in their choice of investment. China [and to a lesser degree Russia] with their powers in the securiy council should NOT be allowed to undermine UN's credibility and impartiality on such an important humanity matter.

(14) The UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has announced in March 2010 that a Panel of Experts will advice HIM ONLY on the way forward. The Secretary General is obliged by his duty of office to ensure violations international law is upheld and MUST follow through with a UN iniated independent commission to investigate war crimes, crimes against humanity and UN/IC actions during the course of the conflict between GoSL/SLA and LTTE.

Legal options to prosecute Sri Lanka

Factual Milestone Statements/ Developments:

(01) Legal Sources have stated, the "International law permits International bodies to step-in to conduct investigations on war-crimes in Sri Lanka, as the opportunities given to Sri Lanka to investigate and prosecute war crimes committed by its armed forces have been exhausted".

(02) On a Legal prosecution option, eventhough Sri Lanka is not a signatory party to the Rome Statute, its important to note Tamils Against Genocide (TAG) have stated the ICC do have the powers to prosecute, "..a strict textual interpretation of the proprio motu rule allows the OTP [ICC Office of the Prosecutor - Moreno Ocampo] discretionary powers to investigate non-signatory countries especially when the violator nation satisfies the following conditions: (1) The State is alleged to have grossly violated international laws having committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide, and (2) Actions of the Stata has statisfied the complementarity mandated by international law".

TamilNet has further reported that TAG views there is a clear case against Sri Lanka at the ICC and are working on legal material for submission to the ICC under the proprio motu powers under Article 15.

(03) Tamilnet reported "However, [the ICC] prosecutor Moreno Ocampo in a recent interview at the CNN, expressed reservations on using his own powers to investigate Sri Lanka".

(04) An alternative option to overcome the political game played out by the UN and IC players has been proposed by Professor Boyle - wherby an International Criminal Tribunal for Sri Lanka (ICTSL) could be set up by the United Nations General Assembly and thus avoid the Security Council who have no powers over the Assembly.

(05) Professor Boyle has stated that the findings from the commission should provide the proof needed by the UN General Assembly to endorse the creation of the ICTSL to ensure guilty parties are made accountable for their international crimes against the Tamils.

Way-Forward

IC analysts such as the International Crisis Group report has stated "For the Tamil Diaspora group to try and pursue the politics of the LTTE without the LTTE is politically naive and politically unviable" (Report No 99, 11th January 2010).

The danger here is that if the UN and IC fails again to 'step in' to resolve the conflict this will pave the path for the LTTE (or splinter group) to reemerge.

Reverting back to militant methods to resolve the Genocide is a dangerous route on many levels but most of all from a human cost perspective - since, the LTTE or splinter group could potentially start a new line of attack in taking the war down South with a comprehensive bombing campaign in targeting Sinhalese areas in a very disruptive way on any commercial setting to force Economic melt-down and even worse - start killings in an indiscriminate manner duplicating the GoSL/SLA genocidal atrocities inflicted on the Tamil civilians in Vanni. Which will be of no use to anybody and only lead to further bloody prolonged war and crimes against humanity.

The Next Real (Peaceful) Solution for Sri Lanka lies with the UN and IC jointly acting through all diplomatic channels and economic sanction measures to ensure complete closure of the Nazi-style Concentration IDP camps; allow independent international bodies to monitor the IDP releases and freedom of movement promised; initiate War-Crimes/ Genocide investigations; ensure bona fide Truth and Reconciliation process which needs to be internationally monitored; and develop regional devolution (political & economical) - as part of a fundamental frame-work to allow peace a chance, alleviate the ethnic Tamil suffering and overcome tragedy with Sri Lanka as a nation.

The Sri Lankan Tamil's in general have not helped matters to date by the community inherent problem with lack of unity when it has come to unifying under the greater goal of combating Tamil Genocide and Self Determination. The current challenge that faces the Tamil community during the next episode of this appalling saga is whether they are able to set-aside their differences on strategies, speak with a unifying voice and unite at a global level to capitalise on the diaspora global presence to press for international justice and exercise the UN chartered rights to self determination [given that GoSL is alrady a signatory party to the 'International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights'].

Further Internet based information's

Eminent Australians have recently spoke-out on Sri-Lanka recent War Crimes, Tamil Genocide, Tamil Perscution Tamil Ethnic Cleansing - Speakers: Hon. John Dowd AO QC; Dr. John Whitehall; Mr. Bruce Haigh, Dr Sam Pari.

http://fastuntoaction.wordpress.com/eminent-australians-speak/

Professor Francis Boyle a leading American expert in international law has recently published “The Tamil Genocide by Sri Lanka” is available from Clarity Press, Inc., Ste. 469, 3277 Roswell Rd. NE, Atlanta, GA. 30305, USA or online at http://www.claritypress.com/Boyle-Tamil.html. ISBN: 978-0-932863-70-6 ($14.95)

I have found the following YouTube interview with Bruce Fein (America Freedom Agenda), coverage by BloodPolitics to be most eloquent in describing the problem in Sri Lanka.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcSLO74geMs

Sample of demonstration video clips in London on 31st January 2009 (over 100,000 attended, which included hundreds of families with all ages of children in protesting on the suffering and hardship experienced by Tamils in Sri Lanka) (Global Peace Support)

Home           Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)  

Monday 30 August 2010

2009: The State of Human Rights in Sri Lanka

The world Human Rights Day was on the 10th December. The event passed in Sri Lanka without anything to celebrate in terms of any kind of positive achievements in the area of human rights. In fact, looking for human rights in Sri Lanka is becoming increasingly like looking for water on the moon or in the desert.

Permissiveness of corruption which has now begun to permeate all areas of life, virtually destroying all mechanisms of good governance, destroys the possibility of achieving any human rights either in the field of civil and political rights or social, economic and cultural rights. Naturally the groups that suffer most are the most vulnerable groups in society such as women, children, the elderly and the minorities.

The system of the executive presidency that exists in Sri Lanka, which is very similar to a system of absolute power in the system of the monarchies, has undermined the parliamentary system and the judicial system which had developed to some extent in the past. In the recent decades the admiration for dictatorships which developed in the two major political parties, the UNP and the SLFP helped to promote the system of the executive presidency. The president in Sri Lanka is above the law and there is nothing in the legal system that can exercise any form of checks and balances in order to control the abuse of power by the president.

The development of any abuse of power encourages the forces of violence within society. Sri Lanka today is one of the most violent societies where there is great permissiveness of extrajudicial killings. In the recent decades extrajudicial killings have taken the form of disappearances or various kinds of killings after arrest and while in police or military custody.

Accompanied with extrajudicial killings are the various possibilities that exist for prolonged detention without any recourse to judicial remedies. Under emergency and anti terrorism laws people have been kept for many years in detention without any possibility of obtaining meaningful redress from the courts. Intervention by the courts has been prevented by various kinds of suspensions of the ordinary laws of criminal procedure and constitutional provisions.

Added to these are heavy psychological pressures which have been created under the name of nationalism in order to discourage any kind of sympathy for victims of human rights abuse. The judicial remedies such as habeas corpus and fundamental rights provisions have suffered greatly due to such pressures generated by nationalism. The discouragement of the legal profession from providing a vigorous service to the citizens to defend rights has also contributed to the decline of human rights in Sri Lanka.

The use of torture is endemic in the policing system in Sri Lanka and added to this is the use of torture in preventive detention under the prevention of terrorism laws and the emergency regulations. All possibilities of finding redress against torture have been suppressed by deliberate denial of the investigative mechanisms into the complaints of torture and other abuses of human rights.

The mechanism of investigation into complaints of human rights abuse through the legal provisions of the criminal procedure code has been suppressed by deliberate political manipulations which virtually leaves the possibility of investigations in the hands of political authorities. The secretariat of the Ministry of Defense has developed a draconian system of controls on the security apparatus that has the capacity of interfering in all investigations into human rights abuses.

This interference has been used to encourage underground elements and some sections of the security forces themselves to engage in illegal activities towards those considered to be unacceptable elements to the government. With this an enormous psychology of fear and intimidation has been created within the country.

The abuse of civil rights has a direct impact on the economic, social and cultural rights in the country. The attacks on journalists which are known globally have placed Sri Lanka among the worst countries for the suppression of freedom of expression. The assassination of journalists has also lead to the fleeing of journalist from the country. Added to this is the self-censorship that has spread due to extreme forms of fear of repercussions.
Manipulating this situation the government has geared up its propaganda mechanism to all state media and the abuse of the media is one of the most visible factors in the country. Even the use of language in the state media has so degenerated and the political attacks on individuals and the abuse of individuals take place through television and radio programmes generally throughout the day. The entire state media is being used for political purposes, particularly for manipulation of the electoral system to the detriment of all opposition political parties.

Under these conditions it is the poor that naturally suffer the most. The suppression of the trade unions and the organizations of the ordinary folk among the farmers as well as the students and others have taken many visible forms. The general deterioration of the living standards is the complaint of all the population including the middle class. Skyrocketing of the prices of essential goods, the enormous problems in the transport systems, the breakdown of the health system and the degeneration of the educational system are among the most frequently heard complaints. However, all organized forums of discussions of such discontent have been suppressed by various forms of violence that is constantly being perpetrated on the population.

Under all these circumstances the assertion of any kind of rights has become extremely difficult in Sri Lanka. It is no exaggeration to assert that seeking human rights in Sri Lanka is as difficult as looking water on the moon or in the desert.

This situation that exists in all parts of the country exists to most unbearable extent in the north and the east. People living there are victims of absolute impunity. Those who dare to make any complaint about their tormentors run a real risk to their lives, liberty and whatever that is left of their properties. Displacement has become a normal affair in the homeland of the Tamil and Muslim populations. (Rule of Law SL)

Home         Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)    

The international significance of Sri Lanka’s emerging police state

The rapid moves by the Sri Lankan government towards a police state not only spell danger for the working class on this island, but are a warning to workers around the world. As debt crises erupt in country after country and governments encounter resistance to the savage austerity measures being demanded by international finance capital, the anti-democratic methods of President Mahinda Rajapakse are an advance notice of the measures that will be used elsewhere.
Political tensions in Colombo illustrate broader international processes in an acute form. The island was embroiled in a savage communal war for 26 years which came to an end with the defeat of the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) last May. President Rajapakse, who had restarted the war in 2006 and conducted it with particular ruthlessness, declared that he would now bring “peace and prosperity” to the island.
The opposite has been the case. The end of the fighting solved none of the underlying problems. Having mortgaged the country to pay for his criminal war, Rajapakse was compelled to take out a $2.6 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to prevent a major balance of payments crisis. Now with the IMF calling the tune, the government is preparing to make major inroads into the living standards of working people.

Rajapakse has been seeking to consolidate his grip over the state apparatus in preparation for social convulsions. In the course of the war, he increasingly operated through a presidential cabal of relatives, close advisers and generals acting independently of parliament and with growing contempt for constitutional and legal norms. The president wielded his extensive powers under the state of emergency, which is still in place, to ban strikes, threaten the media and conduct widespread detentions without trial. Pro-government death squads acting with the complicity of the security forces killed hundreds of people, including politicians and journalists.

Calculating that he could politically exploit the military “victory” over the LTTE, Rajapakse called the presidential election two years early in a bid to entrench himself in power. The opposition parties backed the country’s former top general, Sarath Fonseka, as their “common candidate” in the bitterly fought election on January 26. Fonseka had been part of Rajapakse’s inner circle but fell out with the president and resigned last November to contest the poll.

Rajapakse’s election win, far from settling the issues, produced what can only be described as factional warfare in the country’s ruling elites. Fonseka refused to concede defeat and threatened to mount a legal challenge. The government responded last week by placing the former general under military arrest, on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations that he was plotting to overthrow Rajapakse.

A day later, the president prorogued parliament and announced a general election for April 8 which will now take place in a political climate of fear and intimidation. The government has already announced that its aim is to obtain a two-thirds majority, giving it the power to change the constitution and thus provide the legal fig leaf for Rajapakse’s autocratic rule.

For all the venom of the infighting in the Colombo establishment, the factional disputes are of a tactical character—how to impose new economic burdens on working people and where to line up in the sharpening rivalry between the major powers, especially between the US and China. Rajapakse’s extreme measures are a sure sign that class tensions on the island are reaching a breaking point.

While Greek debts are in the international headlines, Sri Lanka’s economic crisis is of a similar magnitude. The country’s overall debts rose to four trillion rupees ($US35 billion) in the first 10 months of 2009. According to the IMF, the ratio of total public debt to gross domestic product (GDP) reached 87 percent in 2008. The budget deficit has risen to 11.3 percent of GDP and the IMF is demanding that the ratio must be slashed to 5 percent by the end of 2011.

Hongkong and Shanghai Bank Corporation Senior Economist Robert Prior-Wandesforde told a seminar in Colombo last week that the government had to go far further in slashing public spending. Dismissing Rajapakse’s economic figures, Prior-Wandesforde said: “He has to deliver like he did with terrorism [the LTTE]. The one thing that would prevent Sri Lanka from reaching its true potential is the kind of recklessness, wastefulness and corruption in public expenditure.”

Greek economic measures now have to be applied in Sri Lanka and more broadly. But the corollary is that Sri Lankan political methods will increasingly be employed in Greece and elsewhere as popular opposition grows to huge new economic burdens. The crisis is not isolated to economically backward countries like Sri Lanka and problem European states such as Greece, Portugal, Spain and Ireland. A default by Greece would impact heavily on Germany and France and reverberate throughout the EU. Britain is heavily indebted, as is the US, which is only able to sustain a budget deficit at 10.6 percent of GDP because its dollar remains the international reserve currency.

The present global economic crisis is not a temporary phenomenon, but results from the breakdown of the mechanisms put in place after World War II to restore the equilibrium of world capitalism. The United States, which was central to the post-war restabilisation, is now in economic decline and is at the centre of the present financial turmoil. Whatever the short-term ups and downs of particular economies or the global economy as a whole, the world has entered a new period of economic convulsions that has profound political ramifications for the working class.

Anyone who dismisses the warning signs in Sri Lanka would be badly mistaken. Because of its particular history and relationship to the global economy, this small island often sharply reflects economic and political processes taking place internationally. In the final analysis, amid heightened economic and social tensions, the ruling elites around the world are being driven to defend their privileged position by adopting Sri Lankan methods.
The working class needs to draw the necessary conclusion: the only means of defending their basic democratic rights and living standards is to abolish the present social order and to restructure society to meet the pressing needs of the majority, rather than the profits of the wealthy few. (WSWS)

Home         Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)      

Sri Lankan military court convicts former army commander

A Sri Lankan military court convicted former presidential candidate and army commander General Sarath Fonseka last Friday of “engaging in active politics while in uniform”. He will be stripped of his military rank, medals, honours, pension and other benefits, and be barred from military installations.

The following day, President Mahinda Rajapakse, who is also defence minister and commander-in-chief, ratified the court’s sentence. Fonseka rejected the verdict and indicated that he would appeal.

The court decision was a political one designed to justify Fonseka’s arrest shortly after the January presidential election, in which Rajapakse won a second term of office. Fonseka was detained along with a number of supporters, including former army officers, amid allegations that the former army chief had been planning a coup. In lurid government propaganda, Fonseka was accused of plotting to imprison Rajapakse and murder his brothers. The government provided no evidence for the allegations.

Fonseka was held for weeks before being charged on two counts in separate courts martial—of engaging in politics and alleged corruption in relation to military procurements. He also faces charges in civilian courts, including: harbouring army deserters, profitting from arms sales and “spreading... a false statement that could cause panic or inflame the public”. The latter charge relates to accusations of potential war crimes against the president’s brother, Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse.

Last week’s verdict was handed down without providing any detail. The defence ministry website simply noted that the tribunal had “probed the accused’s involvement in politics on three separate charges,” including of being “Traitorous/Disloyal” under section 124 of the Army Act and “Neglect to obey garrison or other orders” under section 102.

The hearings were held behind closed doors. The prosecution was based on four witnesses: former United National Party (UNP) parliamentarian Johnston Fernando, UNP parliamentarian Lakshman Seneviratne, former airport aviation services director Gamini Abeyratne and Major General A.W.J.C. de Silva. Two of them, Fernando, now a government minister, and Seneviratne, claimed that Fonseka sought their help to obtain membership of the opposition UNP. Abeyratne, a government supporter, said he had facilitated the meetings.

From the outset, Fonseka accused the court of being biased. Two of the three officers sitting as military judges had previously been disciplined by Fonseka when he was army commander and the third was a relative of current army commander, Major General Jagath Jayasuriya, who is regarded as a Rajapakse loyalist. The military court ignored these objections, and civilian courts dismissed Fonseka’s appeals against the courts martial.

The anti-democratic character of the court proceedings was underscored by the absence of defence lawyers on the final three days of hearings. Senior defence lawyer Rienzi Arsecularatne told Associated Press: “They went ahead and fixed the court martial on the days I was not available. This is not a proper trial. This is a total miscarriage of justice.”

Fonseka was closely associated with Rajapakse after the president was elected in November 2005 and plunged the country back to war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in mid-2006. As army commander, Fonseka was in charge of the brutal offensives that drove the LTTE out of its territory, killing and wounding thousands of civilians in the process. The general was also a central figure in the Rajapakse’s politico-military cabal that prosecuted the war and ran the country.

Fonseka fell out with Rajapakse after the LTTE’s defeat in May 2009, apparently embittered that the president had sidelined him by relegating him to the specially-created, largely ceremonial post of chief of defence staff. More broadly, Fonseka’s hostility reflected the resentments of a layer of the military’s top brass, who felt that Rajapakse was claiming all the credit for ending the war. In late November, Fonseka announced that he was resigning and contesting the January presidential election against Rajapakse.

Fonseka lost the election despite the backing of the two main opposition parties—the UNP and Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)—and significant sections of big business. Unwilling to accept his defeat, Fonseka announced a legal challenge to have him declared the winner and installed as president. Rajapakse responded with a crackdown on opposition supporters and media critics, which led to Fonseka’s arrest two weeks after the election. Despite being in military custody, the ex-general won a parliamentary seat in the April general election as part of the Democratic National Alliance, formed by the JVP.

The charge that Fonseka “engaged in politics while in uniform” is hypocritical to say the least. After a quarter century of civil war, the Sri Lankan officer caste as a whole is deeply politicised. For Fonseka to privately sound out the possibility of joining the UNP and becoming a presidential candidate was hardly unusual.

Throughout the war, Fonseka repeatedly made public political statements. He openly criticised the 2002 ceasefire agreement, attacked opposition politicians and even branded political leaders in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu as “political jokers” for attempting to pressure the Indian government to halt the war. There was never any suggestion that Fonseka would be disciplined for “engaging in politics” because the government supported these statements. Following the LTTE’s defeat, President Rajapakse hailed the general as “a great war hero”.

The subsequent bitter rivalry between Rajapakse and Fonseka was bound up with broader issues. As the LTTE’s defeat approached, the US became increasingly concerned about China’s growing influence in Colombo as a result of substantial Chinese military and financial aid. Amid mounting evidence of military atrocities involving the killing of thousands of Tamil civilians, the US, which had backed Rajapakse’s war, cynically used the threat of war crimes trials to put pressure on the government.

Rajapakse flatly denied that the military had killed any civilians and trenchantly opposed any international investigation of the final months of the war. The UN estimated that at least 7,000 civilians were killed between January and early May last year. An International Crisis Group report put the death toll far higher, at between 30,000 and 75,000, and accused the military of deliberately targetting hospitals and aid centres inside LTTE territory.

Fonseka, who was intimately involved in all these crimes, indicated his support for Washington by publicly declaring his willingness to testify to an international war crimes investigation. Even more alarming for Rajapakse, Fonseka hinted that he would pin the blame on the government. The military did not carry out war crimes, he said, but illegal orders from outside might have been responsible for such crimes.

In the midst of the election campaign, Fonseka declared that he had information that Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse had given orders to shoot surrendering senior LTTE leaders S. Puleedevan and B. Nadesan, even though they were carrying white flags. British newspapers had already reported the incident in May 2009. The Rajapakse brothers reacted to Fonseka’s statement with furious denunciations, accusing him of betraying state secrets. Even though Fonseka declared he had been misquoted, the government has continued to pursue the so-called white flag incident.

President Rajapakse’s determination to silence Fonseka is certainly aimed at ensuring that no details come to light of the war crimes. Fonseka’s conviction, however, is also part of the government’s broader attempts to suppress political opposition and criticism, no matter how limited. While Rajapakse and his coalition easily won the presidential and parliamentary elections, there is growing opposition to the government’s austerity measures dictated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The UNP and JVP have both condemned Fonseka’s conviction. Last Friday police violently broke up a demonstration in Galle organised by the JVP and Democratic National Alliance to demand Fonseka’s release. Police used tear gas and batons against 2,000 protestors. Police later arrested two JVP MPs—Vijitha Herath and Ajith Kumara—when they attempted to register a complaint about the attack. Herath and Kumara were released on Monday, but 16 others detained during the protest were remanded until August 20.

The opposition parties, like the government, are both mired in Sinhala communalism. They defend Fonseka on the grounds that he is a “war hero”. Like the Rajapakse government, Fonseka is directly responsible for the prosecution of the communal war and the crimes of the military. Moreover, during the election campaigns, Fonseka and the opposition parties made clear that they would also impose the burden of the country’s deepening economic crisis on working people.
The conviction of Fonseka is nevertheless a sharp warning to the working class. If the country’s former top general can be arrested, imprisoned and convicted on trumped-up charges, then the government will have no hesitation is using more vicious, anti-democratic methods to suppress the resistance of working people to its pro-market economic policies. (SEPLK)

Home         Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)       

My Father Has Scars To Prove His Work; by Apsara Fonseka

Almost two weeks ago, after six whole months of illegal detention and many court cases, my father’s first court martial case convicted him of doing politics while in uniform.

I must say, this did not come as any surprise to us since we knew that the verdict was written by this regime a long time ago. We knew our father would be found guilty until proven innocent, not the other way around. But the fact that we were not even given a chance to argue the case in court was not something we expected. Many probably don’t know that the case was heard and closed without even having our lawyers present – we did not even have a chance to bring forth our evidence.

I heard the Defence Secretary has started to ‘clean up’ the army.

This is the reason he had given for dishonourably discharging my father. His comment made me wonder if it was the panel or his verdict that was handed out in court. His comment sounded as if he knew what the verdict would be at the end. Anyhow, I sincerely hope that he will not stop with the army with this ‘clean up’. I hope the other forces too will see this ‘cleaning’. Especially because if this verdict is true, he surely cannot forget the fact that the President Rajapaksa’s second son and his nephew too did politics while in uniform.

No one can forget the fact that Yoshitha went around with the ‘Blue Brigade’, campaigning for his father. I’m not saying that was wrong, but that was definitely doing politics while in uniform because as far as I know, he still is a navy officer and I don’t see a court martial in the horizon for him. Then again, there were some difference between Yoshitha and my father. Firstly, my father is not a Rajapaksa and secondly, my father retired from his position before he went on into politics. So given these confusing definitions and convictions, I’m guessing that the true meaning of doing politics in uniform lies in who is the final arbiter of the decision.

I’m very interested to see what the Defence Secretary’s thoughts would be on this.

Many, including personnel in the military are disgusted with this conviction. One respectable officer went on to say that it was sickening to hear such verdicts against the General. They seem to think that if this was done to the highest ranking officer in the army, what kind of a guarantee would they have? While some believe no good deed goes unpunished, some others seem to believe the best way to survive or to get promoted inside the military is to certainly do politics ‘while’ in uniform. It seems fair to consider so, because wasn’t that what happened during the presidential election? Didn’t several high-ranking officers come on national television to campaign for the President? Were they not promoted? Were they not given high positions in organisations?

I personally don’t understand why the government wants to accuse others when they themselves wanted to bring my father into politics. I remember in one incident, the President himself asked my father to participate in a political meeting held down South. I also remember my father very clearly saying that he will not get on any stage while he was still serving the forces.

On many other occasions, I know many more government officials came to our home, while my father was still the CDS and asked him if he would like to join the government and do politics. Even government officials working abroad flew in just to do so. However, my father’s answer remained the same. So, why blame my father for coming in to politics when they clearly wanted him to join in the first place? I guess the answer is simple – He didn’t join ‘them’.

My father’s reaction to this verdict was priceless. He showed no worry regarding it. When I asked if he was saddened by the verdict and if he felt as if all his efforts and sacrifices were in vain, he merely smiled and said that these little obstacles would not affect him. He said that although the government had the power to take away his ranks, they will never be able to take away the pride and happiness he felt every time he achieved them. He said that no matter who takes what away, they could never take the memories he built as an army officer and that there will never be any regrets for serving his country.

I personally have no worries about my father losing his ranks. Neither does any member of my family. In fact, I really don’t think any Sri Lankan really cares about this verdict. It was simply another drama created for the whole world to see. My father wrote history and that can never be stolen or erased. He marked his name. He has scars to prove his work. He neither begged nor did favours to get where he did. He believes that actions always speak louder than words and that is what brought him all the respect and honour.

He didn’t run away to another country when things became dangerous or when governments changed. He faced all obstacles that came his way and he held his head up high through it all. So, just because some person gave a verdict to make another person happy and for someone to feel superior and strong, people will always remember. He will always be remembered as the army commander who was able to architect a plan to finish a war. That fact will not change. As the people say, he will always be the General of the public. Nothing or no one can change that fact.

My family and I, with many other Sri Lankans, will always honour and respect my father for all he has done for the country. So, it doesn’t matter. History has already been written and my father’s efforts will always be remembered. There is no power that can take that away.

Many already know the final outcome. The government will try to convict him before the next parliament period if not earlier. They will then sentence him to jail with an extended time period and will make sure he loses his seat in parliament. This is to be expected.

What is not known is how the people will react. I hope we will always fight for democracy for the sake of our future.

We have nothing left if we have no say, except, to remember Mahatma Gandhi’s words: “You may never know what results come of your action, but if you do nothing there will be no result.” (SL Guardian)

Home           Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)         

Rajapakse Vengeance

" The Rajapakses, having gained a world have a world to loose. That is why they react with such ‘fear and vindictiveness’ to anyone they consider to be a threat to their Familial Rule and Dynastic Project. The Rajapakses, like all political parvenus, are uncertain about their grip on power and thus very jealous of it. "

Some months ago, Defence Secretary and Presidential sibling Gotabhaya Rajapakse threatened to send the former Army Commander, Gen. Sarath Fonseka, to the gallows. When BBC’s Stephen Sackur asked about the possibility of Gen. Fonseka testifying about possible war crimes, Mr. Rajapakse went into what can only be termed a fit of apoplexy: “He can’t do that. He was the commander. That’s a treason. We will hang him if he do that….. How can he betray the country? He is a liar, liar, liar” (Hard Talk - BBC). The verdict of the first military tribunal indicates that this is no idle ranting. The totally disproportionate, vindictively excessive sentence of the tribunal is a symbol of Rajapakse hatred and an omen of things to come.

In Dante’s Divine Comedy, the innermost circles of hell are reserved for those who commit the most heinous crime and this is where the Rajapakses would send General Fonseka to, because according to their worldview, going against the Ruling Family is the ultimate crime. How else can the maliciously vengeful decision to strip Gen. Sarath Fonseka of his rank and honours and dishonourably discharge him be explained? A guilty verdict was never in doubt. What shocks is the sheer vindictiveness of the sentence given. After all, the first military tribunal convicted Gen. Fonseka of meddling in politics while in uniform, hardly an unusual occurrence in Sri Lanka (for instance, during the last Presidential election, several top ranking army officers appeared on state TV, in uniform, defending the government and Candidate Mahinda Rajapakse, while other top officers instructed soldiers to vote for the ruling party candidate). Army officers meddling in politics is not a healthy sign; but if all army officers who meddle in politics are dishonourably discharged, the top and the middle rungs of the Lankan Army would become somewhat. Moreover, there is not even a shadow of proportionality between the charge – meddling in politics - and the sentence – dishonourable discharge and the stripping of rank and honours. Obviously the Rajapakses not only want to punish their erstwhile ally but also to humiliate him to the maximum.

Perpetrators of human rights violations often efface their crimes by turning their victims into un-persons, ‘Untermenschens’ who do not really count as ‘human’ like the ‘rest of us’. Once this process of de-humanisation is complete it is easy to render invisible even the most heinous of crimes against the target group or individual. In the Orwellian dystopia, those guilty of ‘Thoughtcrime’ were vaporized: “Your name was removed from the registers, every record of every thing you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated…” (Nineteen Eighty-four). When non-persons disappear into jails or are snuffed out on gallows, who would notice?

Is the government implementing a similar tactic vis-à-vis Gen. Fonseka? Is his sentence (dishonourable discharge and the stripping of rank and honours) aimed at transforming him from a military ‘hero’ into a civilian non-hero in the public mind, so that even hanging him can be rendered less unpalatable to the Sinhala South? Is this one of those Rajapakse sleights of hand, so that when the former Army Commander meets his final fate (already decided on by his enemies), he will do so not as General Sarath Fonseka but as Mr. Sarath Fonseka? Is this transformation of Gen. Fonseka into Mr. Fonseka an attempt to break the link between the man and the army he once commanded? Is this vengeful sentence aimed at habituating the army to regard its former commander as an outsider, than as ‘one of us’? Is the regime using this tactic to inculcate within the army a sense of indifference towards Gen. Fonseka’s ultimate fate? Is the stage being set, so that even if Gen. Fonseka is sent to the gallows as a traitor by some other military tribunals, he will die not as the former Army Commander cum ‘war hero’ but as a disgraced civilian?

‘Reality Control’

Sarath Fonseka was a member of the Triumvirate which won the war against the LTTE. That is an indisputable, unchangeable truth. Or is it? Will the government be able to wipe out this truth by turning Gen. Fonseka’s past on its head? In the Orwellian dystopia, the aim is not just to control the deeds and the thoughts of the populace but also their memory: “The Party said that Oceania has never been in alliance with Eurasia. He, Winston Smith, knew that Oceania had been in alliance with Eurasia as short a time as four years ago. But where did that knowledge exist? Only in his own consciousness…. And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed – if all records told the same tale – then the lie passed into history and became truth. ‘Who controls the past’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past’…. It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. ‘Reality control’, they called it” (ibid). Is the Family engaged in a similar exercise of changing history via effacing public memories? After all, if Sarath Fonseka is no longer a former army officer, if he is just a civilian, could he have played any role in defeating the LTTE? Consequently is there any reason mention him in any history of the Eelam War? Vellupillai Pirapaharan used ‘Reality control’ when he arrested, tortured and murdered his one time deputy, Mahattaya. Are the Rajapakses emulating the Tiger leader in this matter as they have done in so many others?

‘Reality control’ works only in a society that is willing to adjust its collective memory according to the needs of the rulers. The North, nursing its physical and psychological in silence, is unlike to forget the key role Gen. Fonseka played in the Fourth Eelam War. Will the South remember or forget? Will the Southern society accept whatever ‘anti-truths’ the regime dishes out, in a collective exercise of ‘consciously inducing unconscious’? Will the Sinhala supremacists, who once hailed Sarath Fonseka as a hero, remember the past, now that according to the Rajapakse worldview he is not a hero and could not have been, since he is rank-less and honour-less? Will the absolute majority of Sinhalese who danced on the streets and ate kiribath to celebrate the victory over the Tigers, spare a thought for their former idol or will he become as much of a non-person as the dead, injured and displaced Tamil civilians? Will the Maha Sangha who once venerated Sarath Fonseka condone this disproportionate and thus unjust sentence with their silence, as they condone injustice done to the minorities?

It is one thing not to vote for Sarath Fonseka. I did not. But it is quite another thing to be silent when a man is being persecuted for political reasons. I do not support Gen. Fonseka but I do not need to like his ideas and actions in order to oppose the injustice being done to him. Had Gen. Fonseka remained loyal to the Rajapakse brothers, none of the charges which are being levelled against him now would have seen the light of day. He could have meddled in politics to his heart’s content; he could have abused his powers as army commander in favour of or in detriment to anyone; he could have broken any law of the land with total impunity. All that was required of him was to remain subservient to the Rajapakses, and obedient to all their decisions. Had he gone along with the Rajapakse project of establishing dynastic rule, post-war, on the strength of defeating the Tiger, he would still be a free man and a honoured ‘war hero’. His real crime was not the many charges which are being levelled against him in courts of law and before military tribunals. He fell because he ceased to obey the Rajapakses. And according to the Rajapakse ethos, that is the greatest crime of all, the one most impossible to forgive or forget.

The sentencing of Sarath Fonseka by the first military tribunal concerns all of us not only because it is a travesty of justice but also because it presages the future. Sarath Fonseka is no ordinary man; he was the Army Commander who helped defeat the Tigers. If that man can be denied his own past, if he can be transformed from patriot to anti-patriot, if he can be arrested, tried and convicted in a manner which violates all norms of justice and fair-play, simply because he opposed the Rajapakses, what cannot happen to other less exalted citizens when they fail the test of unquestioning obedience to the Ruling Family? With the persecution of Sarath Fonseka, a dangerous precedent has been created which can – and will - be used against real or imaginary opponents of the Rajapakses. If the regime is allowed to get away with this crime, it will exponentially increase the threat to the life and liberty of all Rajapakse opponents, past, present or future.

Phobia

A few years ago Gotabhaya Rajapakse was an average Asian American, working as a manager of a 7-11 Store in Los Angelis and subsequently as a systems analyst at the Loyola Law School. Today he is the second most powerful man in Sri Lanka, after President Mahinda Rajapakse, his brother. This great leap, from the ordinary to the extraordinary, happened thanks to the Rajapakse presidency and is being sustained by that solely. Many other family members made similar great leaps, from obscurity to fame and fortune. For the Rajapakse tribe, the Rajapakse Presidency has meant a collective transformation from nobodies into somebodies, very important somebodies. For almost all of them, this Cinderella type changeover would not have been possible without the Rajapakse Presidency and their continued occupation of the heights depends completely on the perpetuation of Rajapakse Rule.

The Rajapakses, having gained a world have a world to loose. That is why they react with such ‘fear and vindictiveness’ to anyone they consider to be a threat to their Familial Rule and Dynastic Project. The Rajapakses, like all political parvenus, are uncertain about their grip on power and thus very jealous of it. This sense of being hemmed in by real or potential enemies and detractors, of being threatened by any outsider is abnormally high in their case because of the narrow base endemic to Familial Rule. The Rajapakses have no natural ideology to justify and no inherent support base to buttress their rule. That is why they embraced Sinhala supremacism and presented themselves as the creators and protectors of a Sinhala-First Sri Lanka. Gen. Fonseka is not just a military man and a ‘war hero’; he is also a strident Sinhala supremacist, and as such a contender for the same ideology and the same base. This is one more reason why the Rajapakses are reacting with such venomous anger towards his political ambitions.

The Rajapakses began by targeting those who opposed its excesses, especially in the conduct of the Fourth Eelam War. Like the Tigers, they too deemed criticism of certain individuals and entities unacceptable, equating such criticism with anti-patriotism. Until just over a year ago, Sarath Fonseka was an enthusiastic votary of Rajapakse governance. He was an architect of the myth of humanitarian operation with zero-civilian casualties. He was blasé about human rights violations and injudicious towards minorities and Southern dissidents. And within the army, his conduct was almost as virulently intolerant as the Rajapakses are within the country. Today he is at the receiving end of those Rajapakse practices which he approved of and implemented not so long ago. Gen. Fonseka’s story is a morality tale: a citizen cannot tolerate injustice, condone impunity and practice abuse, without sowing the seeds of his own downfall. Irrespective of whether we agree with Sarath Fonseka or not, we cannot remain silent in his moment of peril, without imperilling ourselves. (SL Guardian)

Home           Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)                   

Sri Lanka gets US support on bogus human rights inquiry

Sri Lankan External Affairs Minister G. L. Peiris visited Washington last week to patch up relations with the US and fend off continuing demands for an international investigation into the war crimes carried out by the Sri Lankan military in the final stages of its war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
As part of his five-day visit, Peiris met with UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon to oppose his plans to appoint an independent panel into the Sri Lankan atrocities. The Sri Lankan foreign minister reportedly told Ban that the panel was “politically unacceptable” to Colombo, arguing that Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse had just appointed an inquiry—the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission—to examine the country’s civil war from 2002 on.

The Sri Lankan government has flatly denied that any civilians died in the months before the LTTE’s defeat in May 2009 and bitterly opposed any international inquiry into the events. Its denials have been contradicted by a growing mountain of evidence to the contrary, including a lengthy report by the Brussels-based International Crisis Group (ICG) released last month, which estimated the number of dead and missing civilians at between 30,000 and 75,000. The report accused the Sri Lankan military of deliberately shelling and bombing hospitals, humanitarian operations and other civilian targets inside LTTE-held territory.

The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission will be just as much a sham as previous inquiries appointed by President Rajapakse into military atrocities and the activities of pro-government death squads. A Presidential Commission of Inquiry into human rights violations was appointed following local and international outrage at the execution-style killing of 17 aid workers from the French-based Action Contre la Faim (ACF) in August 2006. That inquiry was folded up in mid-2009 without issuing any reports.
During presidential and parliamentary elections this year, the government exploited the limited international criticisms of its human rights abuses to claim that the country was the subject of an “international conspiracy”. Pointing to the obvious hypocrisy of the US and European powers, government ministers asked why Sri Lanka should be subjected to investigation when the murder of civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq was not. In other words, if the US was able to get away with war crimes, why not Sri Lanka?

Having won both elections, President Rajapakse has made a tactical shift, well aware that Washington’s main concern is not war crimes, but the growing influence of China, which provided his government with diplomatic, financial and military assistance during the war. The appointment of Peiris, who is known for his pro-Western orientation, as foreign minister was a step toward mending bridges. The government has made several other gestures—easing the country’s state of emergency and granting a pardon to journalist J.S. Tissanayagam, who was convicted of trumped-up charges under the notorious Prevention of Terrorism Act.

While he did not manage to dissuade UN secretary general Ban, Peiris received support from US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Washington last Friday. Clinton declared that the Sri Lankan Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission “holds promise”. She added: “We expect that it will be given a broad enough mandate with the resources necessary to be able to follow the trail of any evidence that is presented.”

Clinton also patted the Rajapakse government on the back for resettling Tamil refugees after the war. She made no mention of the fact that the Sri Lankan military detained more than a quarter of a million civilians—men, women and children—in military-run “welfare villages” that operated as giant open air prisons. Instead she enthused: “There has been tremendous progress and many thousands and thousands of such internally displaced persons have returned home.”

In turn, Peiris indicated that Sri Lanka might “engage in a dialogue with the United Nations” as long as its bogus commission was allowed to proceed “without hindrance” from the international community. Peiris reportedly promised Clinton that the remaining 45,000 detainees would be resettled within three months. Contrary to Peiris’s claims that people are being resettled “with dignity,” they are being returned to towns and villages under military occupation with little or no financial assistance from the government.

Peiris hinted at the real discussions that took place behind closed doors with Clinton. He mentioned a Foreign Relations Committee report prepared for the US Senate last December on the significance of Sri Lanka to US strategy. Referring to China’s growing influence in Colombo, the report declared that the US could not afford to “lose” Sri Lanka, which was strategically positioned near vital Indian Ocean sea lanes.

Peiris declared that the Sri Lankan government looked forward to “a multidimensional relationship with the United States” on the lines of the Senate report, saying it “called for a broadening and a deepening of the relationship between our two countries at this time”. His reference to “a multidimensional relationship” is a carefully chosen one. The report complained that the previous US approach had given too much weight to human rights considerations, arguing that “US policy toward Sri Lanka cannot be dominated by a single agenda”. It called instead for “a broader and more robust approach… that appreciates new political and economic realities in Sri Lanka and US geostrategic interests”.

Both Clinton and Peiris clearly recognise that the Senate report is the basis for improved relations between the two countries. Washington will play down human rights and support Colombo’s window dressing on the issue, as long as Sri Lanka reestablishes its previously close ties with the US on crucial strategic issues. Pointing to the developing relationship, Peiris invited “American companies to come in and to participate vigorously in the rebuilding of infrastructure” in Sri Lanka.

The Rajapakse government undoubtedly wants the US to use its influence with the European Community, which decided earlier this year to end Generalised System of Preferences Plus (GSP+) tariff concessions on imports from Sri Lanka by August, citing unresolved human rights abuses. Peiris has attempted to convince the EU, so far without success, to reverse its decision. If the GSP+ concessions were withdrawn, the results could be devastating, particularly for Sri Lankan garment manufacturers, whose largest markets are in Europe.

The Obama administration’s deliberate downplaying of the gross human rights abuses in Sri Lanka is a green light for the Rajapakse government to intensify its continuing attacks on basic democratic rights as it prepares to impose on working people the austerity demands made by the International Monetary Fund as the condition of last year’s $US2.6 billion loan to the government. (SEPLK)

Home        Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)

Sri Lankan government prepares major constitutional changes

Just two months after parliamentary elections, the Sri Lankan government is preparing a series of far-reaching constitutional amendments that will further entrench President Mahinda Rajapakse in power and enhance his autocratic methods of rule.

Prime Minister D. M. Jayaratne presented the proposed amendments for cabinet approval on June 9 and revealed last week that the changes will be presented to parliament in the coming weeks. Underlining their anti-democratic character, the changes will be introduced as an “urgent bill” under a rarely used constitutional clause, effectively blocking public discussion.

Two main changes are involved. The first would abolish the limit of two on the number of presidential terms, allowing Rajapakse to stand for office indefinitely. Rajapakse first became president after the November 2005 election, won a second term in January and is due to step down in November 2016.

The second would modify the 17th amendment to eliminate the requirement for a constitutional council, which has broad powers to oversee government appointments and appoint other commissions to supervise key government institutions, including the police, elections and the public service.

The 17th amendment was enacted in 2001 amid sharp public debate on the politicisation of the state apparatus under previous presidents. According to the Sri Lankan constitution, the executive president has wide powers, including to appoint and dismiss ministers and governments. In addition, through the continuing state of emergency, the president can order detentions without trial, ban strikes and censor the media.

On taking office, Rajapakse rapidly plunged the island back to war in mid-2006, effectively tearing up the 2002 internationally-recognised ceasefire with the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). He used his police-state powers to the full to prosecute the war. Resting on a shaky parliamentary coalition, the president increasingly operated through a politico-military cabal of relatives, top bureaucrats and generals.

Rajapakse simply ignored the 17th amendment and refused to establish a constitutional council that would have cut across his ability to appoint trusted cronies to major posts. When the Supreme Court eventually ordered the president to establish the constitutional council, he ignored the ruling. Now Rajapakse is seeking to neutralise the 17th amendment.
At present, the president is required to consult with the opposition to form a constitution council, which comprises the president, prime minister, parliamentary speaker, opposition leader and a nominee of other parliamentary parties. Under the proposed changes, there would be no constitutional council. Instead the president would be required only to “consult” with the prime minister, speaker and opposition leader in making key appointments.

Rajapakse exploited the military’s victory over the LTTE in May 2009 to whip up a climate of militarism and triumphalism in this year’s presidential and parliamentary elections. The main opposition parties—the United National Party (UNP) and Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)—had backed the war and offered no alternative. Rajapakse easily defeated opposition presidential candidate Sarath Fonseka—his top general before the two fell out—who was then arrested on trumped-up charges of planning a coup.

At the parliamentary election in April, the ruling coalition won 141 seats—just nine short of the two-thirds majority required for constitutional amendments. Rajapakse is clearly confident that he can secure the support of enough opposition MPs by offering various inducements to make the planned changes.

The government has also fed speculation about further constitutional changes, including to the voting system, which favours smaller parties. Other mooted amendments are changes to the provincial councils and the creation of a second parliamentary chamber. The government’s first priority, however, is to consolidate its grip on, and the powers of, the presidency.

The defeat of the LTTE has not led to an easing, but rather a strengthening of Rajapakse’s autocratic methods of rule. The government confronts a worsening economic crisis as a result of the huge public debts produced by high military spending and the impact of the continuing global economic turmoil. Having taken out an International Monetary Fund loan last year, Rajapakse is under pressure to drastically cut the budget deficit.
Already there is widespread resentment among the island’s Tamil minority over the military’s brutal methods, which led to tens of thousands of civilian deaths in the final months of the war. More broadly there is simmering discontent among working people over the steady deterioration of living standards and the government’s attacks on basic democratic rights. Last year, Rajapakse used his emergency powers to outlaw industrial action by public sector workers in the petroleum, port, water and power sectors for higher wages.

The government clearly expects further social unrest. Announcing the cabinet’s approval of the constitutional changes, acting media minister Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena declared on June 10: “[T]he period which our country is presently going through is one in which the government is seeking to make necessary adjustments to the present ‘administrative and constitutional structure’ of Sri Lanka, to bring about stability to the country.”
The police-state measures that were used to prosecute the government’s war against the LTTE are being strengthened to suppress the inevitable opposition of working people to new economic burdens. Rajapakse has framed his policies in military terms, promising to wage “an economic war” to build the nation.

The opposition parties are posturing as defenders of democracy and opponents of the constitutional amendments. JVP parliamentary leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake said his party would oppose the moves in parliament “tooth and nail” and “stoke up a public debate throughout the country on this matter”.

The JVP has its own long record of contempt for democratic rights. In the late 1980s, the party’s hit squads murdered hundreds of trade unionists, workers and political opponents who rejected its chauvinist campaign against the Indo-Lanka Accord and the intervention of so-called Indian peacekeepers. In 2005, the JVP supported Rajapakse for the presidency and urged him to use his executive powers to restart the war. Having fallen out with Rajapakse, the JVP now attempts to put on a democratic face to appeal to popular discontent.

UNP media spokesman Gayantha Karunatilake declared: “We will fight against the government’s arbitrary actions. We will even go to court in an effort to block these dictatorial proposals.” The UNP’s opposition is equally hollow. The party was responsible for introducing the executive presidency in 1978 and used its powers in 1980 to sack 100,000 public employees who took strike action for a pay increase. Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, successive UNP governments were notorious for their systematic abuse of democratic rights.

The only way that workers can defend their living standards and democratic rights is through a complete break with all these parties of the Sri Lankan bourgeoisie. What is needed is the building of an independent political movement of the working class based on a socialist and internationalist program that is directed against the source of these attacks—the capitalist profit system itself. (SEPLK)

Home        Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)              

Sri Lankan SEP condemns opposition candidate’s arrest

The Socialist Equality Party (SEP) unequivocally condemns the arrest of defeated opposition candidate General Sarath Fonseka. His detention by military police on Monday night is a fundamental attack on democratic rights that foreshadows the consolidation of a police-state regime under President Mahinda Rajapakse.

No charges have been laid against Fonseka, who resigned from the military last November to contest the January 26 presidential election. The various accusations levelled by government spokesmen are riddled with contradictions—that he divulged state secrets, conspired to overthrow the government, and planned to assassinate Rajapakse and his close advisers, including the president’s brothers.

No evidence has been provided to substantiate any of these allegations. According to the government, all the charges relate to Fonseka’s activities as a serving officer—that is, before he stepped down three months ago. Why has the government taken so long to act? The obvious answer is that it began concocting the charges when Fonseka became the opposition’s candidate and is now using them to meet its immediate needs: to remove Fonseka from the political scene and intimidate its opponents.

Just 24 hours after Fonseka’s arrest, Rajapakse prorogued parliament and called general elections for April 8. The poll will be held under a pall of intimidation and repression directed against any political opposition to the government. If Fonseka can be dragged away by military police on unspecified charges of “overthrowing the government” then anyone who challenges the Rajapakse regime can confront similar measures, or worse.

The government has declared that its aim is to win a two-thirds parliamentary majority to enable it to change the constitution. As executive president, Rajapakse already wields far-reaching powers that have been extended under the country’s continuing state of emergency. During his first term, he reduced parliament to a rubber stamp and ruled through a politico-military cabal that flouted the country’s courts and legal system. Now Rajapakse wants to acquire the power to change the constitution to formalise his dictatorial methods of rule.

The response of the media to Fonseka’s arrest demonstrates that there is no constituency within Sri Lankan ruling circles for the defence of democratic rights. The right-wing Island declared that the detention came as “no surprise”. Its editorial acknowledged that “the unfolding drama” was “not without the trappings of a witch-hunt” but blamed the opposition parties and “hoped that the government and the army will operate within the confines of the law”.

The Daily Mirror, which at times exhibits liberal pretensions, was no less cynical. Its editorial ignored the issue of democratic rights and lectured the government on its political blunder. By arresting Fonseka, it opined, Rajapakse had turned the general from “a zero into a hero”. Neither newspaper condemned the arrest or called on the government to end its persecution of opposition politicians.
The media reaction in Colombo is in line with the muted international response. The brazen arrest of the main opposition candidate just two weeks after Sri Lanka’s presidential election was referred to as “unusual” by the US State Department. The comment stands in marked contrast to the massive campaign mounted by the US and its allies last year, branding the Iranian presidential elections as rigged and denouncing the regime’s repression of its opponents. In both cases—Iran and Sri Lanka—the response, or lack of it, is determined by the interests of US imperialism, not concern for democratic rights.
The SEP demands the immediate and unconditional release of Fonseka. In doing so, however, we warn the working class to place no faith in Fonseka or the opposition parties that are supporting him. Until the defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) last May, Fonseka was part of Rajapakse’s cabal and ruthlessly waged the war that the president had restarted in 2006. Both men are responsible for war crimes and the gross abuse of democratic rights, including the operation of pro-government death squads.

Likewise, the main bourgeois opposition parties—the United National Party (UNP) and Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)—have a long history of anti-democratic abuses. Their ability to posture as “democrats” depends on the support of the ex-lefts of the Nava Sama Samaja Party (NSSP) and United Socialist Party (USP), both of which have uncritically joined the opposition movement to free Fonseka.

The actions of these opportunists confirm the SEP’s recent warnings (see: “Sri Lankan SEP replies to the United Socialist Party”). A political fissure has opened up in the ruling class, posing dangers to its rule if the working class begins to fight for its own class interests. Far from mobilising workers and youth independently, however, the NSSP and USP are deliberately creating dangerous illusions in Fonseka and the right-wing opposition parties to block such a development.
The significance of the USP’s and NSSP’s actions is underscored by the deep crisis facing the Sri Lankan bourgeoisie. The political warfare in ruling circles is a product of the extreme social tensions being generated by the country’s worsening economic situation. Rajapakse’s preparations for dictatorial forms of rule are not primarily directed against Fonseka and the opposition parties, but against the working class. Sri Lanka exhibits in a particularly acute form the debt crisis that is currently erupting around the world. Having mortgaged the country to pay for his war, Rajapakse is now compelled to slash public spending and launch a frontal assault on the living standards of working people.
For all the bitterness of the conflict between the Rajapakse and Fonseka factions, their differences are of a purely tactical nature—how to take on the working class and where to line up in the intensifying rivalry between major powers, especially between the US and China. Confronted by a concerted movement of workers in defence of their rights, the two camps would rapidly bury their differences and not hesitate in using the most extreme methods to defend the profit system and crush the opposition.

The working class confronts serious dangers. Workers cannot defend their class interests if they are politically shackled to one or other faction of the bourgeoisie, but must strike out on an independent road using the methods of class struggle. The SEP calls for the immediate formation of independent action committees in workplaces and working class areas as a first step in defending the democratic rights and living standards of the masses.
The fight for democratic rights is inexorably bound up with the struggle against capitalism—a social order that is rooted in the economic exploitation of the overwhelming majority by the wealthy few. In opposition to all factions of the ruling class, the working class must fight for a workers’ and farmers’ government to implement a program of socialist policies that would refashion society from top to bottom to meet the social needs of working people.

The necessary precondition for such a political struggle is the rejection of all forms of nationalism and communalism, which have been exploited for decades to divide Sinhala from Tamil workers, and workers in Sri Lanka from their class brothers and sisters in South Asia and internationally. There is no solution to the problems facing working people within the narrow confines of this island. The fight for a Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and Eelam is indissolubly linked to the broader struggle for socialism throughout the region and around the globe.

The SEP calls on workers and young people to give urgent consideration to these political issues, contact the party and actively take part in its campaigns. (SEPLK)

Home          Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)           

Sri Lankan government uses emergency laws to charge former presidential candidate

President Mahinda Rajapakse’s Sri Lankan government has invoked its draconian emergency regulations to lay serious criminal charges against the defeated president candidate, ex-Army Commander General Sarath Fonseka.

The laying of the charges against Fonseka, who is also a member of parliament, after holding him in military custody for more than five months, is not only a move to silence him. It is yet another indication of Rajapakse’s increasingly totalitarian measures as the government prepares to impose severe austerity measures on the working class and poor.

Attorney General Mohan Peiris has formally requested the Colombo High Court to appoint a three-judge bench for a “special” trial on the “grave” offences allegedly committed by Fonseka. Such trials are heard without a jury, and those found guilty can appeal only once before the Supreme Court.

Fonseka has been charged with two offences under the emergency laws, one of “spreading ... a false statement that could cause panic or inflame the public” and one of “providing information ... that could directly or otherwise incite racial feelings.” Each charge could mean imprisonment for up to five years.

The jailed MP has also been charged under the Penal Code with “providing information ... that could directly or otherwise rouse racial feelings by spoken or written word intended to ... cause disaffection among the population against the legally constituted government of Sri Lanka or trying to foment hostile feelings or disharmony amongst such populace or different classes.” This charge carries a punishment of two years rigorous imprisonment.

Fonseka was arbitrarily arrested on February 8 by the military just two weeks after the presidential election, in which he was backed as a candidate against Rajapakse by the main parliamentary opposition parties and section of the business establishment. Initially accused of plotting to assassinate Rajapakse, Fonseka is still being tried in two military Courts Martial cases, on charges of engaging in political activities while in uniform and violating army procedures in the procurement of arms.

The timing of the new criminal charges points to the fact that government is intensifying its police-state methods and increasingly using repressive measures against all political opposition and the working class.

The charges arise from an interview given by Fonseka—seven months ago—to Fedrica Janze, the editor of the Colombo-based Sunday Leader. In the interview, published on December 13, Fonseka accused the president’s brother, Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse, of ordering the assassination of leaders of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) who attempted to surrender during the final days of the military’s defeat of the LTTE in May last year.

Fonseka was quoted as saying: “The Secretary of Defence, Mr. Gotabhaya Rajapakse had spoken to Brigadier Shavendra Silva, the commander of the 58 brigade, that all leaders of the LTTE who try to surrender should not be allowed to do so and that all of them should be killed.” Fonseka said he obtained this information from a journalist attached to the army brigade. However, after the report was published, Fonseka claimed that he had been misquoted by the newspaper.

It is known that three LTTE leaders—political wing leader Balasingham Nadesan, peace secretariat head Seevaratnam Puleedevan and Ramesh, a military leader—were engaged in surrender negotiations with high-level government officials through various intermediaries, including Norway. The LTTE leaders were told to appear in front of the government forces with white flags. While coming to surrender in the early hours of May 18, the three were murdered cold-bloodedly.

This war crime was one of many committed during the final months of the war. Military bombing and shelling killed thousands of Tamil civilians. The UN has estimated the number of civilian deaths at 7,000. The Brussels-based International Crisis Group has provided evidence that puts the number of deaths at between 30,000 and 75,000.

In a four-page preamble to the charges against Fonseka, the attorney general alleges that the Sunday Leader interview tarnished the image of the country internationally and was used by human rights groups and the Tamil diaspora to demand war crimes investigations. Peiris further claims that the interview damaged the “reputation” of the military, causing countries such as US to stop inviting the armed forces for training programs.

The charges are an outright attack on basic democratic rights. Peiris’s allegations employ similar language to that used by the government against anyone who speaks or writes about the war crimes or demands an independent investigation. Any such calls could be branded as “false statements that could cause panic or inflame the public” or “cause disaffection among the population”.

The charges are also a direct threat to the media. The killing of the three LTTE leaders was first revealed a few days after the war ended. The British-based Sunday Times and Guardian carried reports on the incident. At the time, Fonseka, as Army Commander, joined the government in brushing aside the allegations.

This week, two more criminal charges were suddenly laid against Fonseka. On Tuesday, police indicted him and his son-in-law, Dananu Tilakaratne, on 21 charges of cheating public funds during tender processes for military hardware purchases. On the same day, the attorney general indicted Fonseka for allegedly employing 10 army deserters in his presidential election campaign. This charge carries 20 years imprisonment.
As Army Commander, Fonseka ruthlessly prosecuted the war, working hand-in-glove with the Rajapakse government, which provoked the resumption of the fighting in 2006. Fonseka was a key man in Rajapakse’s ruling cabal until the military defeated the LTTE in May. By moving so ruthlessly against this critic within the ruling establishment, the government is sending a threatening message to working people.

Before laying these charges, Rajapakse brought the attorney general’s department, which was previously part of the justice ministry, under his direct control. The attorney general’s office, which traditionally maintained some legal independence, is now being used to frame and jail political opponents. This is part of wider concentration of power in the hands of Rajapakse, who is also the defence minister and finance minister, and has brought 60 ministries and other government institutions under his command.

These developments are taking place as the government begins implementing International Monetary Fund (IMF)-dictated budget cutting measures designed to unload the burden of the government’s huge debts and fiscal deficit onto the back of working people.

Last month’s budget unveiled an extended wage freeze on public sector workers, increased taxes on essentials, and begins the re-structuring of government-owned corporations that will seriously affect jobs and working conditions. At the same time, the government is making tax concessions to big business and investors. It has also pledged to the IMF that further measures to drastically reduce the deficit will be outlined in the 2011 budget, which is due in November.

Since the end of the war, the government has maintained the emergency powers in order to crack down on workers’ struggles. Last year, Rajapakse issued essential services orders against electricity board, ports, petroleum and water board workers. However, the emergency powers were not used because the trade unions called off the wages campaign.

Early this month, a military-police terror campaign was unleashed against thousands of slum dwellers in the Colombo suburb of Mattakkuliya. The entire adult population was rounded up, more than 200 were arrested and 30 people are still in custody. The charges against Fonseka are another warning of a turn to dictatorial methods of rule. (SEPLK)

Home        Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)