Sri Lankan President at the UN denies War Crimes

Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse’s trip to New York and speech at the UN General Assembly last week had two main purposes: to cover up for war crimes committed during the country’s civil war and to appeal for foreign investment to rebuild its devastated economy.
Rajapakse’s speech at the UN was his first since the defeat of the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in May last year. Facing widespread international criticism and calls for a war crimes investigation, last year he sent then Prime Minister Ratnasiri Wickremanayake to the annual General Assembly meeting.

Addressing the UN, Rajapakse repeated the lie that his government and the Sri Lankan military committed no war crimes. Despite the government’s claims that the army killed no civilians, the UN and various human rights organisations have provided ample evidence that thousands, if not tens of thousands, of Tamil civilians died as a result of the military’s artillery and aerial bombardment.

Following the LTTE’s defeat, the army herded more than a quarter of a million civilians—men, women and children—into detention centres where they were held for months before resettlement began. Around 40,000 people are still being detained in these so-called welfare villages. Those who have been “resettled” have been returned to their villages and towns with scant financial assistance under what amounts to a permanent military occupation.

Rajapakse denounced the LTTE as “one of the most brutal, highly-organised, well-funded and effective terrorist organisations” in the world. Appealing for support from the US and European countries, he declared: “[M]any of the atrocities, the West has come to experience in recent times, the people of Sri Lanka were themselves the victims of, for nearly 30 years…”

Just as the US and its allies have waged their neo-colonial wars under the bogus banner of fighting terrorism, so Rajapakse justified his communal war as a “war on terror”. The LTTE, a bourgeois nationalist organisation advocating Tamil separatism, emerged as a result of decades of anti-Tamil discrimination by Colombo governments. Its individual acts of terrorism against Sinhala civilians were certainly reactionary and provided grist for the mill of Sinhala supremacist propagandists. But they were also a desperate response to the broader state repression directed against the island’s Tamil minority..

In the lead up to the LTTE’s defeat, the US and European powers, which had backed Rajapakse’s war, began to raise concerns over human rights abuses and calls for a limited investigation into possible war crimes—by both sides. As commentators in Colombo were quick to point out, Washington was proposing to hold the Sri Lankan military to account for crimes similar to those carried out by US forces in Afghanistan on a routine basis. The real purpose behind the US call was to put pressure on the Rajapakse government, which in the course of the war had come to depend on China for economic, military and political aid.

During his speech, Rajapakse repeated a proposal made previously to change international law to take into account so-called wars against terrorism. “[I]t is worth examining the capacity of current international humanitarian law to meet contemporary needs… The asymmetrical nature of conflicts initiated by non-state actors gives rise to serious problems which need to be considered in earnest by the international community,” he said..

The proposal is a rather obvious appeal to the US and its allies to join Sri Lanka in pushing for a change to international law to authorise all governments—“big or small”—to use methods that are currently illegal under the Geneva Conventions. Like the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan, its Sri Lankan counterparts resorted to detention without trial, torture and extra-judicial killings to terrorise the Tamil population and government opponents.

Rajapakse’s mission to the UN appears to have fallen flat. He had planned to meet various government leaders, including from Australia, UK, Brazil, France, South Korea and Russia, to solicit political and economic support. However, Rajapakse was only able to meet leaders from Turkey, Qatar, Jamaica, Iran and Norway.

Rajapakse’s meeting with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was regarded in Colombo as a key event. With the backing of the US and European powers, Ban has appointed an expert panel to advise him on human rights violations in the final months of the Sri Lankan war. During his meeting with Rajapakse, Ban restated that the panel was not a formal war crimes investigation—a comment that was immediately seized on in Colombo as a diplomatic triumph.

Rajapakse had also been hoping to reverse the European Union’s decision to suspend its GSP+ tariff concessions for Sri Lanka unless various human rights criteria were met. On his way to New York, Rajapakse stopped in Berlin to meet German Chancellor Angela Merkel but had no success in altering the EU decision. The loss of EU trade preferences will hit the battered Sri Lankan economy hard because Europe is the top export market for the country’s sizable garment industry.

Rajapakse’s claims to be “building a lasting peace, healing wounds, ensuring economic prosperity and guaranteeing the rights of the whole nation to live in harmony” are completely fraudulent. Continuing, widespread anti-Tamil discrimination will fuel communal tensions and conflict. As for “economic prosperity,” the country is heavily in debt as a result of the war and global financial crisis. The government is under pressure to impose drastic austerity measures to reduce the budget deficit.

The second aspect of Rajapakse’s trip to New York was to secure investment and aid. His entourage of 130 people included ministers, parliamentarians and around two dozen business leaders. The Sri Lankan embassy organised for the president to meet American business executives at the Helmsley Hotel. Around 150 attended, according to an embassy release, “from a variety of industries, including the hospitality and tourism industry, the beverage industry, and the aerospace and defence community”.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Rajapakse boasted: “Sri Lanka—with a literate population, relatively low labour costs, and a sizeable corps of trained accountants—is drawing the interest of outsourcing firms, including major Indian business-process outsourcing companies seeking ways to expand outside India, where wages also have been rising.”

In the same article, Ashroff Omar, chief executive of the multi-national apparel exporter Brandix Lanka, underlined the significance of Sri Lanka as a cheap labour platform. He explained that it currently costs about $US150 a month to employ a “trained” Sri Lankan garment worker, compared with $400 in China. He added that in couple of years China’s labour cost would be about $600 a month while the costs in Sri Lanka would be around $200.

It appears that Rajapakse was no more successful in attracting investment offers than he was in mending relations with the US and the European powers. As the economic crisis worsens, the Sri Lankan government will inevitably attempt to shift new burdens onto working people as it seeks to lower costs and make the country “more competitive” with other cheap labour platforms. (WSWS)
Read more>>> on 'Centre for the Study of Minority Political Struggle - Sri Lanka'

More Research on Sri Lankan Issues done by International Crisis Group, Click here

Home            Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)

Former Sri Lankan army chief convicted for second time

A Sri Lankan court martial convicted former army chief Sarath Fonseka last Friday on a charge of violating military procurement procedures and sentenced him to three years jail. Fonseka, who is also head of the opposition Democratic National Alliance (DNA), was found guilty of breaching procedure in purchasing night vision-devices, generators, batteries and VHF direction finders while serving as army commander.

Fonseka denied the allegations and rejected the verdict. In a statement on September 9, he declared: “[T]his entire exercise of trying me before this court martial … and in the High Courts is all politically motivated”. Fonseka also accused the three-judge panel of bias. He noted that he had disciplined the chief judge, Major General M.P. Peiris, over an integrity issue. He added that Major General S.W. L. Daulagala, another panel member, was a very close associate of Defense Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse, a brother of President Mahinda Rajapakse.Senior defence counsel Rienzie Arsekularatne told reporters that the charges against his client were “frivolous” and that the decision would be challenged in the appeal court. He said defence lawyers had pointed out that the 2006 procurement guidelines that Fonseka allegedly violated were a temporary measure, introduced prior to a statute passed in the House. As such, the procurement guidelines did not contain any penalties for breaches.

The military court hearings were held behind closed doors and the ruling has not been made public. The judges have sent their decision to President Rajapakse, who as commander-in-chief, will almost certainly rubberstamp the conviction once he returns from the UN General Assembly meeting in New York this week. If this second conviction is ratified, Fonseka will automatically lose his parliamentary seat.                                        
 In August, a separate military court convicted Fonseka of “engaging in active politics while in uniform”. He was stripped of his military rank, medals, honours, pension and other benefits, and was barred from all military installations. His appeal against the first conviction was dismissed by the appeal court but he has filed another challenge in the Supreme Court. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court set down the case for December 3.     
 The central purpose of the charges against Fonseka has been to politically destroy a potential challenger to President Rajapakse. Fonseka stood against Rajapakse as the common candidate of the main opposition parties in the presidential election on January 26. After losing, Fonseka disputed the result, alleging widespread corruption and malpractice, and indicated he would appeal to the Supreme Court to have it overturned.

In extraordinary scenes the day after the election, the government dispatched hundreds of heavily armed troops to surround the Cinnamon Lakeside Hotel, where Fonseka and opposition leaders were staying. A military spokesman claimed that the soldiers were sent to arrest “army deserters” who had been assisting Fonseka. Over the next few days, security forces carried out a systematic crackdown, arresting Fonseka supporters and intimidating opposition politicians and journalists.

The repression was accompanied by a lurid campaign alleging that Fonseka had been planning a coup to oust Rajapakse and assassinate his brothers. No evidence was provided to substantiate any of these claims. On February 8, soldiers broke into a meeting between Fonseka and opposition leaders and detained him at the navy’s headquarters in Colombo.

The bogus nature of the “coup” allegations was underscored on February 17 when a magistrate court unconditionally released 14 of Fonseka’s supporters. They had been accused of involvement in Fonseka’s alleged coup attempt, but police were forced to admit that there was no evidence to support a case against any of the detainees. Significantly, when Fonseka was finally charged, none of the allegations related to a coup plot.

The differences between Fonseka and Rajapakse, while extremely bitter, are tactical in character. As army commander, Fonseka was part of Rajapakse’s ruling cabal and ruthlessly prosecuted the renewed war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Both men are responsible for war crimes that resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians in the final months of fighting. Immediately after the LTTE’s defeat in May 2009, Rajapakse hailed Fonseka as the best army commander in the world.

Fonseka fell out with the president once it became clear that the latter was intent on claiming credit for defeating the LTTE as he prepared for early presidential elections. Fonseka was relegated to the specially-created and largely ceremonial post of chief of defence staff. He resigned from his new post, in late November, and announced his candidature in the presidential election.

The two major opposition parties—the United National Party (UNP) and Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)—backed Fonseka as their joint presidential candidate. Immediately after the presidential election, Rajapakse called parliamentary elections for April. Despite being in military custody, Fonseka formed the Democratic National Alliance with the JVP and won a seat in parliament.

The continuing persecution of Fonseka reflects divisions within the Sri Lankan ruling elite. The UNP and JVP both supported the communal war against the LTTE, the government’s abuse of basic democratic rights and its agenda of pro-market restructuring. However, differences have emerged on the orientation of foreign policy amid the sharpening rivalry throughout the region between the US and China.

In the course of the war, Rajapakse relied increasingly on Chinese finance, arms and political support, granting Beijing various concessions in return. The growing influence of China stands in the way of the strategic interests of Western powers, particularly of the US. In the aftermath of the war, the US and European powers raised the issue of war crimes in Sri Lanka, primarily as a means of pressuring the Rajapakse government. During the election campaign, Fonseka hinted at his support for Sri Lanka’s traditional allies by indicating his willingness to testify before an international tribunal.

Rajapakse’s determination to press ahead with charges against Fonseka is part of a broader attack on basic democratic rights. The government faces rising popular resentment over the implementation of the austerity measures demanded by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the local corporate elite. The IMF granted a loan of $US2.6 billion last year on condition that the budget deficit be halved from 9.9 percent of Gross Domestic Product in 2009 to 5 percent at the end of next year.

The ruthlessness with which Rajapakse has pursued his former ally Fonseka is a warning to workers of the police state measures that will be used to suppress popular resistance to the government’s austerity measures. (WSWS)

Home             Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)   

Sri Lanka is still denying civilian deaths

During the Vietnam conflict, the US military developed some creative ways to increase the numbers of Viet Cong insurgents it claimed to have killed. "If they're dead, they're Viet Cong," meant that any Vietnamese killed by American soldiers would automatically count as enemy fighters.

Sri Lanka's defence secretary, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, has taken such creative accounting to new heights. The United Nations reported that at least 7,000 civilians were killed and tens of thousands wounded during the final months of the brutal conflict with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, which ended in May 2009. But Gotabhaya has repeatedly cast aspersions on the idea that there were any civilian casualties.

In his recent statement, before a Sri Lankan commission looking at lessons learned from the war, Gotabhaya claimed that injured Tigers "changed their uniforms into civilian clothes" and that the Tigers must have suffered at least 6,000 dead and 30,000 injured - suggesting those counted as civilian casualties were really just Tamil Tiger fighters who had shed their uniforms.

As for the widespread war crimes and human rights abuses by both sides reported both during and after the conflict by various UN agencies, the US state department and human rights organisations, the defence secretary seems to be suffering from severe amnesia. He told the Lessons Learned Commission: "No complaints about human rights violations or abuses by the army were brought to my notice. None at all."

Despite the promises made by President Mahinda Rajapaksa to UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon in June 2009 to investigate wartime atrocities, as well as Sri Lanka's international legal obligations to investigate alleged laws of war violations, the president and his brothers in power have not lifted a finger to do so. The president often appears stunned when other governments both praise the government's victory yet insist on accountability for laws of war violations.

Gotabhaya also proclaimed that the military operation was a really a "humanitarian intervention" in which "we took great care to avoid [endangering] civilians ... our military had to stop operations and give protection to people, food convoys." In practice, however, rather than protecting civilians, the government blocked access by humanitarian organisations. The International Committee of the Red Cross complained publicly that it was unable to reach those most in need.

There are genuine concerns that the Lessons Learned Commission will serve only to whitewash allegations of serious abuses, and that its conclusions will be used to brush off calls for an international investigation. The panel's mandate is deliberately limited: its main responsibility is to understand the reasons for the collapse of the 2002 ceasefire agreement, and there is no express mandate to investigate laws of war violations.

The government clearly wants to avoid an honest attempt to find the truth. During a BBC interview in June, Gotabhaya threatened to have the commander behind the final military offensive, Gen Sarath Fonseka, executed after he promised to co-operate with investigations into wartime violations. The government took Fonseka - who earlier this year unsuccessfully ran against the president - to court martial, where he was convicted, essentially cutting him off from any capacity to challenge the Rajapaksa version of events.

The government announced in June that it will deny visas to the members of a UN expert panel established to advise Secretary General Ban on mechanisms for accountability. For those who didn't get the message, protests against the panel led by a government minister outside the UN compound in Colombo should have: this government has no interest in investigating abuses and providing victims a measure of justice.

Add to this the continued suppression of government critics, civil society, and media, the restricted access for independent monitors to the northern and eastern parts of the country where the fighting occurred, the lack of information about an estimated 8,000 suspected Tamil Tiger fighters currently detained in "rehabilitation camps," and the conditions are ripe for a complete rewrite of history.

What the Lessons Learned Commission makes of the testimony it receives remains to be seen. One would hope that it would see the government's version of events for what it is: a cynical fabrication designed to avoid scrutiny. Unfortunately, there is every reason to fear that the panel will believe the story that is being spun by the Rajapaksa brothers, which basically runs to the formula from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland: "Nothing would be what it is because everything would be what it isn't." (HRW)

Home         Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)