Tawang (Arunachal Pradesh), Sep 20 (IANS) India has moved hundreds of troops to the Chinese border along the northeastern state of Arunachal Pradesh, but an army officer said Sunday that this was a routine winter exercise.
A visiting IANS correspondent saw 60 to 70 trucks carrying soldiers proceeding towards the Chinese border in Tawang and nearby posts, snaking through a rough mountainous terrain at an altitude of over 14,000 feet.
Army officials denied they were deploying extra soldiers in the forward posts.
According to army commanders, the troop movement was part of "Operation Alert", a winter exercise that sees soldiers move into inhospitable border areas of Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast ahead of the bitter weather conditions that make the roads impassable due to heavy snowfall.
"There is no threat or no extra forces being sent to the border," an army commander told IANS requesting not to be named. "Reports of troop build up are rumours. Don't read too much into army convoys moving to the border."
Local residents, however, said they had not seen such military activity in recent years.
"The movement of troops has surely increased," said Moni Lama, a Buddhist monk.
The border deployment comes amid persistent reports of Chinese incursions and Beijing's opposition to the visit of Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama to Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh.
China has denied any incursions by its army into India. And Indian officials say the number of border breaches has shown no dramatic increase to warrant undue worries.
Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu said: "We firmly oppose the Dalai (Lama) visiting the so-called 'Arunachal Pradesh'." China disputes the ownership of Arunachal Pradesh.
India has said that the Dalai Lama is free to travel to any part of the country. The Tibetan spiritual leader has lived in India since fleeing his homeland in 1959 after a failed revolt against Communist rule.
Takam Sanjay, a ruling Congress MP from Arunachal Pradesh, told IANS: "We welcome the Dalai Lama's visit to Arunachal Pradesh. China has no reason to interfere in India's internal matters."
It is through Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh that the Dalai Lama entered India.
The India-China border along Arunachal Pradesh is separated by the McMahon Line, an imaginary border now known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
India and China fought a border war in 1962, with Chinese troops advancing deep into Arunachal Pradesh and inflicting heavy casualties on poorly armed Indian troops.
The border dispute with China was inherited by India from British rulers, who hosted a 1914 conference with the Tibetan and Chinese governments that set the border in what is now Arunachal Pradesh.
China has never recognised the 1914 McMahon Line and claims 90,000 sq km, including nearly all of Arunachal Pradesh. India accuses China of occupying 8,000 sq km in Jammu and Kashmir.
After 1962, tensions flared again in 1986 with Indian and Chinese forces clashing in Sumdorong Chu valley of Arunachal Pradesh. Chinese troops reportedly built a helipad in the valley leading to the fresh skirmishes.
China policy: Is foreign ministry at odds with security establishment?
New Delhi, Sep 20 (IANS) Is India's security establishment at odds with the foreign policy establishment over the threat perception vis-a-vis China?
Even as the government sought to play down reports of Chinese border "aggression", saying there was nothing alarming about them, there are sections of the strategic establishment, whose views are articulated through retired armed forces personnel and strategic experts, who appear to think that the government is underplaying the Chinese "threat".
With some sensation-seeking television channels happy to play along, this section also feels the government was not ready to concede that Chinese forces have made serious "incursions" into Indian territory and have scaled up their aggressive postures in trends ominously reminiscent of the months preceding the 1962 war between the two countries.
The first alarm bell was raised by Indian Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor Aug 31 saying there have been several border violations by Chinese troops in the past few months, including an incursion by a helicopter. However, he clarified that these infringements could have been inadvertent. By this Saturday, he was saying that the number of incursions this year was the same as last year and there was nothing to be worried about.
"There have been several violations and one incursion by a Chinese helicopter in the past few months. It could have happened due to a navigational error but that does not justify it. It was taken up at the border personnel meet," Kapoor had said earlier.
Prior to that, former Indian Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta warned that Beijing was in the process of creating formidable military capabilities and it would be more assertive in its claims on the neighbourhood.
Speaking at the National Maritime Foundation, he said: "China is in the process of consolidating its comprehensive national power and creating formidable military capabilities. Once that is done, China is likely to be more assertive on its claims, especially in the immediate neighbourhood."
These fears were further amplified when a section of the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), the country's external intelligence agency, reportedly briefed the political leadership of China's "ambitious designs" in the region and how it was making massive investments in the neighbourhood.
At a closed-door session in the recently held police chiefs conclave this week, two senior RAW officials said these incursions should not be overlooked as China had "bigger designs" and was investing huge amounts of money in countries like Nepal, Sri Lanka and Myanmar to isolate India.
However, the nature of these investments and the grand designs to offset India's regional goals were not spelt out.
But despite the alarmist reports, fanned by some television channels, the external affairs ministry has sought to play down the incursions, saying these are "routine incidents" that occur due to differences in perception about the Line of Actual Control, the ceasefire line, as China does not recognise McMahon Line that then Tibetan rulers agreed with the British rulers of India.
In the midle of this confusion, a high-level meeting of officials that was to be held here Thursday to discuss the alleged Chinese border intrusions was postponed. The meeting was expected to be chaired by National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan. Cabinet Secretary K.M. Chandrasekhar, Defence Secretary Pradeep Kumar, Home Secretary G.K. Pillai and Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao and the three service chiefs were to attend.
No reason was given for the postponement. But reliable sources said this followed differences between the external affairs ministry and the Prime Minister's Office on the one hand and the defence ministry on the other on how to deal with China.
Since then, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, followed by National Security Adviser M.K Narayanan, Foreign Secretary Nirumpama Rao and even the army chief have sought to downplay the threat perception with Gen Deepak Kapoor now saying "there was no cause for worry or concern".
External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna cautioned against creating "excessive alarm" over the reported developments and stressed that India's border with China had been "most peaceful".
The defence ministry has on the other hand pitched for a more assertive approach vis-a-vis the alleged incursions, which Beijing has denied. The defence ministry wants curbs on army patrolling of the border lifted and a more pro-active approach towards building border infrastructure that lags far behind China's.
Currently, there are patrolling restrictions in certain "sensitive areas" of LAC to avoid possible clashes with Chinese troops.
Security analyst B. Raman, a former RAW official, has in his latest blog posted that he was "not unduly worried over the continuing reports of Chinese troop intrusions".
"We are fortunate in having a competent, professional army, which is capable of taking care of them. There is no need for a hysteria over the intrusions," he said.
"I am more worried about the diplomatic, economic and strategic intrusions which the Chinese are quietly making in our neighbourhood and the inability of our diplomacy to counter them," he wrote.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Defeated politicians conspiring with Western countries
Minister Dulles Alahapperuma has accused certain defeated political parties of collaborating with Western countries to take Sri Lanka’s military leaders to courts.
Addressing an election propaganda rally at Puhulwella in Kirinde, Matara, the Minister said two or three defeated politicians with several western countries conspired in April and May to save the LTTE from defeat. The conspiracy was in place to save the LTTE even by destroying the President. He claimed that Sri Lanka was fortunate to have a strong and courageous Head of State who did not shiver or was not afraid. Therefore, the country was able to enjoy freedom after the liberation from the terrorists.
The meeting was organised to consolidate the victory of Freedom Alliance candidates contesting the Southern polls. Ministers Rajitha Senaratne, Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena and Mervyn Silva, Parliamentarian Wimal Weerawansa and several people’s representatives were present.
Addressing an election propaganda rally at Puhulwella in Kirinde, Matara, the Minister said two or three defeated politicians with several western countries conspired in April and May to save the LTTE from defeat. The conspiracy was in place to save the LTTE even by destroying the President. He claimed that Sri Lanka was fortunate to have a strong and courageous Head of State who did not shiver or was not afraid. Therefore, the country was able to enjoy freedom after the liberation from the terrorists.
The meeting was organised to consolidate the victory of Freedom Alliance candidates contesting the Southern polls. Ministers Rajitha Senaratne, Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena and Mervyn Silva, Parliamentarian Wimal Weerawansa and several people’s representatives were present.
Sri Lankan refugees commence indefinite fast
According to police sources, 20 other refugees also joined the fast to express support to the aggrieved ones.
Police as well as revenue officials denied reports that the protest was due to lack of facilities in the camp and said they have been extended 'utmost consideration'.
The refugees have been under detention for over 10 years and they had been brought to the camp from different areas and charged under CrPC and NSA.
Due to practical difficulties, the cases cannot be disposed off promptly, the officials said.
The prisoners have been demanding to let them rejoin their relatives.
Even in victory the Sri Lankan govt seems unable to define peace
Colombo risks squandering Sri Lanka's hard-won peace - article by Brahma Chellaney
If Sri Lanka is to become a tropical paradise again, it must build enduring peace. This will only occur through genuine interethnic equality, and a transition from being a unitary state to being a federation that grants provincial and local autonomy. It will be a double tragedy for Sri Lanka if making peace proves more difficult than making war.
Yet even in victory the Sri Lankan government seems unable to define peace or outline a political solution to the long-standing cultural and political grievances of the Tamil minority, which makes up 12 percent of the 21.3-million population. A process of national reconciliation anchored in federalism and multiculturalism can succeed only if human-rights abuses by all parties are independently investigated. United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has acknowledged that civilian casualties were "unacceptably high," especially as the war built to a bloody crescendo.
The continuing air of martial triumph in Sri Lanka, though, is making it difficult to heal the wounds of war through three essential "Rs": relief, recovery and reconciliation. In fact, the military victory bears a distinct family imprint: President Mahinda Rajapaksa was guided by two of his brothers, Gotabaya, the defense secretary who authored the war plan, and Basil, the presidential special adviser who formulated the political strategy. Yet another brother, Chamal, is the ports minister who awarded China a contract to build the billion-dollar Hambantotta port, on Sri Lanka's southeast.
In return, Beijing provided Colombo not only the weapon systems that decisively tilted the military balance in its favor, but also the diplomatic cover to prosecute the war in defiance of international calls to cease offensive operations to help stanch rising civilian casualties. Through such support, China has succeeded in extending its strategic reach to a critically located country in India's backyard that sits astride vital sea-lanes of communication in the Indian Ocean region.
Sinhalese nationalists now portray Rajapaksa as a modern-day Dutugemunu, a Sinhalese ruler who, according to legend, vanquished an invading Tamil army led by Kind Elara more than 2,000 years ago. But four months after the Tamil Tigers were crushed, it is clear the demands of peace extend far beyond the battlefield. What is needed is a fundamental shift in thegovernment's policies to help create greater interethnic equality, regional autonomy and a reversal of the state-driven militarization of society.
But Rajapaksa, despite promising to address the root causes of conflict, has declared: "Federalism is out of the question." How elusive the peace dividend remains can be seen from Colombo's decision to press ahead with a further expansion of the military. Not content with increasing the military's size five-fold since the late 1980s to more than 200,000 troops today, Colombo is raising the strength further to 300,000, in the name of "eternal vigilance." Soon after the May victory, the government, for example, announced a drive to recruit 50,000 new troops to help manage the northern areas captured from the rebels.
The Sri Lankan military already has more troops than that of Britain or Israel. The planned further expansion would make the military in tiny Sri Lanka larger than the militaries of major powers like France, Japan and Germany. By citing a continuing danger of guerrilla remnants reviving the insurgency, Rajapaksa, in fact, seems determined to keep a hyper-militarized Sri Lanka on something of a war footing. Yet another issue of concern is the manner the nearly 300,000 Tamil civilians still held by the government in camps where, in the recent words of U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, the "internally displaced persons are effectively detained under conditions of internment."
Such detention risks causing more resentment among the Tamils and sowing the seeds of future unrest. The internment was intended to help weed out rebels, many of whom already have been identified and transferred to military sites. Those in the evacuee camps are the victims and survivors of the deadly war. To confine them in the camps against their will is to further victimize and traumatize them.
Sri Lanka's interests would be better served through greater transparency. It should grant the U.N., International Red Cross and nongovernmental organizations at home and abroad full and unhindered access to care for and protect the civilians in these camps, allowing those who wish to leave the camps to do so and live with relatives and friends. Otherwise, it seriously risks breeding further resentment.
Then there is the issue of thousands of missing people, mostly Tamils. Given that many families are still searching for missing members, the government ought to publish a list of all those it is holding — in evacuee camps, prisons, military sites and other security centers. Even suspected rebels in state custody ought to be identified and not denied access to legal representation.
Authorities should disclose the names of those they know to be dead — civilians and insurgents — and the possible circumstances of their death. Also, the way to fill the power vacuum in the Tamil-dominated north is not by dispatching additional army troops in tens of thousands, but by setting up a credible local administration to keep the peace and initiate rehabilitation and reconstruction after more than 25 years of war.
Any government move to return to the old policy of settling Sinhalese in Tamil areas is certain to stir up fresh problems. More fundamentally, such have been the costs of victory that Sri Lankan civil society stands badly weakened and civil liberties curtailed. The wartime suppression of a free press and curtailment of fundamental rights continues in peacetime, undermining democratic freedoms and creating a fear psychosis.
Public meetings cannot be held without government permission. Sweeping emergency regulations also remain in place, arming the security forces with expansive powers of search, arrest, detention and seizure of property. Individuals can still be held in unacknowledged detention for up to 12 months. For the process of reconciliation to begin in earnest, it is essential the government shed its war-gained powers and accept, as Pillay says, "an independent and credible international investigation . . . to ascertain the occurrence, nature and scale of violations of international human-rights and international humanitarian law" by all parties during the conflict.
Pillay has gone on to say: "A new future for the country, the prospect of meaningful reconciliation and lasting peace, where respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms can become a reality for all, hinges upon such an in-depth and comprehensive approach."
Unfortunately, Colombo still seeks to hold back the truth. Those who speak up are labeled "traitors" (if they are Sinhalese) or accused of being on the payroll of the Tamil diaspora. Last year, a Sri Lankan minister accused the U.N. undersecretary general for humanitarian affairs, John Holmes, of being on the rebels' payroll after Holmes called Sri Lanka one of the world's most dangerous places for aid workers.
The media remains muzzled, and a host of journalists have been murdered or imprisoned. Lawyers who dare to take up sensitive cases face threats. Recently, a well-known astrologer who predicted the president's ouster from power was arrested. And this month, the U.N. Children's Fund communications chief was ordered to leave Sri Lanka after he discussed the plight of children caught up in the government's military campaign.
Rather than begin a political dialogue on regional autonomy and a more level-playing field for the Tamils in education and government jobs, the government has seen its space get constricted by the post-victory upsurge of Sinhalese chauvinism opposed to the devolution of powers to the minorities.
The hardline constituency argues that the Tamils shouldn't get in defeat what they couldn't secure through three decades of unrest and violence. Indeed, such chauvinism seeks to tar federalism as a potential forerunner to secession, although the Tamil insurgency sprang from the state's rejection of decentralization and power-sharing. The looming parliamentary and presidential elections also make devolution difficult, even though the opposition is splintered and Rajapaksa seems set to win a second term.
Reversing the militarization of society, ending the control of information as an instrument of state policy and promoting political and ethnic reconciliation are crucial to postconflict peace-building and to furthering the interests of all Sri Lankans — Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims. So also is the need to discard the almost mono-ethnic character of the security forces. Colombo has to stop dragging its feet on implementing the constitution's 13th amendment, which requires the ceding of some powers to the provincial or local level.
Sadly, there is little international pressure on Colombo, despite the leverage offered by the Sri Lankan economy's need for external credit. The U.S. can veto any decision of the International Monetary Fund, but it chose to abstain from the recent IMF vote to give Colombo a $2.8 billion loan. In the face of China's stonewalling at the U.N., Ban has been unable to appoint a special envoy on Sri Lanka. A U.N. special envoy can shine an international spotlight to help build pressure on a recalcitrant government. But on Sri Lanka, the best the U.N. has been able to do is to send a political official to Colombo this month for talks.
It is thus important for the democratic players, including the United States, the European Union, Japan and Norway — co-chairs of the so-called Friends of Sri Lanka — and India, to coordinate their policies on Sri Lanka. If Rajapaksa continues to shun true reconciliation, these countries should ratchet up pressure on Colombo by lending support to calls for an international investigation into the thousands of civilian deaths in the final weeks of the war.
The International Criminal Court has opened an initial inquiry into Sri Lankan rights-abuse cases that could turn into a full-blown investigation. Sri Lanka, however, is not an ICC signatory and thus would have to consent — or be referred by the U.N. Security Council — for the ICC to have jurisdiction over it. As world history attests, peace sought through the suppression and humiliation of an ethnic community proves to be elusive.
If Rajapaksa wants to earn a place in history as another Dutugemunu, he has to emulate that ancient king's post-victory action and make honorable peace with the Tamils before there is a recrudescence of violence. It will be a double tragedy for Sri Lanka if making peace proves more difficult than making war.
Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the independent, privately funded Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, is on the international advisory council of the Campaign for Peace and Justice in Sri Lanka.
First Published by Japan Times
If Sri Lanka is to become a tropical paradise again, it must build enduring peace. This will only occur through genuine interethnic equality, and a transition from being a unitary state to being a federation that grants provincial and local autonomy. It will be a double tragedy for Sri Lanka if making peace proves more difficult than making war.
Yet even in victory the Sri Lankan government seems unable to define peace or outline a political solution to the long-standing cultural and political grievances of the Tamil minority, which makes up 12 percent of the 21.3-million population. A process of national reconciliation anchored in federalism and multiculturalism can succeed only if human-rights abuses by all parties are independently investigated. United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has acknowledged that civilian casualties were "unacceptably high," especially as the war built to a bloody crescendo.
The continuing air of martial triumph in Sri Lanka, though, is making it difficult to heal the wounds of war through three essential "Rs": relief, recovery and reconciliation. In fact, the military victory bears a distinct family imprint: President Mahinda Rajapaksa was guided by two of his brothers, Gotabaya, the defense secretary who authored the war plan, and Basil, the presidential special adviser who formulated the political strategy. Yet another brother, Chamal, is the ports minister who awarded China a contract to build the billion-dollar Hambantotta port, on Sri Lanka's southeast.
In return, Beijing provided Colombo not only the weapon systems that decisively tilted the military balance in its favor, but also the diplomatic cover to prosecute the war in defiance of international calls to cease offensive operations to help stanch rising civilian casualties. Through such support, China has succeeded in extending its strategic reach to a critically located country in India's backyard that sits astride vital sea-lanes of communication in the Indian Ocean region.
Sinhalese nationalists now portray Rajapaksa as a modern-day Dutugemunu, a Sinhalese ruler who, according to legend, vanquished an invading Tamil army led by Kind Elara more than 2,000 years ago. But four months after the Tamil Tigers were crushed, it is clear the demands of peace extend far beyond the battlefield. What is needed is a fundamental shift in thegovernment's policies to help create greater interethnic equality, regional autonomy and a reversal of the state-driven militarization of society.
But Rajapaksa, despite promising to address the root causes of conflict, has declared: "Federalism is out of the question." How elusive the peace dividend remains can be seen from Colombo's decision to press ahead with a further expansion of the military. Not content with increasing the military's size five-fold since the late 1980s to more than 200,000 troops today, Colombo is raising the strength further to 300,000, in the name of "eternal vigilance." Soon after the May victory, the government, for example, announced a drive to recruit 50,000 new troops to help manage the northern areas captured from the rebels.
The Sri Lankan military already has more troops than that of Britain or Israel. The planned further expansion would make the military in tiny Sri Lanka larger than the militaries of major powers like France, Japan and Germany. By citing a continuing danger of guerrilla remnants reviving the insurgency, Rajapaksa, in fact, seems determined to keep a hyper-militarized Sri Lanka on something of a war footing. Yet another issue of concern is the manner the nearly 300,000 Tamil civilians still held by the government in camps where, in the recent words of U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, the "internally displaced persons are effectively detained under conditions of internment."
Such detention risks causing more resentment among the Tamils and sowing the seeds of future unrest. The internment was intended to help weed out rebels, many of whom already have been identified and transferred to military sites. Those in the evacuee camps are the victims and survivors of the deadly war. To confine them in the camps against their will is to further victimize and traumatize them.
Sri Lanka's interests would be better served through greater transparency. It should grant the U.N., International Red Cross and nongovernmental organizations at home and abroad full and unhindered access to care for and protect the civilians in these camps, allowing those who wish to leave the camps to do so and live with relatives and friends. Otherwise, it seriously risks breeding further resentment.
Then there is the issue of thousands of missing people, mostly Tamils. Given that many families are still searching for missing members, the government ought to publish a list of all those it is holding — in evacuee camps, prisons, military sites and other security centers. Even suspected rebels in state custody ought to be identified and not denied access to legal representation.
Authorities should disclose the names of those they know to be dead — civilians and insurgents — and the possible circumstances of their death. Also, the way to fill the power vacuum in the Tamil-dominated north is not by dispatching additional army troops in tens of thousands, but by setting up a credible local administration to keep the peace and initiate rehabilitation and reconstruction after more than 25 years of war.
Any government move to return to the old policy of settling Sinhalese in Tamil areas is certain to stir up fresh problems. More fundamentally, such have been the costs of victory that Sri Lankan civil society stands badly weakened and civil liberties curtailed. The wartime suppression of a free press and curtailment of fundamental rights continues in peacetime, undermining democratic freedoms and creating a fear psychosis.
Public meetings cannot be held without government permission. Sweeping emergency regulations also remain in place, arming the security forces with expansive powers of search, arrest, detention and seizure of property. Individuals can still be held in unacknowledged detention for up to 12 months. For the process of reconciliation to begin in earnest, it is essential the government shed its war-gained powers and accept, as Pillay says, "an independent and credible international investigation . . . to ascertain the occurrence, nature and scale of violations of international human-rights and international humanitarian law" by all parties during the conflict.
Pillay has gone on to say: "A new future for the country, the prospect of meaningful reconciliation and lasting peace, where respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms can become a reality for all, hinges upon such an in-depth and comprehensive approach."
Unfortunately, Colombo still seeks to hold back the truth. Those who speak up are labeled "traitors" (if they are Sinhalese) or accused of being on the payroll of the Tamil diaspora. Last year, a Sri Lankan minister accused the U.N. undersecretary general for humanitarian affairs, John Holmes, of being on the rebels' payroll after Holmes called Sri Lanka one of the world's most dangerous places for aid workers.
The media remains muzzled, and a host of journalists have been murdered or imprisoned. Lawyers who dare to take up sensitive cases face threats. Recently, a well-known astrologer who predicted the president's ouster from power was arrested. And this month, the U.N. Children's Fund communications chief was ordered to leave Sri Lanka after he discussed the plight of children caught up in the government's military campaign.
Rather than begin a political dialogue on regional autonomy and a more level-playing field for the Tamils in education and government jobs, the government has seen its space get constricted by the post-victory upsurge of Sinhalese chauvinism opposed to the devolution of powers to the minorities.
The hardline constituency argues that the Tamils shouldn't get in defeat what they couldn't secure through three decades of unrest and violence. Indeed, such chauvinism seeks to tar federalism as a potential forerunner to secession, although the Tamil insurgency sprang from the state's rejection of decentralization and power-sharing. The looming parliamentary and presidential elections also make devolution difficult, even though the opposition is splintered and Rajapaksa seems set to win a second term.
Reversing the militarization of society, ending the control of information as an instrument of state policy and promoting political and ethnic reconciliation are crucial to postconflict peace-building and to furthering the interests of all Sri Lankans — Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims. So also is the need to discard the almost mono-ethnic character of the security forces. Colombo has to stop dragging its feet on implementing the constitution's 13th amendment, which requires the ceding of some powers to the provincial or local level.
Sadly, there is little international pressure on Colombo, despite the leverage offered by the Sri Lankan economy's need for external credit. The U.S. can veto any decision of the International Monetary Fund, but it chose to abstain from the recent IMF vote to give Colombo a $2.8 billion loan. In the face of China's stonewalling at the U.N., Ban has been unable to appoint a special envoy on Sri Lanka. A U.N. special envoy can shine an international spotlight to help build pressure on a recalcitrant government. But on Sri Lanka, the best the U.N. has been able to do is to send a political official to Colombo this month for talks.
It is thus important for the democratic players, including the United States, the European Union, Japan and Norway — co-chairs of the so-called Friends of Sri Lanka — and India, to coordinate their policies on Sri Lanka. If Rajapaksa continues to shun true reconciliation, these countries should ratchet up pressure on Colombo by lending support to calls for an international investigation into the thousands of civilian deaths in the final weeks of the war.
The International Criminal Court has opened an initial inquiry into Sri Lankan rights-abuse cases that could turn into a full-blown investigation. Sri Lanka, however, is not an ICC signatory and thus would have to consent — or be referred by the U.N. Security Council — for the ICC to have jurisdiction over it. As world history attests, peace sought through the suppression and humiliation of an ethnic community proves to be elusive.
If Rajapaksa wants to earn a place in history as another Dutugemunu, he has to emulate that ancient king's post-victory action and make honorable peace with the Tamils before there is a recrudescence of violence. It will be a double tragedy for Sri Lanka if making peace proves more difficult than making war.
Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the independent, privately funded Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, is on the international advisory council of the Campaign for Peace and Justice in Sri Lanka.
First Published by Japan Times
UN political chief voices concern about SL's displaced, says there is a real risk of breeding resentment
Internally displaced persons (IDPs) living in Government-run camps in Sri Lanka lack basic rights of freedom of movement, and the country is not making the expected progress towards a lasting peace in the wake of the end earlier this year to fighting between military forces and Tamil rebels, the United Nations political chief said Friday.
He stressed that the IDP issue is particularly important because it provides Sri Lanka with “an opportunity to move beyond simply ending the fighting to solidifying the peace. As the situation currently stands in the camps, there is a real risk of breeding resentment that will undermine the prospects for political reconciliation in the future.”
B. Lynn Pascoe, Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, told a press conference in Colombo at the end of his visit to Sri Lanka that the UN had not observed the progress expected after the world body and the Government issued a joint statement following the conclusion of fighting with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in May.
More than 280,000 IDPs now reside in often congested camps in the north of the country, and Mr. Pascoe – who visited some camps yesterday – said he was very concerned about the lack of freedom of movement for residents and what he called the “closed nature” of the camps.
“People are not free to come or go and they are understandably upset,” he said. “We picked up great frustration on this point in the camps that we visited yesterday. I was told by many – and quite emphatically – that they just want to go home.
“We understand there are security concerns to be addressed. At the same time, this kind of closed regime goes directly against the principles under which we work in assisting IDPs all around the world.”
Mr. Pascoe urged the Government to allow those IDPs who have completed the screening process to leave the camps as they choose, and for those people remaining to be able to exit the camps during the day and to freely meet with family and friends in other sites.
On the last day of his visit to Sri Lanka, Mr. Pascoe held talks today with President Mahinda Rajapaksa, senior Government ministers, military officials, opposition leaders, Tamil politicians and representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other civil society groups.
During the meetings the Under-Secretary-General discussed the situation of the IDPs as well as human rights accountability and political reconciliation.
He told the press conference that he was pleased that Walter Kälin, the Secretary-General’s Representative on the human rights of IDPs, will visit the country next week.
But Mr. Pascoe said he remains concerned about the pace of the process of allowing IDPs to return to their former communities.
“If there is more screening to do, it should be speeded up. It appears there are areas where de-mining is not a big concern. For those areas, families who have passed the screening process could be resettled without much further delay. More people should be allowed to stay with relatives and host families.”
Mr. Pascoe said he was informed by the Government today that it intends to both provide day passes to allow people to go to work or visit family and friends and to more aggressively publicize the option of accommodation with relatives and other host families.
“Of course this is not the ultimate solution to the problem of getting people home quickly, but it is an interim measure that reduces congestion in the camps,” he said, calling for the Government to show more transparency and to consult more widely to allay the fears and concerns of the IDPs.
He stressed that the IDP issue is particularly important because it provides Sri Lanka with “an opportunity to move beyond simply ending the fighting to solidifying the peace. As the situation currently stands in the camps, there is a real risk of breeding resentment that will undermine the prospects for political reconciliation in the future.”
He stressed that the IDP issue is particularly important because it provides Sri Lanka with “an opportunity to move beyond simply ending the fighting to solidifying the peace. As the situation currently stands in the camps, there is a real risk of breeding resentment that will undermine the prospects for political reconciliation in the future.”
B. Lynn Pascoe, Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, told a press conference in Colombo at the end of his visit to Sri Lanka that the UN had not observed the progress expected after the world body and the Government issued a joint statement following the conclusion of fighting with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in May.
More than 280,000 IDPs now reside in often congested camps in the north of the country, and Mr. Pascoe – who visited some camps yesterday – said he was very concerned about the lack of freedom of movement for residents and what he called the “closed nature” of the camps.
“People are not free to come or go and they are understandably upset,” he said. “We picked up great frustration on this point in the camps that we visited yesterday. I was told by many – and quite emphatically – that they just want to go home.
“We understand there are security concerns to be addressed. At the same time, this kind of closed regime goes directly against the principles under which we work in assisting IDPs all around the world.”
Mr. Pascoe urged the Government to allow those IDPs who have completed the screening process to leave the camps as they choose, and for those people remaining to be able to exit the camps during the day and to freely meet with family and friends in other sites.
On the last day of his visit to Sri Lanka, Mr. Pascoe held talks today with President Mahinda Rajapaksa, senior Government ministers, military officials, opposition leaders, Tamil politicians and representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other civil society groups.
During the meetings the Under-Secretary-General discussed the situation of the IDPs as well as human rights accountability and political reconciliation.
He told the press conference that he was pleased that Walter Kälin, the Secretary-General’s Representative on the human rights of IDPs, will visit the country next week.
But Mr. Pascoe said he remains concerned about the pace of the process of allowing IDPs to return to their former communities.
“If there is more screening to do, it should be speeded up. It appears there are areas where de-mining is not a big concern. For those areas, families who have passed the screening process could be resettled without much further delay. More people should be allowed to stay with relatives and host families.”
Mr. Pascoe said he was informed by the Government today that it intends to both provide day passes to allow people to go to work or visit family and friends and to more aggressively publicize the option of accommodation with relatives and other host families.
“Of course this is not the ultimate solution to the problem of getting people home quickly, but it is an interim measure that reduces congestion in the camps,” he said, calling for the Government to show more transparency and to consult more widely to allay the fears and concerns of the IDPs.
He stressed that the IDP issue is particularly important because it provides Sri Lanka with “an opportunity to move beyond simply ending the fighting to solidifying the peace. As the situation currently stands in the camps, there is a real risk of breeding resentment that will undermine the prospects for political reconciliation in the future.”
Sri Lanka responds to Prof Philip Alston on Channel 4 video
The Government of Sri Lanka welcomes the media statement issued today (17) by Prof. Philip Alston, Special Rapporteur on extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary executions, in which he now acknowledges that the report which was shared with him by the Government leads him to the conclusion that "the views expressed do indeed raise several issues which warrant further investigation before it could reasonably be concluded that the video is authentic".
The Government of Sri |Lanka also welcomes Prof. Alston acknowledgement that the government's investigation has been prompt. The government regrets however, that Prof. Alston has characterized the professional investigation as not independent merely because the experts concerned were Sri Lankan.
Prof. Alston does not appear to have carefully perused the Government's Consolidated Response of 09 September in which a URL to Mr Siri Hewawitharana's experience and qualifications was included on page 4.
Contrary to Prof Alton's assertion, the Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights, Mahinda Samarasinghe, contacted Mr Hewawitharana on 05 September, several days after the short op-ed opinion piece in The Island newspaper appeared and requested him to provide the Minister with a more detailed analysis of the video in the form of a short report. The said report was received on 06 September.
With regard to Dr De Silva, the sole reason for Prof. Alston's characterization of his analysis as partial is that he appears to have been consulted by the Government of Sri Lanka on previous occasions. The Government is of the view that it is quite legitimate to consult acknowledged experts from autonomous academic institutions and this in no way makes the expert part of the Government nor does it render the view tainted by bias.
Moreover, the fact that Prof. Alston now acknowledges that the video needs further investigation to prove its authenticity is sufficient to establish that the work of the experts consulted by the government of Sri Lanka is credible. This also confirms the governments concern that Prof. Alston was unduly hasty in issuing his original press statement concerning the contents of the video in the absence of any credible material.
It would be pertinent to note that the High Commissioner for Human Rights welcomed the Sri Lankan delegation's communication that a prompt investigation had been carried out into this matter. She also mentioned that, being a lawyer herself, she had thought it fit not to make a pronouncement on this issue until the authenticity of the contents of the video in question was established.
The Government is of the view that any further comment on this issue by Prof. Alston should only be consequent to the receipt of fresh and cogent evidence that will enable him to conclude that the video in question is genuine.
-- Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights
The Government of Sri |Lanka also welcomes Prof. Alston acknowledgement that the government's investigation has been prompt. The government regrets however, that Prof. Alston has characterized the professional investigation as not independent merely because the experts concerned were Sri Lankan.
Prof. Alston does not appear to have carefully perused the Government's Consolidated Response of 09 September in which a URL to Mr Siri Hewawitharana's experience and qualifications was included on page 4.
Contrary to Prof Alton's assertion, the Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights, Mahinda Samarasinghe, contacted Mr Hewawitharana on 05 September, several days after the short op-ed opinion piece in The Island newspaper appeared and requested him to provide the Minister with a more detailed analysis of the video in the form of a short report. The said report was received on 06 September.
With regard to Dr De Silva, the sole reason for Prof. Alston's characterization of his analysis as partial is that he appears to have been consulted by the Government of Sri Lanka on previous occasions. The Government is of the view that it is quite legitimate to consult acknowledged experts from autonomous academic institutions and this in no way makes the expert part of the Government nor does it render the view tainted by bias.
Moreover, the fact that Prof. Alston now acknowledges that the video needs further investigation to prove its authenticity is sufficient to establish that the work of the experts consulted by the government of Sri Lanka is credible. This also confirms the governments concern that Prof. Alston was unduly hasty in issuing his original press statement concerning the contents of the video in the absence of any credible material.
It would be pertinent to note that the High Commissioner for Human Rights welcomed the Sri Lankan delegation's communication that a prompt investigation had been carried out into this matter. She also mentioned that, being a lawyer herself, she had thought it fit not to make a pronouncement on this issue until the authenticity of the contents of the video in question was established.
The Government is of the view that any further comment on this issue by Prof. Alston should only be consequent to the receipt of fresh and cogent evidence that will enable him to conclude that the video in question is genuine.
-- Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights
IDPs in Sri Lanka's camps growing impatient: UN political chief
“I saw some efforts under way to make areas suitable for resettlement, both through clearing landmines and rehabilitating schools and economic infrastructure, said B. Lynn Pascoe, the Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, who arrived in the country yesterday.
“I also met with people in the camps who want to leave and return to their homes, but cannot do so, and are understandably growing impatient and anxious about their future,” he added.
In May the Government declared victory over the rebel Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), ending more than two decades of fighting. There are some 280,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) residing in camps in northern Sri Lanka.
Mr. Pascoe, accompanied by the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hussein Bhaila, visited Mannar, where he witnessed preparations to construct a water reservoir for resettled communities, and received a briefing and demonstration by the armed forces on progress in clearing mines from the surrounding Mannar Rice Bowl region.
The delegation then visited two IDP camps and a rehabilitation centre for former LTTE members in Jaffna, before concluding the field visit at the Manik Farms camp in Vavuniya, the largest of the country’s IDP camps.
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today voiced his concern about developments regarding the IDPs, as well as the political process and a possible accountability mechanism for alleged human rights violations committed during the armed conflict.
Speaking at his monthly news conference in New York, Mr. Ban said he had discussed these issues with President Mahinda Rajapaksa last Monday, and then dispatched Mr. Pascoe to follow up.
“I have asked him to deliver my letter to the President outlining the concerns of the international community and immediately report back to me,” said the Secretary-General, who also reiterated his concern at the continued detention without charge of two UN staff members in Sri Lanka.
Mr. Pascoe is expected to conclude the two-day visit tomorrow in Colombo, where he will meet with President Rajapaksa and other Government officials, as well as with opposition and Tamil politicians, members of civil society and UN representatives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
