Telling differences between the UNA version and the Fonseka version of the resignation letter
Posted on November 15th, 2009

Dilrook Kannangara

It’s over before it started! UNA was planning to subcontract its presidential candidate even before the presidential election is announced. However, its campaign hit a snag even before it managed to initiate open campaigning for the so called common candidate. UNA led by anti-national factions including the Mano Ganeshan LTTE faction, Hakeem faction, Mangala faction, $3 million Ravi faction and the Sinhala LTTE Sarath Manamendra faction could not agree with some of Fonseka’s key concerns. They have done well to shield their growing disputes.

 First of all it must be emphasized that neither Fonseka nor the government has any right to release this letter along with its annexure to the media as it concerns vital national security issues. The government must investigate into the leaking of this defence-critical document to the media. Wrongdoers must be punished irrespective of their position.

 UNA media published Fonseka’s resignation letter immediately upon the handing over of the letter. Another version was published in the Sunday Times (ST version). There are important differences between the two especially in the annexure where the reasons for Fonseka’s resignation are enumerated.

 The UNA version has omitted everything that is valuable to the Sri Lanka Army.

 The ST version has 17 points while the UNA version has only 16! What is missing? Readers may be surprised to learn that it is point number Eight (8) that is missing from the UNA version which has been renumbered in a deliberate attempt to disregard what is good and relevant to the defence establishment.

 Point 8 of the annexure (ST version) goes, “Your Excellency, I wish to remind you that whilst the Eelam War IV was being fought I repeatedly requested to increase the compensation paid to those Next of Kin of the officers and men killed in action from Rs.150,000.00 which was the amount sanctioned in year 1985, to Rs.500,000.00 as the approved amount is grossly insufficient in the present context. This request was not considered favourably thereby I feel extremely guilty that the Army and the Government at large has not looked into the welfare of those who paid the supreme sacrifice.” (Source: The Sunday Times, 15 November, 2009).

 This obviously is not in line with Elam thinking as it would benefit no Elamist. Hence it was left out in the UNA version.

 Point number 16 of the annexure starts thus, “troop requirement for the resettlement is grossly insufficient and cannot sustain the demanding needs in the resettled areas, thus placing the innocent people in turmoil.” And the UNA version omits this! It shows the pro-Elam tendency of the UNA which calls for the dismantling of army camps and begs not to increase the number of troops.

 The same point ends thus, “There is no clear policy to ensure the security of the Tamil people thereby leaving room to ruin the victory attained, paving the way for yet another uprising in the future due to lack of security arrangements in the resettled areas.” The part, “due to lack of security arrangements in the resettled areas”, is missing. This alteration completely changes the meaning of the sentence.

 Last point (#17) goes, “Sri Lanka Army ensured the safe custody of approximately 10,000 surrendered LTTE cadres. But it is regrettably noted that so far no constructive action has been taken to methodically rehabilitate them in order to ensure that they get back to the society as properly rehabilitated law abiding citizens.” This has been completely deleted by UNA Elamists because it proves the absence of human rights violations and International Humanitarian Law violations by the army. Allegations of war crimes and human rights violations are the only hope Elamists have although these are dead ends too.

 Instead the following fake point has been inserted in the INA version. “The peace dividend the whole country expected at the conclusion of the war has yet to materialize. The economic hardships faced by the people have increased while waste and corruption have reached endemic proportions; media freedom and other democratic rights continue to be curtailed. The many sacrifices the army made to end the war would not have been in vain, if we can usher in a new era of peace and prosperity to our motherland.” Who on earth might have composed this as it is not in the annexure? It is not difficult to guess!

 Point number 15 on IDPs ends with the sentence, “Yet, today many of them are continuing to live in appalling conditions due to the lack of proper planning on the part of the government”. The UNA version has more to it at the end. It adds, “and the IDPs who have friends and relatives elsewhere in the country must be given the choice to live with them until proper demining has been done in their areas.” Who else apart from the Tamil Elam messenger Mano Ganeshan cried for this?

 As can be seen, the UNA camp has manipulated not only Fonseka’s silence but also his integrity and his resignation letter as well. They are very likely to manipulate the ex-General’s birth certificate and the death certificate too. This shows the growing fatal discrepancies within the alleged UNA-Fonseka tie up. It’s a miscarriage!

 Chief of Defense Staff Gen. Sarath Fonseka’s Letter of Resignation
General Sarath Fonseka’s 16 Reasons
His Excellency the President Through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Public Security, Law and Order Presidential Secretariat COLOMBO 12 November 2009 Your Excellency REQUEST TO RETIRE FROM THE REGULAR FORCE OF THE SRI LANKA ARMY 1. I, General G S C Fonseka RWP RSP VSV USP rcds psc presently serving as the Chief of Defence Staff, was enlisted to the Ceylon Army on 05th Feb 1970 and was commissioned on the 01st June 1971. On the 6th Dec 2005 due to the trust and confident placed on me, Your Excellency was kind enough to… -Full Story-
(LankaWeb – 13/11/09)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2020 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress