US & Indian reports expose anti-national Ranil
Posted on December 21st, 2009

H. L. D. Mahindapala

Even before the presidential election could get into first gear Ranil Wickremesinghe, the Vice President of the International Democratic Union (IDU) — a club of the right-wing Christians of the West including Bush, Blair and John Howard of Australia — is dodging the critical issue that is before the nation: Is he with his right-wing Christian leaders in the West pressing for tribunals to try Sri Lankan forces that waged a successful war against the Tamil Tiger terrorists or not?

 When he was asked in India what his stand was on the allegations made by Gen. Sarath Fonseka against his own army Wickremesinghe told the Indian media that he has sought an explanation from the Sri Lankan government.

PTI reported: “Replying to a question on the charge by opposition Presidential election candidate Fonseka, which he has later subsequently denied, the United National Party (UNP) leader said the Sri Lankan Government should explain in the next Parliament session.

“We have heard that they had a discussion. The government has not yet explained. They should explain in the next Parliament session. They can’t shift the blame,” Wickremesinghe said. (PTI “”…” December 16, 2009).

Now who is shifting what from whom? Why should Wickremesinghe ask for explanation from the government on charges made by his “Common Candidate”, Gen. Sarath Fonseka, about alleged incidents when he could, without any difficulty, ask the Army Commander who is with him now? Besides, his “Common Candidate” has accepted total responsibility for whatever happened when he was Army Commander. So what’s holding up Wickremesinghe from asking his nominee about the allegations he made against his fellow-soldiers? Why is he shifting the blame to the government?

 And since Fonseka has not withdrawn his allegations, or apologized to Maj-Gen. Shavendra Silva (the Sunday Leader editor is on record saying that Gen. Fonseka stands by his allegations) what is Wickremesinghe’s stand on the statements made by his “Common Candidate”? Is he going to press charges on the basis of the allegations made by his “Common Candidate”? If so will he put his Candidate too on trial as he has taken full responsibility for whatever happened under his command?

 On this issue President Mahinda Rajapakse’s position is crystal clear. Like the way he took responsibility to lead the war he is now ready to take responsibility for its consequences, whatever it may be. He told representatives of 64 trade unions at his office here on December 14, 2009 : “I will never betray the Security Forces and am ready to face any accusation on behalf of the Security Forces that had made tremendous sacrifices for the nation.”

 Analysing the two positions of Ranil Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa, the Correspondent of the Indian Express, P. K. Balachandran, wrote: “Rajapaksa’s statement is in contrast to an earlier remark by Fonseka that he is not opposed to a war crimes probe if credible evidence of rights violations is given, because the Sri Lanka army does not have anything to hide.

“While Rajapaksa has consistently opposed an international war crimes investigation or trial, Fonseka seems to have a different view, more in line with Western thinking on the subject.

“Fonseka’s main supporter, the pro-West United National Party, is not against the internationalisation of the Sri Lankan conflict and has not resisted calls for a war crimes tribunal made by the Western powers.” (Emphasis mine.)

 This is a damning indictment of the positions taken by Wickremesinghe and Fonseka. Balachandran, a seasoned Sri Lankan watcher, has identified four main aspects: 1. UNP is pro-West; (2) UNP is not against the internationalisation of the Sri Lankan conflict, meaning that it is willing invite interference from foreign sources; 3) UNP has not resisted calls for a war crimes tribunal made by the Western powers and (4) Fonseka is not opposed to war crimes probe if credible evidence is available and since he has given the evidence, which he considers to be credible, he has to now initiate a war crimes probe.  All four factors combined have serious consequences for Sri Lanka’s (a) sovereignty, (b) dignity as a member of the international community and (c) the Armed Forces who risked their lives to fight the battles of Fonseka.

 It is common knowledge that the 33-year-old war, starting from the declaration of war in the Vadukoddai Resolution of 1976, was fought against everything that is contained in the four factors mentioned above. It was a war fought not only to defeat the enemies within but also the enemies abroad. Among other glories, the successful completion of the war was a triumph over these meddlesome external forces. Right now Wickremesinghe is in the forefront of the move to initiate war crimes tribunals, according to Balachandran’s report. In short, any objective analysis would point the finger at Ranil Wickremesinghe for acting like “the running dog of imperialist West”  — that good old Chinese Marxist phrase — who relentlessly pursue anti-national policies to denigrate the image of Sri Lanka abroad.

 He has consistently allied himself with anti-national forces, operating internally and externally. For instance, he attacked Gen. Sarath Fonseka when he was leading the nationalist forces in the battlefield. But the moment Fonseka abandoned the forces that fought for the nation he has had no hesitation in inviting Fonseka to be his leader.

 All his current allies have been those who abandoned the nationalist cause. The latest is the JVP — Jathika Vihulu-kara-yan-gay (National Jokers) Party. Its present leader, Somawansa Amerasinghe, was in the bandwagon that killed innocent civilians (mostly UNPers) to topple the government in which Wickremesinghe was a minister. Then to him Wickremesinghe was the symbol of evil capitalism exploiting the masses. Wickremesinghe was also a party to the Indo-Sri Lanka agreement that was opposed brutally by the JVP. Politically, Wickremesinghe and Amerasinghe are at loggerheads even now, opposed to each other radically on all fundamentals. What Marxist dialectics can Amerasinghe adduce to reconcile their ideological contradictions? On what political, rational or ethical principles can Somawansa go to bed with Wickremesinghe?

 What is more, Somawansa has embraced Sarath Fonseka’s symbol of swan and campaigns on the same platform with Wickremesinghe. This adds to the crimes of Somawansa betraying his own ideologies and his leader who must be turning in his grave watching the antics of his successor. Has he forgotten that Sarath Fonseka was in the army that finally liquidated Somawansa’s leader Rohan Wijeweera?

 So it is rather comic to see Somawansa holding events to commemorate his slain leader in the morning and then rushing in the evening to occupy seats on the same platform with those who defeated his terrorist movement and massacred his leader and comrades.  He leaves no doubt in the minds of the voters that in following Fonseka’s swan Somawansa has turned into Soma-hansa! Today Soma-hansa stands out as the ace joker leading the Jathika Vihulu-kara-yan-gay Party. Besides, if he can betray his leader and his ideological principles as and when he pleases how can he take the moral high ground and accuse others of being morally corrupt?

 The menagerie of elephants, swans and bell-ringers on the opposition platform cannot be considered as a zoo because zoos are normally benign places. But this ark of beasts and birds is proving to be a greater danger to the nation than the Tigers who were exterminated not so long ago. None in the menagerie is a comfort to the nation. The wild elephants have produced in Wickremesinghe a leader who has never failed to go on the rampage against the best interests of the nation. Though Wickremesinghe denies it he has never ceased to run down Sri Lanka abroad to increase international pressure on the elected government of the day. This is a crime against the people and yet he doesn’t care because he has placed all his trust in the White sahibs in foreign governments and his white Christian fundamentalists in the IDU who talk directly to God like Bush.

 The Rajapaksas on the other hand has come out boldly as defenders of the nation. The incontrovertible testimony of the roles of the Rajapaksas in defending the nation and Wickremesinghe betraying the nation comes from the latest bi-partisan US report of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Senate. The contrast stands out clearly in the following critical paragraph: “In Colombo, the U.S. approach is viewed by many senior government officials as heavy-handed and “ƒ”¹…””ƒ”¹…”shrill.” They no longer sense a strong partnership with the United States and view the relationship to be on a downward trajectory. The President’s senior advisor and brother, Basil Rajapaksa, advised committee staff that the United States should approach Sri Lanka as “ƒ”¹…””ƒ”¹…”friends” and “ƒ”¹…””ƒ”¹…”give suggestions rather than make critical remarks.”

 “The President’s other brother and Defense Secretary, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, expressed similar frustration that the United States and international community had not recognized the Goverment’s progressive transition to democracy, ethnic reconciliation, disarmament and demobilization of paramilitary groups, rehabilitation of child soldiers, and economic development. He said he believed strongly in the value of repairing Sri Lanka’s relations with the United States and recommended that Washington focus its attention on the future and not the past, judging the Goverment on its record of performance in the Eastern Province, and not on the agendas of its critics. He said he did “ƒ”¹…””ƒ”¹…”not deny there have been cases of government abuse,” but that defeating the LTTE had been the top priority and trumped other considerations.

 “Many Sri Lankan Government officials seemed surprised by the barrage of international criticism and intense public scrutiny they received following the war. They had expected instead praise for defeating a notorious terrorist group””‚which pioneered suicide bombing techniques and assassinated Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Ghandi in 1991 and Sri Lankan President Ranasinghe Premadasa in 1993″”‚and space to make the transition to a post-conflict environment. Opposition leaders take a different view. United National Party and opposition leader Ranil Wikremesinghe said the United States was on the right track in publishing the “ƒ”¹…””ƒ”¹…”Incidents Report” and should “ƒ”¹…””ƒ”¹…”keep the pressure on the government.” Wikremesinghe said Sri Lankans did not want to lose their relationship with the United States, and the Goverment’s criticism of recent U.S. remarks was “ƒ”¹…””ƒ”¹…”complete nonsense.” (Emphasis mine) ( p. 15, Sri Lanka: Recharting US Strategies After the War, US Senate, Foreign Relations Committee “”…” December 7, 2009)

One does not have to be a rocket scientist to recognize the defence put up by the Rajapakse brothers to protect the national interests and the aggressive anti-national attack of Wickremesinghe urging US to “keep the pressures on the government”.  He must have certainly argued at length, running down the government, to conclude that US should “keep the pressures on the government”. At last we have on the record what Wickremesinghe has been telling the foreign governments. He has even run to Delhi and told the External Affairs Minister S M Krishna that the situation faced by IDPs is “bad” (PTI “”…” December 16, 2009) when the Editor of The Hindu, N. Ram, who visited Manik Farm, has recorded earlier that the situation of IDPs in Sri Lanka is better than the 17 camps for Sri Lankan refugees in India. This is the latest instance where Wickremesinghe has proved that he cannot be trusted to defend the nation on any critical issue. There is nothing positive in his politics. His negative politics is based essentially on bad-mouthing Sri Lanka to all and sundry.

His behaviour is predictable: it points to him as a petty and weak leader who is aiming to grab any help he can from anyone abroad to win the presidency/premiership because the people have repeatedly rejected him as an anti-national and dishonourable fake. How can Wickremesinghe serve the nation when he runs like a lap dog behind foreign governments to undermine the sovereignty of the people?

 His main aim, of course, is to topple the government with foreign interventions because he cannot get the backing of the people for him to become the Executive Prime Minister “”…” his latest ambition. So does this nation need a leader like Wickremesinghe who is going all out to urge the biggest power on earth to undermine the sovereign rights of the people by putting pressure on the governments elected by the people? Wickremesinghe’s right is to put pressure on the government through the people, not through Bush, Blair and Brown. How can he be trusted to serve the nation when he is selling the nation for his personal gain? He has always been in the habit of selling the nation to anyone who is prepared to buy it and he doesn’t care at what price he sells it as long as he gets his share of power. Isn’t he the most treacherous betrayer of nation next, of course, to Don Juan Dharmapala? 

 The people who decide to vote for him and his band of anti-national forces will be committing hara-kiri on January 26 because they will lose not only the gains won in the battlefield but also the fundamentals on which this nation was built by the founding fathers who paved the path for the voters to elect freely a future filled with the heritage that carried the nation forward for over two millennia. The founding fathers did not build this nation for Ranil Wickremesinghe and his political allies to hand over territory, or our soldiers to the enemies waiting in the wings to undermine our dignity, our national sovereignty and our unique heritage.  

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2021 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress