Why is Moon blind to West exporting terrorism? Part II.
Posted on August 8th, 2010

H. L. D. Mahindapala

Part I published yesterday focused on US State Department’s latest report on terrorism which said categorically that Tamil Tiger terrorists continue to raise funds in North America, Europe and Australia either through coercion or bogus charity funds “”…” all of which lead to violations of human rights in Sri Lanka destabilized by terrorism. This means that these terrorist activities are continued despite the domestic laws of these Western nations prohibiting terrorist activities on their soil. The report is quite emphatic in saying: “In spite of losing the war on the ground in Sri Lanka, the LTTE’s international network of financial support was suspected to have survived largely intact.” The conclusion that can be drawn from this statement is that though the terrorist war in Sri Lanka is over, ending violations of human rights arising from it, the Western bases of the banned Tamil Tiger outfit remain intact and open for its terrorist network to carry on their illegal activities under the very noses of the Western champions of human rights.

   It is the international dimensions of Tamil Tiger terrorism that is a concern to Sri Lanka and the international community. The State Department has quite correctly rung the alarm bells to signal the current threats from the agents of Tamil Tiger terrorists operating in Western bases, This places a heavy responsibility on Ban Ki-Moon to raise the issue of the terrorist bases of the banned Tamil Tigers with the big powers in the West who are sheltering selected terrorists groups like the Tamil Tigers while the agents of Al Qua’ida are hunted ruthlessly day and night. It is mandatory for him to root out terrorism in all its manifestations “”…” particularly fund raising and propagandizing — because the UN Security Council resolutions specifically identify these as primary causes of global terrorism.  

However, Moon has shown no signs of taking on the West to eliminate the Tiger fund-raising bases. The State Department report implies that the steps taken by the West are inadequate to deal with the problem of Tigers exporting terrorism to Sri Lanka. If Moon is consistent and is driven by high moral principles of international humanitarian law why must he stop at appointing a panel on Sri Lanka (and that too in addition to the Sri Lankan Commission on Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation) and not appoint one or several panels on the export of terrorism from the West?  

 There can be no dispute about these Western sources of terrorism now that the State Department has named them as the bases where the international network of the Tamil Tigers has “survived largely intact.” It is a reality that Moon cannot deny because it is officially revealed by the State Department. So when will Moon appoint a panel to advise him on the violations of the UN Security Resolutions which stipulate that nations must not allow their territories to be used as bases for financing, propagandizing or exporting terrorism to other friendly nations?  

  Another alarming aspect of terrorism is the curious way some of the so-called experts interpret terrorism. Take the example of the Australian expert on terrorism, Prof. Clive Williams of the Australian National University who says: “They (agents of the Tamil Tiger terrorists) never done anything here except collects money and they never posed a threat to Australia. It is always been very much a support activity for the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. 

 “Organisations should only be on the list if they post a particular danger to Australia. I don’t know anything (the Tigers) have done that would warranted it.” (The Australian  -A Plus — July 16, 2010. 

  According to the logic of Prof. Williams it is perfectly legitimate for the Tamil Tigers to collect money in Australia and use it to wage a terrorist war in Sri Lanka because “they have never posed a threat to Australia.” This is contrary to the international law on terrorism as well as the common Australian code on terrorism applied generally to foreign or local terrorists. For instance, Australia banned Gerry Adams of the Provisional IRA, who had “not posed a threat to Australia”. The Irish terrorists were never a threat to Australia. But he was banned because he belonged to an organisation that “conducted criminal terrorist acts and bombings” said Philip Ruddock , the Immigration Minister. The other example is Iraq. It was never a threat to Australia. In fact, Australia had thriving trade relations with Iraq but Australia joined the coalition of the willing in throwing a naval cordon around Iraq to prevent essential goods like medicine and food from entering Iraq. According to UNICEF figures 600,000 children died of malnutrition and lack of medicine. 

 Australia is also obliged under international law to abide by UN Security Resolutions. But unlike the other 32 countries that had banned the Tamil Tigers Australia has banned the Tamil Tigers only under international law but not under domestic law. This is like saying that a woman is pregnant under international law but a virgin under domestic law. Australia wants to have it both ways though it has a very clear cut policy when it involved big powers like Britain on IRA or Americans in Iraq.  

In his rush to defend the Tamil Tigers Prof. Williams has exposed himself as an academic who is not qualified to be an expert on terrorism in Australia. If he is the expert he claims to be on terrorism in Australia then he should have been aware of the following Tamil Tiger terrorist acts known to the Australian security authorities: 

1) In April 2009, the Sri Lankans, mainly tertiary students, held a peace rally on the steps of the Victorian Parliament. Labour MP. Telmo Languiller addressed the peaceful rally. When they were going home after the rally the Tamil Tiger agents attacked students walking down Collins Streets and one Sinhalese student was hospitalized with a cracked skull. That same night six Sinhalese shops in the Melbourne suburbs of Dandenong, Clayton, Doveton and Huntingdale were attacked, sending a chilling message to the Sinhalese community domiciled in Australia.  

 2. In the Westmead suburb of Sydney, (see May 18, 2009 Sydney Morning Herald) a Tamil gang broke into a house shared by Sinhala students and splashed acid on the face of two students and stabbed one in the stomach. Police have charged the Tamil attackers. These were politically motivated crimes that come under the definition of terrorism. How many more acts like these are required for Prof. Williams to categorize them as terrorists?  

 3. Tamil radio stations in Sydney and Melbourne have been vilifying both Sinhalese and Tamil dissidents. Dr. Noel Nadesan, the Editor of the Tamil community news paper, UTHAYAM, was the constant target of radio attacks because he didn’t toe the LTTE line. He and his family were threatened with reprisals. In Sydney, Tamil Tiger thugs raided an outlet in a suburb and grabbed 400 copies of UTHAYAM and burnt them all.

  4. Prof. Williams’ bland statement that the Tamil Tigers only “collected money” is, to say the least, appalling. It could be because he is naƒÆ’†’¯ve, ignorant or partisan “”…” none of which is excusable for an academic who claims to be an expert on terrorism. He knows that UN Security Council Resolution 1373 and other related resolutions have made it illegal to raise funds or propagandize terrorism. To exonerate them as if they are a branch of the Red Cross collecting money for some charity questions his authority as an expert.Besides, what would be his response if Al-Qa’ida was making Australia a base to collect money for buying arms in the underworld to blow up Allied forces (including Australian soldiers) in Afghanistan?

  5. Like most effective and deadly terrorist organizations LTTE was internationalized not only to raise funds but also to hit foreign targets when it was deemed to be necessary. LTTE began with assassinating Rajiv Gandhi in S. India. How long would it have taken to escalate terrorist violence from Sri Lankan students in Australian suburbs to shopping malls and other critical targets in Australia?  

As an expert on terrorism Prof. Williams should have known these basic facts known to Australian authorities. When he states that he does not know hat the Tamil Tigers have done to be banned in Australia he is letting himself down as an expert. Could it be that he is trying to cover-up or is there a hidden motive in his agenda for him to overlook these criminal acts? Besides, when Prof. Williams says: “I don’t know anything (the Tigers) have done that would warranted it (banning)” is he saying that politically motivated violent  acts committed against Sri Lankan Australians do not come within his definition of terrorism?  

 White- washing terrorism is not the way to combat the Hydra-headed monster of terrorism. Prof. Williams “expert opinion” on Tamil Tiger terrorism has no regard for the pain of the victims of Tamil Tiger terrorism in Australia. No one denies Prof. Williams his right to hold opinions even if they are based on ignorance. But he should not air his baseless opinion publicly because it will be a reflection on the standards of expertise available at the ANU for public consumption. For his own sake, it is necessary to emphasize that his claim to be an “expert on terrorism” would increase exponentially if he keeps his mouth shut on Tamil Tiger terrorist activities permanently.  

Finally, the Country Report of the US State Department should be considered as a valuable document which gives new reasons for the Australian government to take a fresh look at the Tamil Tiger activities, particularly with a view to banning this outfit to prevent fund raising for the “deadliest terrorist organization of the world”

12 Responses to “Why is Moon blind to West exporting terrorism? Part II.”

  1. Ratanapala Says:

    This excellent article together with the Part 1 should be sent to the Five Monkies who call themselves “ELDERS”.

  2. dhane Says:

    Mahindapala how much you & others write about LTTE. Australian politician are sympathisers of LTTE and further they need Tamil vote to be in power and free services. Which ever the Party Labour, Liberal & Green are begging for Tamil Vote same way as UK recent election. Wait and see on 22nd the out come.
    The best is to introduced Dr Rohan Gunaratne our man to Prof. Williams to refresh is basics in terrorism.
    Hope Dr Gunaratne have spare time to give tuition to Prof Williams.

  3. marat2010 Says:

    Hi Mahindapala

    I don’t know how much Mahinda and his gang pays you to write anti-west claptrap, but two wrongs does not make one right. As one of the most biased journalists of the yesteryear( you also backed Ranil’s father’s coup against Sirimavo Govt in 1965. No western billas then , right?) we cannot hope anything more productive than this anti-christian anti-west gung ho nationalist hog wash. MR’s Govt cannot behave with impunity simply because USA and UK targeting civillians in Afghanistan. In same breath I think you will legitamize mass scale slaughter of Buddhist monks commited by despicable Burmese Junta ( close friends of MR admin) simply because they are anti-west . It is because of guys like you with tunnel vision ( remember you also backed Premadas) that we have a kleptocracy today in this country. Despite your cosmopolitan crust , you are nothing more than a vassal of a feudal king.

    Regards/ Marat

  4. Nihal Fernando Says:

    Hi Marat,

    Ranil’s father Mr Esmond Wickramasinghe was a non-Buddhist. He was backed by some western billas to topple Mrs Sirimavo’s government. It seems that you express your contempt for nearly everything you consider wrong in dispensing with Mr Mahindapala has written. Those western billas are always trying to subjugate Sinhala to the whims and fancies of the Christian idelogy and neo colonialism.

  5. marat2010 Says:

    Hi Nihal
    Yes. I know who backed this coup in the guise of protecting “free” press. But my point here is Mahindapala who was in league with these same Western billas at that time now howls against them and also even , by his own account supported late Tarzie Vittachi to write anti-nationalist anti-Bandaranaike recollection of race riots titled “Emergency ’58 ( currently held forth by pro-LTTE Diaspora websites as proof of “state terrorrism”. How Ironic for a nationalist crusader ha !) which rightly made fun of so called(bogus) revolution of ’56 . This only shows how unprincipled this guy is.
    He has no ideology and helps the hand which feeds him , an admirable trait we can find even in Canis familiaris .

    Thanks / Marat

  6. Nihal Fernando Says:

    Hi Marat,
    I do not know either Mr Mahindapala or you personally. I do appreciate your prompt and polite response to my comment and salute you being a gentleman.

  7. Geeth Says:

    Hi Marat,
    You have selected a name of a revolutionary who envisioned a free world through French Revolution while never knowing that it will be unrealizable for the rest of the non western humanity. It is so symbolic that Marat’s role in the revolution and his tragic fate in regard to your comment, because the current version of western modernity and its democracy is responsible for the murder of Marat and many more thousand people’s lives in the bloody period of the revolution that freed only westerners. High morality of French revolution even couldn’t at least abolish profiting out of existing slavery and colonialism that was spearheading by France at that time and in the period of post revolution. Upholding the legacy of the revolution that was fought only for the freedom of the western man, today its descendants in the west trying to crucifix Sri Lanka, while tightening the screws around the globe to continue the cycle of poverty they have left behind in their colonies. However, this comment is not to confront with Marat, but just to share a different point of view.

    I do not think anybody in this forum is against west just for the sake of being against them. None of us hate west instead, although I do not have bizarre ritual like penchant into it, most of us more and more like to embrace their cultural and other influences willingly. But when we stop and think, we can realize that our descent in the reliance of the west is in rapid decline while our dissidence and distrust is rapidly growing due to unfair and ill treatment of the west toward our country. This situation is a result of the ill fated foreign policy of the west toward us. They are responsible for it. The day they change their policy, things will be back to normal. I think that is the hope of everyone in this forum.

    Can anyone explain and enlighten us by pointing out some aspect of the west that we can admire in regards to their current policy toward Sri Lanka? Rajapaksa administration is just a temporary thing, but western foreign policy toward Sri Lanka is older than that. Critiquing that policy is not a crime to my understanding. If anyone can prove otherwise still I am open to learn from them.

    As of the history of Mahindapala, I have no information about it. I was not even born at the time period that Marat is referring to. But if the information is true, I admire HLD for being changed. I admire him for correcting his policies. Above all, I am really happy to see, as a profound and highly effective writer he is writing for his country at the hour of need, but not against it. How if he was writing to destroy the country adhering to the well known deceptive technique of hiding under the guise of “anti Rajapaksa”, knowing very well that Rajapaksa will loose nothing comparing to the loss of the nation by the instability that will spark immediately after the demise of him? When there is no alternative leadership in sight, I do not believe that the rivals of Rajapaksa do not know this fact.

    Marat, I think you shouldn’t have written the last sentence of your second comment; because, the reason why most of the writers in this forum support Rajapaksa regime at this historical moment is not because they are Canis familiaris, or they are fed by Rajapaksas; but because they do not desire to see the calamity that can expect immediately after a sudden collapse of the government.

    Please be fare. When all Colombians were in their high time with unparalleled political power in fifties, we cannot expect gymnastic performance from a young writer working in a Colombo English newspaper at his young days without much experience. On the other hand, west was not ‘billas’ at that time either, but more like ‘Nattal Pappas’ right? Finally, if your information is true, why we must expect HLD to stick to his policies all the way through fifty years up until now without change? Shouldn’t we give due credit for the change of his policy?

    I think members of this forum must express their solidarity with HLDM at this moment.

  8. marat2010 Says:

    Hi Geeth
    Thanks for your comment.
    I agree with you that West( esp. USA) hardly follows an ethical foreign policy and this is true from Vietnam through Latin America to Afghanistan and Iraq. But the democratic ideals of West are the basis for the best form of government that the people ever devised. The alternatives like the feudal system we cannot even consider as we know the hideous one man rule existed in this country, which Robert Knox aptly documents in his book. One of the hallmarks of an undemocratic system is the wide chasm between the ruler and the ruled and this gulf is widening today in Sri Lanka under the rule of Rajapakse oligarchy. You may well agree with me that there is no rule of law in our country today. Had there been, people like Mervyn cannot behave like a bull in a china shop . The Bush mantra is repeated here in Sri Lanka. Those who curry favor with the powers that be get all the loot while others, become traitors. Unlike HLDM most of us are not expatriates. We all know that these so called patriots who live in affluent western nations ask poor Sri Lankans to make sacrifices that they themselves are not willing to do; very much like their counterparts in the Tamil Diaspora who had no qualms about LTTE using innocent
    What the expatriates like HLDM should do, if they are true patriots, is trying to reform civilians as cannon fodder to achieve their utopia. Rajapakse’s regime like Dayan Jayathillake for example. But HLDM blindly supports Rajapakse’s policies and this makes him unprincipled, for then we begin wonder about the true motives behind this unconditional support.
    Also being anti-Rajapakse does not readily translate in to anti-Sri Lankan; for as citizens we should at least try to refine the stinking political environment of our country, even if it involves certain risks.

    One small note on Marat: The reference to him here is a nod to his radical anti-establishment streak. How ever even Marat had gone to the deep end when his fellow Jacobins like Maximillian Robespierre took power, sending all his rivals to guillotine including the moderate Gerondines. Hence I believe Charlotte Corday stands vindicated of her assassination of Marat.

  9. Nihal Fernando Says:

    Hi Marat,

    Your last comment has tempted me to write again against your virtual divorce from the political realities of President Mahinda Rajapakse. Wihtout his political leadership the thirty year terrorism in Sri Lanka would not have been eradicated. You are bias througout, showing your bitterness towards the present regime. See what action has been taken by the President against Dy. Minister Mr Mervyn Silva. Why can’t you see that the glass is half full instead of it is half empty.

  10. Sri Rohana Says:

    Marat supposed if we defeat Pres.Mahinda then who will come to power? Can’t you remember 1987 Sri Lankans brought JRJ and his clique to parliament with 7/8 majority. This was the biggest blunder of our recent history. They made our caring and sharing society into highly materialistic society. Quantity the most valued not the quality. Corrupted private capitalists system controls the whole society from top to bottom. Now we are prisoners of what JRJ created to our society. It is Jurassic park scenario in SL we don’t have any control of JRJ’ created dinosaurs. Every economic, social, judicial power is on the hands of Dinosaurs and they are the deciders. The root of almost all the problems we face now is that.
    It is not fair to blame President Mahinda for JRJ’s mistakes. MR is not a magician to change a whole corrupted society with in few years. If Ranil or SF comes to power can they change this corrupted profit earners? SF is having dictator type mentality from his feudalist military organization. In military system one government servant is another government servant’s slave?
    Ranil is JRJ’s nephew? He is best choice to commercial fraudsters and lumpen Colombans. If Ranil come to power then what will happen to us. Pro Anglo American agents, fundamentalist, Pro-eelam tamil separatists expansionists will take control of our country. Eric Solheim, Milliband and Kochners will be our governors. NGO’s, INGO’s will be our Chief Ministers. Is that we want after change the present President.
    President Mahinda saved our country from racist tamil terrorists. Ranil and Chandrika bow down to western agenda and decided to give racist tamil eelam to Prabakaran. Now we have a country to live. Suppose if Sri Lankans defeated President Mahinda in 2010 then world history will write us as most ungrateful nation in the world.

  11. marat2010 Says:

    People gets the leaders they deserve. If people of this country are willing to live in feudal bondage, who am I to shatter their nationalist dreams ( even though they are becoming nightmares to others) .

  12. Sri Rohana Says:

    Hi Marat
    Feudalism is in Europe and their colonies yet. If not how come Britain, Holland, Belgium, Norway, Spain, Denmark and Monaco head of states are appointed from feudalist families. In additionally British colonies such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand also accepted their head of the state as British feudalist woman Elizabeth. In additionally house of lord is another feudalist institute. All the members are Viscounts, Lords, Baroness, Earl or Bishops. If this is not feudalism what it is?
    On what basis you say that we have a feudalist system. If you read about feudalism in Europe and India you understand what is feudalism. In our country we never ever had feudalist system.
    At present our head of the state appointed by people’s mandate. This democracy system created by 1987 JRJ’s constitution and this was approved by Ranil.W and other UNP ers by 7/8 majority. Since people of our country is not ready to appoint Ranil.W as our head of the state he cannot come to power. But he too wanted to become the President of SL. That’s the reason he contested two times and defeated both times. To some one to become president of SL he or she has to take majority of votes. Only Colombans votes are not enough.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2020 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress