“Sri Lanka Dare Not Criticize the UN Panel” Says “Himal South Asian”? Is This another Ban Ki Moon Supportive And What Gives”Himal South Asian” Carte Blanche~ To Make Such Bold Assertions ?
Posted on May 1st, 2011

In retrospect By Sarath Kumara


April 30th. 2011

After many months of work as the story goes, the United Nations’ Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts~ to all appearance  biased ‘experts’ with Tamil Tiger Sympathies hand picked by an equally biased UN Secretary General  seems to have apathetically  penetrated the United Nation’s direction of operations as it comes from  its highest level. Incredibly the UNSG is bungling his way through his appointed designation in typical bull in a chinashop fashion with misrepresented rhetoric now backed by an equally inept flybynight news engine calling itself Himal South Asian, also reeking of pro Tamil Tiger sympathies probably egged on by some of the enemies of the State whose transparencies nevertheless are well known to official circles who probably need to be carefully scrutinised.

Indeed the panel has submitted its report to the Sri Lankan Government and the report has  been sent to Colombo for review, where formal release is still awaited as ‘Himal’ suggests somewhat circumspectly that “extracts have already been leaked to the media.” As a result of these leaks, the report ‘framed’ by this advisory panel( Indeed reeking of a frameup!)  which is not an investigative panel, (agreed upon by Himal) “”…” has led to heated debate in the national and international arena invariably based on the cheap sensationalism involved, but where are the credibilities that suggest any accuracy relative to the Sri Lankan Government’s legitimate responses to redressing the needs of the Nation beyond a load of falsified and biased documentation which circumvents the efforts of the Government and to the contrary depicts  them as wrong and stinks of bipartisan Tamil Tiger Sympathy! The External Affairs Ministry in Colombo has already rejected the report as flawed, and President Rajapakse has called for protests and mass mobilisations as a show of strength against the UN which he has done with assertion and valid reason as organizations such as ‘Himal’ continue in their vain attempts to discredit the Rajapaksha administration in tow with the aforementioned enemies of the State where powers of greater credibility are now gathering their strengths in support of the Sri Lankan Government. The report addresses the major abuses alleged to have taken place in the lead-up to the May 2009 end of the 25 years of civil war on the Island. The Panel of Experts “”…” composed of three members, from Indonesia, South Africa and the US “”…” has decided that there are credible allegations that both the Government and the LTTE committed war crimes and crimes against humanity during this period. So what gives them carte blanche to broadcast a load of insubstantiated speculations and a heap of falsified accusations with no tangible proof or evidence to justify the seriousness of their allegations? And what a bunch of apathetic Dodos they must be if they cannot infer the difference between a Sovereign Nation fighting a group of relentless, Nation destructive terrorists and the right of the Nation towards this as opposed to the objectives of the terrorists who tried everything within their means with the support of those who invested millions of dollars in their support yet failed miserably which is rationally the only reason for this panel report appearing to be a simple expression of disgruntled frustrations where every member of the panel at some stage or the other has had run ins with the Sri Lankan Administration and rebuffed on the grounds of unwanted interference into the internal affairs of Sri Lanka? Hence It seems imbecilic on the part of Ban Ki Moon to even think of appointing such a panel with such great conflicts of interest as they present and needs to be investigated for his part in what appears to be have the makings of a conspiracy against Sri Lanka where Sri Lanka in reality has been delivered from the throes of dangerous terrorism and the only violation of human rights, something the Tamil Tigers and none other are responsible for! In this respect when certain qualified Government opinions are expressed, that this is now appears truly to have undercurrents of Tamil Tiger sympathy there seems hardly any reason to doubt it! The report which details “the denial of humanitarian assistance to civilians by the government as well as systematic attacks against them, involving widespread shelling and targeting of civilian facilities, including hospitals” is a fabricationof the truth as these are the refered to falsifications of evidence on which the UN panel seems to have based their report on.
Sri Lanka despite the allegations has done much towards the relief of civilians caught up in the conflict and the stories of attacks on them and widespread shelling are fabrications which will surely haunt the consciences of those who make them as they have been proven to be the sole responsibility of the criminally liable Tamil Tiger terrorists where any panel in support of them could also be criminallty liable based on their their accusations and a very loose panel at that needing the tightening of a few screws so that it does not come apart at its moorings!

The LTTE, alone need to be condemned for having used civilians as hostages and “ƒ”¹…”human shields’, shot at and killed civilians who attempted to escape the conflict zone, forcefully recruited children into its army, and used military equipment in the proximity of civilians where it has been the concerted efforts of the Sri lankan Armed Forces who rescued them from the attrocities they were subjected to by their Tamil Tigar oppressors! There is circumstantial as well as documented evidence to prove this!.

When the report  addresses  so called “obstacles to accountability after the war” which includes the state of emergency that remains in place, having been extended month by month, including, most recently, in April; the Prevention of Terrorism Act, which likewise continues to be in force; as well as lingering militarisation of the conflict zone and restrictions on  certain categories and areas of the media which often misrepresent and falsely depicts what really transpires often in collusion with the enemies of the State, what right has a puny panel despite being under the auspices of the UN   with lirttle or no knowledge of the Constitutionalised legitimate functioning of A Sovereign Nation that Sri Lanka veritably is  and what truly transpired duringn the conflict BEYOND HEARSAY! to make such diabolical accusations?

It seems eyewash to suggest that ” Sections of the Tamil diaspora also come in for criticism for two reasons: for having provided support for the LTTE and for continuing to refuse to acknowledge the LTTE’s role in the humanitarian disaster, thus undermining a sustainable peace’ so as to justify the greater liability of the UN panel which has created an envisioned scenario which is the furthest from the truth from the legitimacies which support the rights of Sri Lanka rather than those of terrorists who have tried to destroy the Nation towards their objectives as well as those of the enemies of the State  which in all probabilities could well include the State of Tamil Nadu In India or a greater administrative part thereof amongst others!
Finally,it needs to be asked, who comprises this UN Panel that rejects the ability of the Sri Lankan Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission “”…” set up by President Rajapakse in May 2010 “”…” to credibly address accountability without sounding ignorant that,on the basis of a so called lack of independence and impartiality which appears to have been divined by a trio of speculative morons with a single objective in mind ~ to unconditionally and without hard evidence discredit the Government of Sri Lanka!
To have the affront to  suggest that “While the LTTE is gone, the significance of the report has to do with the record and continuing attitude of the Rajapakse Government” makes the panel sound as though it has a legitimate right to criticise a Government which has despite massive adversities posed by various powerful international sources with Tamil Tiger sympathies and at times a blinkered attitude by the panel with no moral justification, to attempt to incarcerate what is now being accepted by the Tamils themselves who reside in Sri Lanka that surely this is an Administration on their side as opposed to the Tamil Tigers who had nothing to offer them except their falsified offers of an impossible secession for which a vast number of Sri Lankan Tamils alongside their Sinhalese counterparts paid a heavy price!

While none of the so called  findings appear to be verifiably accurate or hold up in an International Tribumal despite concerns that have been voiced by rights groups and the media  the “Panel of Experts” report paints a very distorted picture of Sri Lanka’s conduct during the terrorist insurgency with heavy bias leaning in favour of the terrorists if one reads between the lines with hardly a good word for the Sri Lankan Administration for very obvious reasons “”…” and the steps taken since its end which in the eyes of many international sources have been highly commended despite many difficulties.
This adds considerable weight to the demand that these concerns be trashed which might at least in some small measure alleviate the humungous task  the Rajapakse Government’s is faced with towards rebuilding the Nation!.

6 Responses to ““Sri Lanka Dare Not Criticize the UN Panel” Says “Himal South Asian”? Is This another Ban Ki Moon Supportive And What Gives”Himal South Asian” Carte Blanche~ To Make Such Bold Assertions ?”

  1. cassandra Says:

    SK,

    After reading your article, I looked up on the Internet and read the article referred to, in the May 2011 issue of Himal Southasian. And it appears that the title of your article reflects an unfortunate misunderstanding of the heading of the article in Himal Southasian. The article in the magazine is, in fact, headed, “Sri Lanka: Dare not criticise”. It is important to note that there is a colon separating the words “Lanka” and Dare”. So, the title is NOT meant to read “Sri Lanka dare not criticise”. I have not found elsewhere in the article either any comment that “Sri Lanka Dare Not Criticise the UN Panel”.

    The article is one of four in the ‘Commentaries’ section of the magazine. The four articles are headed as follows

    Religion: My country, my team
    Sri Lanka: Dare not criticise
    Nepal: Tsunami of malfeasance
    Art: ‘Vibrating the Shadows’

    It will be noted that in each case, the heading starts with a reference to the area covered – Religion, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Art. So, the words ‘Sri Lanka’ in the heading merely refers to the area covered by the article, the actual title of the article is really ‘Dare not criticise’. I cannot see how one can reasonably read that to mean ‘Sri Lanka dare not criticise’.

  2. Geeth Says:

    To my understanding, it is not that important whether or not the title has a colon between two words or not, since the contents of the article is taking away (cancels the validity of) the colon anyway. Presence of the colon actually obscures the true intention of the writer. But the article doesn’t. The title on one hand presents “Sri Lanka: Dare not criticize” as a statement of Sri Lanka of her position, and on the other hand it serves as a warning to Sri Lanka. However the article is critical of Sri Lanka of her current position of shunning away western led criticism, and on the other hand it’s pointing its finger warning not to criticize Moon’s panel report based on the assertion that this report as a point of departure for a lasting solution.

    The entire article is representing the NGO position of Sri Lankan situation. Nothing new in it. Same tune of Wagner, only difference is the name of the one who plays it this time.

    It prescribes solutions upon us. It sounds like critical of cosmetics of the problem, such as of LTTE and diaspora. But it is silence of causes. It is not critical of the core of the problem either; not even critical of entire HR game plan of the west based on other reasons. If “Himal” is genuinely working for a better future of the region, then they cannot miss those points.

    Following is how it ends the article. Take note on the bold and underlined sections, which tells it all.

    Polarising triumphalism.
    Since the war’s end, Colombo’s strategy has been to reject any criticism of its wartime actions, saying that such censure is being manipulated by the Tamil diaspora. While the new report does criticise sections of the diaspora, the latter’s importance as a political force has been on the wane. In fact, it could be argued that it is now the Western governments who use the politically weak diaspora to send a message to the Sri Lankan government, rather than the other way around. While Colombo is depending on Beijing and Moscow to mobilise support to undermine any political pressure relating to the Panel of Experts report, political will is required on the part of Washington and New Delhi ultimately to determine whether Sri Lanka will be called to account.

    This month, we are seeing the second anniversary of the end of the war. But, after a quarter-century of conflict, with over 100,000 lives lost, the government of President Rajapakse has done little to deliver on the historic opportunity for political reconciliation presented by the conflict’s close. Rather than broad democratisation and a constitutional political settlement, which could have won over the country’s minorities, the Rajapakse regime has continued with its war-time mentality, promoting a polarising triumphalism in order to consolidate its power.

    In this situation, the UN report could be a window of opportunity for progressive and democratic forces within Sri Lanka to begin a debate on the future of the country. Admittedly, this seems unlikely, given that the continuing repression and extreme nationalist demagoguery of the Rajapakse regime seems to have closed possibilities for a free, rational debate. Nonetheless, at the international level at least, if the Rajapakse government is in trouble with what it describes as the politically motivated ‘international community’, it has only its own post-war hubris to blame.

    How can we expect anything different than this from “Himal” when Himal is another larger regional network among other destabilizing tools of the west with having a notable NGO personality like Jehan Perera in its editorial board covering its Colombo section?

    This is the link for the article. http://www.himalmag.com/component/content/article/4430–dare-not-criticise.html

  3. cassandra Says:

    Geeth,

    I note all you write and take your point about the two different meanings one could read into the title of the magazine article. Anyway, Sarath Kumar has left us in no doubt about the construction he has chosen to place on it. And with all due respect to you, I say that the colon and where it was placed in the original article were important. Ignore that, and you get an entirely different meaning to what was intended in the article.

    I might add that in this case, failure to pay due attention to the significance of punctuation marks is not limited to the matter of the colon. In the heading to SK’s article the words ‘Sri Lanka Dare Not Criticize the UN Panel’ are set out within inverted commas (or quotes as some might describe them). This tells the reader that those words and in that form are being quoted from the Himal article. But in fact that phrase, ‘Sri Lanka Dare Not Criticize the UN Panel’ is not contained anywhere in the Himal article. As far as I am concerned, to present something as a quotation from an article when it is in fact not so, is improper, misleading and quite unacceptable.

  4. Geeth Says:

    Cassandra,
    As far as punctuations concerned, I hope you might have noted that there is a question mark at the end of the first part of the title. It asks whether or not Himal says that, “Sri Lanka Dare Not Criticize the UN Panel” Says “Himal South Asian”? This question interrogates if Himal implies a warning to SL or not. It is a question rather than a statement. And when one relates the title to his/her own article, the title becomes the author’s own property rather than somebody else’s.

    For me, the author has every right to omit this colon based on the contents of the article. It is his title; he has every right to manipulate his words. However the contents of Himal article proves that he is right. On the other hand, these contents of the Himal article have omitted the colon anyway. Not only that, quite predictably and comically Himal demands political will from Washington and New Delhi, as if the Himal is not happy with the amount of political will that has been demonstrated by these two capitals at the moment. It says “While Colombo is depending on Beijing and Moscow to mobilise support to undermine any political pressure relating to the Panel of Experts report, (note the terminology used ‘undermine political pressure’ and ‘panel of experts’)political will is required on the part of Washington and New Delhi ultimately to determine whether Sri Lanka will be called to account.” Isn’t this statement depreciating the colon anyway? How many times they have demanded accountability from parties who are engaged in genocidal violence in other parts of South Asia like Afghanistan? Doesn’t that prove that they are only winning for their supper rather than human rights, accountability or justice?

    When we read the article of Himal, we can find that sole objective of Himal is to contribute their fair share toward the concerted global media campaign sphere headed by the west to publicize this report as a legitimate document reflecting the concerns of international community. But their assertion is far from truth. Why all these NGOs whistling the same tune? Why any of them do not have a different tune? If they are genuine, independent and intellectually honest, then they must have seeing some dangerous signals in this trend of punishing independent nations according to the whims and fancies of parties with wasted interests in the region? If Himal is a regional magazine striving for the well being of the masses of the region, why HIMAL do not see what they supposed to see? Why can’t they act impartial? This is not a matter of Rajapaksas but a matter of the entire nation. We cannot forget that.

    None can miss that Himal is tacitly warning Sri Lanka through their article and it warns us not to criticize Ban’s panel report. (I even do not want to call it a UN panel report) The whole objective of Sarath’s article is to criticize this standpoint of Hmal over the report. Under such conditions I said that the colon is irrelevant. To my understanding, question mark also belongs to punctuations.

  5. Geeth Says:

    I forgot to mention another very important point tacitly establishing by so-called promoters of this panel report including Himal. Presenting this report as a ‘good start’ for reconciliation, what they are implying is that anything short of punishing the leaders who conducted the anti-terrorist campaign in SL is not acceptable for reconciliation. In other words it implies “if you want me to be friendly, let me kill you first.” Now the question is who really demanding this? Without hiding behind mere words, Tamils must clearly declare their standpoint.

    If we accept Himal solutions then we are accepting that punishing is the ultimate way to reconciliation. This is a ridiculous situation. When the west and Indian promoted terror was winning in Sri Lanka, Sri Lankans were beaten in every aspect of their lives. Now when the terrorism was beaten (defeated), still they want Sri Lankans to be beaten. This is like Samuel, Bertie and Annesley’s theory of “Uoo mata gahanawa, mata uoo gahanawa.” When you stop and think, you are the only one who has been beaten all the way through.

  6. cassandra Says:

    Geeth,

    I note all you write and can appreciate what you have to say. I will say, however, that my comments were not about the content of the Himal article, and I have no wish to enter into a discussion on that. Yes, the question mark is also a punctuation mark and I have no problem with the way it has been used in the heading to SK’s article. What I considered was not proper was for SK to disregard the colon in the heading of the Himal article and to state within inverted commas (denoting that it is a quotation from the Himal article) a phrase which in fact does not occur in that article.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


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