H. L. D. Mahindapala

 Senator Christine Milne, Leader of the Australian Greens Party, has been a regular  critic of Sri Lanka’s role in the  longest running war in Asia – a war launched by the Tamil leadership in 1976 and ended in 2009. Her recent speech in the Australian  Senate once again attacked Sri Lanka demanding an  independent investigation into human rights  violations in the last eight months (September 2008 to May 2009) of the war. She has never asked for an investigation into the war crimes committed by the Indian IPKF forces during the  three years ( from 1987 to 1990) they occupied the north and the east.. H. L. D. Mahindapala raised this issue with Sen. Milne. The reply sent from her office and Mahindapala’s response to that are reproduced below.

 This correspondence reveals the bias of Western politicians who parade as champions  of human rights. Here is the full text of the reply sent by  Mahindapala which deal with the core issues arising from the US-UK resolution due to be presented at UNHRC in March:

 James Stewart

Office of Senator Christine Milne

Leader of the Australian Greens

GPO Box 896 Hobart TAS 7001

 Dear Mr. Stewart,

 I  refer to my original e-mail sent in response to Sen. Christine Milne’s speech in Parliament calling for an independent inquiry into the alleged violations of international humanitarian law between September 2008 and May 2009.

 I regret to note that I have not received an acknowledgement yet. However, I note you have replied my letter sent by Mr. Ranjith Soysa. I thank  you for that.

 The contents of your reply, sent  on  behalf of Sen. Milne, makes it imperative that I clarify some issues raised by me as you have misrepresented them in your reply to Mr. Soysa. First thing I wish to state is that you have skipped the main issues raised in my letter and diverted attention to  issues that were never mentioned in my letter. It is surprising that a senior staff member of Sen. Milne’s office has decided to reply on behalf of the Senator without dealing  with the main issues. I also can’t believe that this has been done presumably with the consent of the Senator.

 Let me deal with the salient point in your reply. You state: “The thrust of your objection is that Senator Milne’s speech did not adequately account for the fact that the LTTE also participated in war crimes. However, Senator Milne acknowledged that the LTTE have also been accused of war crimes.” I do not know by what logic you arrived at the conclusion that the main thrust in my letter is that “Senator Milne’s speech did not adequately account for the fact that the LTTE also participated in war crimes.”

 I regret to state that you are deliberately misstating my letter which said, inter alia, “……you (Sen Milne) have accused, repeating the contents in the US-UK resolution, only Sri Lanka and the LTTE as having violated humanitarian law.”  This gives the lie  to your accusation that I had blamed Sen. Milne for not holding LTTE responsible for its war crimes. If you note I have stated that, following the US-UK resolution, Sen. Milne only blames Sri Lanka and LTTE in equal measure leaving out the third military interventionist, India.

 Purely to avoid any further misunderstanding may I state that the main thrust of my letter to Sen Milne, is two-fold: 1. She focuses unjustly only on the last few months of 33-year old war which  is absurd by any known standards and 2. She has conveniently ignored the war crimes committed by the Indian forces that occupied Jaffna from 1987 – 1990. Please note  that she mentions LTTE only in passing, like the US-UK resolution, and focuses mainly on the Sri Lankan violations which are alleged to have taken place within the last eight months of a 33-year-old war (i.e., September 2008 – May 2009). What is baffling is why she concentrated on eight months of a 33-year old war and conveniently skips  the crimes committed by India for three years (1987 – 1990).

 Let me clarify this further. The 33-year-old war – the longest running war in Asia – was fought by three militarized forces: 1. Sri Lankan, 2. LTTE and 3. Indian militaries. She focuses  on two of these – i.e., Sri Lanka and LTTE, the latter in passing. How can a committed human rights champion like Sen. Milne ignore the brutal role of India when  documented evidence was produced for her to deal with human rights  violations  of the IPKF soldiers.

 I also pointed out to her that the Head of the Intelligence Unit of the Indian Forces in Sri Lanka has said: : “There are a few issues involved in analysing the allegations of atrocities by Indian troops after 25 years. In COIN (Counter Insurgent Operations) operations there are always innocent civilians killed, usually described as collateral damage in the fire-fight between two sides. This happened in Sri Lanka also. But there were specific instances where serious allegations were leveled. I remember two of them: massacre of patients and doctors by troops in Jaffna teaching hospital and retributive killings in an ambush in Valvettithurai. I think both the Army leadership and Government (of India) failed to institute transparent investigations to get at the truth and disprove them or punish the culprits. But in 1987-88 human rights was not a big issue worldwide as it is now. India was no exception to this. Bigger killings were taking place in Afghanistan where the US was fighting a proxy war against Soviets. India itself did not pay much attention to human rights accusations against it. But all this is hindsight wisdom.” (International Law Journal of London,  Interviewer Parasaran Rangarajan, Editor — – Feb. 6, 2014).

 What more proof does Sen. Milne need to live up to her claim to be the champion of human rights?

 In fairness to  you, may I mention that you admit, in  vague sort of way,  that crimes committed prior to “the close of the war….. should also be investigated.” This, I must add, is an afterthought introduced by you and not mentioned in the speech of the good Senator. Obviously, Indian violations have not come into her radar screen either because she does not think they are important or because she is wearing tinted glasses.

 Anyway, the only other military force that violated international humanitarian and human right law, prior to the last few months, is India. So why is Sen. Milne running away without facing this issue of Indian violations of human rights? How valid is her morality on human rights when she accuses only two of the violators of human rights in Sri Lanka and not the most significant force: India, the regional super power? Besides, the violations of human rights would not have reached the level  that occurred in  the last months of the war if India did not  train, finance, encourage and export terrorism to Sri Lanka. Ironically, India has been the creator and preserver of Tamil terrorism that destroyed Sri Lanka. India  is the prime mover for the creation of Tamil terrorism.  So why is she letting India off the hook?

 Your exit  strategy is to say, in your reply to Mr. Soysa: “You are quite right that many war crimes have no doubt been carried out prior to the close of the war and, no doubt, those crimes should also be investigated. However, as a starting point, the Greens hope that the allegations mentioned in the report should be investigated.” This is the fundamental flaw (or is  it bias) exposed in this excuse trotted out by you. Starting from US-UK resolutions and ending in Sen. Milne et al make the last phase “the starting point”. This is an arbitrary cut-off point which excludes India. Should not those genuinely concerned with human rights cover all violations of human rights simultaneously? What gives Sen. Milne and the movers of the US-UK resolution the  moral right to start at the point that suits their political agenda excluding their “strategic partners” in global politics?  Should violations of  human rights be judged on the arbitrary lines determined by partisan do-gooders who assume that they can dictate morality like kissing that goes by favour?

 Besides, the head of the Intelligence Chief  of IPKF in Sri Lanka, Col. R. Hariharan, says unequivocally that “both the Army leadership and Government (of India) failed to institute transparent investigations to get at the truth and disprove them or punish the culprits.” When it is clear that India has “failed to institute transparent investigations to get at the truth and disprove them or punish the culprits” for 25 years shouldn’t Sen. Milne begin from that point instead of starting from the last phase of the war? Sen. Milne does not mention even  in passing the atrocities committed by the Indian forces 25 years ago. Why? Does she sees only the Sri Lankan chip in her eyes and not  the Indian tree trunks staring in front of her which are visible if she cares to look at them even without her glasses?   

 You say that she was focused only on the report titled Island of Impunity? Investigation into international crimes  in the final  stage of Sri Lankan civil war ( 13/2) published by Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) “working for fair, just and democratic society”, as stated by PIAC. The  title, “Island of Impunity” is most appropriate because Sen. Milne speech confirms that India has been allowed to get away with “impunity” despite the documents related to Indian crimes should have been known to her if she was investigating violations of human rights in Sri Lanka without bias. Well, now that she has taken  the PIAC report seriously will she also in the interest of human rights and also in the interest of “working for fair, just and democratic society” request  PIAC also to investigate the crimes committed by India?

 Now  that I have clarified my issues arising from Sen. Milne’s speech, can you kindly persuade her to answer the  following queries:

1. As a leading champion of human rights isn’t  it her  primary duty to deal with all war crimes and crimes against humanity, irrespective of who committed them? Instead of sweeping the Indian crimes under the carpet shouldn’t she have begun by investigating the Indian crimes on the principle of noblesse oblige? Shouldn’t the Big Brothers set the example for small brothers to follow?
2. The Indian violations were committed 25 years ago. How come she woke up to violations  of international humanitarian and human rights law in Sri Lanka only after the Sri Lankan forces defeated “the deadliest terrorist outfit in the world” exported to Sri Lanka by “Incredible India”?
3. How fair is it  for a human rights champion to deal with human rights issues that suits his/her political agenda and ignore other crimes that committed by big powers?
4. Will the good Senator even now consider raising this issue  of Indian  violations and insist that the Indian war crimes also be included (by name) in the forthcoming US-UK resolution in Geneva?
5. Will she also condemn the move of the US government to cozy up to Narendra Modi, the BJP candidate tipped  to be the next Prime Minister of India, ignoring the earlier American decision to refuse a visa to Modi for the massacre of Muslims in the state of Gujarat run by him?
6. Since she condemns Prime Minister Tony Abbot for saying that “we (the Australian government) accept that  sometimes in difficult circumstance, difficult  things  happen” will she also condemn Tony Abbot, US and the  rest of the international community for recognizing Modi as the Prime Minister of India if he wins  the coming election and oppose his participation in the next Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting?
7. Also will she sever all connections with the Indian High Commission in Canberra as it would be representing a government headed by a human rights violator who was denied a visa by the US?

 I trust you will have the time to reply this e-mail now  that I have clarified the key issues of human  rights arising from the speech made by the good Senator.

 Thanking you.

 Yours sincerely

 H. L. D. Mahindapala

Editor, The Observer (1990 – 1994)

President, Sri Lanka Working Journalists’ Association ( 1991 – 1993)

Secretary-General, South Asia Media Association (1993 – 1994)

———————————————————————–

 Reply sent to Mahindapala by James Stewart of Senator Milne’s office:

 Dear Don,

 Thank you for your email. I am replying on behalf of Senator Milne.

 I am sorry that you felt my letter did not adequately address your concern about the IPKF involvement in Sri Lanka. Please note that we did not receive any correspondence from you and my reply was directed elsewhere.

 I point you towards the following statement made in that letter:

 You are quite right that many war crimes have no doubt been carried out prior to the close of the war and, no doubt, those crimes should also be investigated. However, as a starting point, the Greens hope that the allegations mentioned in the report should be investigated.

 As you can see, it is clear – as you point out – that other crimes have been committed by many parties. As you can appreciate, the Sri Lankan Civil War was very long with many actors that perpetrated many human rights violations. The goal of Senator Milne’s speech was to urge the Government to support an independent investigation into the human rights allegations illustrated in the report Island of Impunity.

 This does not mean that the Greens reject other investigations being carried out. On the contrary, the Greens support investigations into any allegation of human rights abuses, hence why we are – at this time – calling for a full investigation into allegations of abuse conducted on Manus Island. Our call for accountability on such matters is always open ended, contrary to your claim in your letter.

 I hope this helps address your concerns.

 Kind regards,

 James Stewart
Office of Senator Christine Milne
Leader of the Australian Greens
GPO Box 896 Hobart TAS 7001 | Ph: 03 6224 8899 | Fax: 03 6224 7599

 Reply sent by Mahindapala to James Stewart.

 Dear James,

Thanks for your prompt reply.

 Please note that I have already dealt with this point in my last e-mail to you.

 In case you missed it I am reproducing the relevant part for your attention: “Your exit  strategy is to say, in your reply to Mr. Soysa: “You are quite right that many war crimes have no doubt been carried out prior to the close of the war and, no doubt, those crimes should also be investigated. However, as a starting point, the Greens hope that the allegations mentioned in the report should be investigated.” This is the fundamental flaw (or is  it bias) exposed in this excuse trotted out by you. Starting from US-UK resolutions and ending in Sen. Milne et al make the last phase “the starting point”. This is an arbitrary cut-off point which excludes India. Should not those genuinely concerned with human rights cover all violations of human rights simultaneously? What gives Sen. Milne and the movers of the US-UK resolution the  moral right to start at the point that suits their political agenda excluding their “strategic partners” in global politics?  Should violations of  human rights be judged on the arbitrary lines determined by partisan do-gooders who assume that they can dictate morality like kissing that goes by favour?”

 I would  be thankful if  you could address this issues comprehensively. Your attempt to glide over the vital issue of Indian crimes by blandly saying that all crimes should be investigated does not answer the questions raised by me. I feel it is more a cover-up for Indian crimes.

 You also failed the other questions raised by me.

 I’ll be most thankful if you could answer those questions, one by one, as it would clarify to me Senator Milne’s stand on human rights violations in Sri Lanka.

 Yours  sincerely

Mahinda