Can Sri Lanka Hold On To Its Fragile Peace – National Geographic Nov. 2016
Posted on November 5th, 2016

Ira de Silva Canada

The Editor
National Geographic
Washington, D.C.
U.S.A.

Dear Sir:

Can Sri Lanka Hold On To Its Fragile Peace – National Geographic Nov. 2016

Reference the article in the November 2016 issue of National Geographic titled “Can Sri Lanka hold on to its fragile peace” by R. Draper, the simple answer is YES. Without the post war domineering, dictatorial interference of the very countries such as the United States, Canada, Britain, the European Union and Australia that supported the Tamil terrorist movement politically and helped their citizens fund Tamil terrorism in Sri Lanka, the country can work on reconciliation and progress acceptable to all Sri Lankans. The same applies to India who created, promoted and funded the Tamil terrorist movement to destabilize Sri Lanka for it’s own political agenda and whose policies have not changed. India is still doing its utmost to create “Tamil Eelam” with the support of the Tamil political parties in Sri Lanka who during the terrorist war were the spokespersons of the LTTE (Tamil terrorists).

The U.S., Britain and the E.U. even at the final stages of the terrorist war, did their utmost to save the terrorists and promoted their evacuation to enable them to return to terrorize all of Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka refused and so earned their wrath and their subsequent revengeful actions. Sri Lanka refused because it had previous experience of foreign intervention to save the LTTE terrorists. In 1987 when the LTTE terrorists were surrounded, India threatened to “invade” Sri Lanka and coerced the then President to permit Indian helicopters to evacuate the LTTE leadership. They went to India and returned more organized and funded to wreak the worst terrorism on the country. It was the FBI that rated the LTTE as the most ruthless terrorist group in the world, yet in 2009 the U.S. was determined to save them to once again make them the tool of the so-called international community to harass and coerce Sri Lanka.

Since 2009 these countries that supported terrorism in Sri Lanka have been harassing Sri Lanka at the behest of their citizens who funded terrorism and who still advocate the division of the country to create a fascist, Tamil only region in the country as envisaged by the LTTE. It is their continued “foreign policy” to divide Sri Lanka.

“The Tamil Tigers infamously expelled more than 70,000 Muslim residents from the Northern Province in 1990”. He is oblivious to the fact that all Sinhalese were also expelled. University students were severely beaten before they were driven out.

“By mid May 2009 they had slaughtered the last remnants of the Tamil Tigers along with thousands of the trapped civilians”. It was the hierarchy of the Tamil terrorists and the battle hardened cadres who were protecting them that were killed mid May 2009. The use of the word “slaughtered” is indicative of Drapers attitude towards the Sri Lankan forces. The LTTE leadeship were killed in battle. Do American journalists refer to the mass killings by U.S. troops in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan as “slaughter”? The Tamil Tigers used the civilians as a human shield. Even the U.S. military acknowledged that the Sri Lankan forces did their best to minimize civilian casualties and in doing so lost many more soldiers than if they bombed the area. The Sri Lankan forces freed 300,000 civilians from the LTTE. What a contrast to what the west does and yet it is referred to as “slaughter”.

The author of this article appears to be supportive of the usual separatist/terrorist propaganda that was carried on by the LTTE  for the duration of the war and post war. His article is superficial, displays ignorance of history and is clearly biased in his effort to promote the separatist agenda which is alive and well in Sri Lanka supported by the west and India. His intention seems to be to justify the actions of those who supported and still support the division of the country. It is another attempt to promote the agenda of the west and primarily U.S.policy supported by India. If it succeeds what will follow is not a durable peace but chaos, instability and possible military intervention including massive bombing operations, killing of thousands as evidenced in other countries where the U.S. has used this policy. It appears that Draper has been recruited to support this agenda.

To illustrate my opinion of Draper, his attitude and bias I am providing  the following few examples.

He keeps referring to the Tamil homeland. He seems to be unaware that the Tamil homeland is in Tamil Nadu, India where seventy million Tamils live, and from where the Tamils he met originally came from. How can there be two “homelands”?

His claim that the Sinhalese came in 500 B.C. boggles the mind of anyone who has even a nodding acquaintance of the history of the region and particularly Sri Lanka. He seems to be ignorant of the history of the region which clearly indicates that these Tamils came through invasion and war  which is in recorded  history backed by archeological remains and stone inscriptions of Sinhalese in the north of Sri Lanka. In colonial times there was a deliberate policy of using cheap labour for the glory of the “empire”. Tamils were imported from India in thousands. Divide and rule was the standard policy which promoted minorities to subjugate the majority. “British colonizers tended to award upper-income jobs to Tamils while consigning Sinhalese to semi-skilled labour” says Draper. Is he of the opinion that Sri Lanka should revert to the “special favours” for the Tamils?

The woman who he met states that her husband sold gasoline to Tamil “resistance”  fighters a clear indication of his mindset. The rest of the world had designated them as “terrorists” of the worst kind. To Draper they are resistance” fighters! “She saw little risk to this practice, which was common among Tamil men in Mannar” – this could be interpreted that she saw little risk because the Tamil men supported the LTTE terrorists and therefore if they were part of the LTTE there was little risk.

“One brother couldn’t make it. He’s in Paris, illegally and without a job. The Sri Lankan military had tortured him, and if he were to return home, he fears he might well be apprehended from the streets, as the fisherman was, as thousands of Tamil men have been—without warning, justification, paper trail, or even official acknowledgment”. Draper seems to be unaware of the fact that this type of unsubstantiated, fabricated story” was the ticket to thousands of Tamils to get refugee status in the countries they went to. They did not go to their homeland Tamil Nadu, India a few miles away but to western countries to seek a better life. Why? Is it because they were mostly economic refugees? If the brother is in Paris illegally, perhaps he has been denied refugee status as his claim is fraudulent.  Draper seems to ignore the fact that claims of torture are standard practice” to get refugee status.  He has not made any attempt to get verification but merely makes these vague statements without any proof. It is a reflection of his poor journalism, bias and ignorance. Many of the so-called missing persons are now surfacing in other countries. Although NGO’s have made public declarations of how they were tortured and killed it is strange that when they re-appear these organizations are silent.

I know my husband is alive,” she says, with simple finality. This belief is what preoccupies her. Is it not possible that she knows that her husband is alive because he is overseas like her brother? Another so-called missing person who is alive and well overseas but still claimed “missing”.

As for Samantha Power claiming that Sri Lanka has made extraordinary progress  working toward a durable peace, an accountable democracy, a new relationship with the outside world, and expanded opportunities for all.” Is it not strange that the U.S. considers it progress because the current regime is giving in to U.S. dictates and in the process depriving the citizens of Sri Lanka their democratic rights to govern themselves as they see fit? The same applies to the “new relationship with the outside world” – read the western countries who supported LTTE terrorism and are promoting a “federal solution” to divide the country, which are the goals of the LTTE supporters in and outside of Sri Lanka. What will result is a fragmented Sri Lanka, with one third of the country and it’s resources being a Tamil only country although the majority of the Tamil population live outside of that part of the country.  Will ALL Tamils be forced to inhabit their Eelam? Is this what the U.S. means by “accountable democracy”. This type of federal solution which is being advocated can not be acceptable to the majority Sinhalese if there is to be a Tamil only area which excludes them but which will allow most of the Tamils to reside out of that area. It is clear that the federal solution is for the benefit of the U.S., India and the LTTE supporters but of no benefit to Sri Lanka as it’s so-called ethnic problems will not be resolved but increase. How can it then be an acceptable “solution”. It is another example of the short sighted policy of the U.S. supported by Draper.

There are many other statements, conclusions and judgements Draper makes to promote his agenda. Those dealt with above are just a few. What is clear is that this article is nothing more than the continued effort of false propaganda to promote the separatist cause in Sri Lanka. It contains many lies which the writer tries to pass off as facts to damage Sri Lanka . That the national Geographic has chosen to publish this low level journalism is, in my view, deplorable.

Yours truly,

Ira de Silva

Canada

2 Responses to “Can Sri Lanka Hold On To Its Fragile Peace – National Geographic Nov. 2016”

  1. aravinda Says:

    The writer can not be ignorant of history or facts about Sri Lanka. these kind of articles are planted for few years before Western nations start to meddle in internal affairs of Asian or African nations. It is a softening process. But before we look at external enemies of Sri Lanka, think about our internal enemies. Ex-President Chandrika is doing rounds sowing seeds of Federal solution. Mano Ganeshan is a man who addressed LTTE gathering, begging Tamil youth to take up arms. Kiriella was a man who said , I am not a fool to fight LTTE. Ravi Karunanayaka was well documented belittling Sri Lankan army. List goes on. These are the power brokers of Sri Lanka. They will break up Sri Lanka, perhaps Sri Lankans deserve no better.

  2. plumblossom Says:

    The National Geographic Article about Sri Lanka ‘Can Sri Lanka Hold On to Its Fragile Peace?’ by Robert Draper in its November, 2016 issue is full of outrageous, total and utter lies about Sri Lanka and is extremely insulting to all Sinhala Buddhists and all the people of Sri Lanka. We hope that the Western media stop persecuting the Sinhala Buddhists by spreading such lies about Sinhala Buddhists for the sake of sanity.

    The article says that in 2015 that the present Sri Lankan Government has admitted that since 1994, over 65,000 persons (the reader is made to think that all of these are LTTE terrorists) have disappeared as admitted by the present Sri Lankan Government. However this is a total and utter lie. Actually in 1994, the Sri Lankan Government at the time said that around 40,000 perished during the totally Sinhala Maoist leftist JVP insurgency or uprising of 1987-1989 which was a totally Sinhala Maoist leftist JVP insurgency which was located in the South of the island and had nothing whatsoever to do with the LTTE terrorist conflict in the North.

    Of the rest of the 25,000 (65,000 – 40,000), the previous Sri Lankan Government appointed Paranagama Commission received around 24,000 complaints. However of this 24,000, 4,000 were duplicate complaints so it was only actually 20,000 complaints. Of this 20,000 over 5.000-5,800 were complaints about ‘missing in action’ Sri Lankan Security Forces members. Over 12,000 were complaints against the LTTE terrorists themselves recruiting young persons using coercion. Therefore 20,000 – 5,000 – 12,000 leaves 3,000 (as a maximum) outstanding complaints and even these must be those who were recruited by the LTTE terrorists and who then died in the war.

    How did 3,000 (as a maximum) become 65,000? It is a total lie! What the present Sri Lankan Government said was that in the country as a total there were 65,000 missing as a whole (meaning 40,000 from the totally Sinhala Maoist leftist JVP insurgency or uprising which was located in the South of the island which was a totally Sinhala Maoist, leftist JVP uprising and which had nothing whatsoever to do with the LTTE terrorist conflict in the North and this 24,000 from LTTE terrorism in the North). However the 24,000 as I said is 4,000 duplicates which were discarded, 5,000-5,800 Sri Lankan Security Forces who are ‘missing in action’ and 12,000 complaints against the LTTE terrorists themselves.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2018 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress