(i) An International Commission of Enquiry against Sri Lanka?
At the next UNHRC sessions in Geneva in March 2014, there is the possibility that an International Commission of Enquiry can be set up to investigate the war crimes allegations against Sri Lanka, in relation to the final stages of the war against Tamil Tigers.
Though they may think it will be easy, setting up of such an International Commission of Enquiry against Sri Lanka will not be an easy task for the adversaries of Sri Lanka.
It is true at UNHRC in Geneva we have failed twice – in 2012 and 2013. India voted against us on both occasions. Last time (in 2013), 13 countries voted in favour of Sri Lanka, but 25 countries voted against us. 9 countries abstained from voting.
I belive the vote this year (2014), will be too close to call.
The current membership (47) of the Human Rights Council of the UNHRC is as follows:
Algeria, Argentina, Austria , Benin , Botswana , Brazil, Burkina Faso , Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire , Cuba, Czech Republic , Estonia, Ethiopia , France , Gabon, Germany, India , Indonesia, Ireland, Italy , Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait , Maldives, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, Namibia, Pakistan , Peru , Philippines, South Korea , Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia , Sierra Leone , South Africa, Macedonia, UAE, UK, USA, Venezuela and Vietnam
Judging the current membership, most Asian and African countries may want to vote in favour of Sri Lanka, otherwise they may abstain from voting. India is again likely to vote against us. The misfortune for us is that the EU countries will cast a block vote, and their votes will go against Sri Lanka. The US and UK will put undue pressure on some African and Latin American countries to vote against us. It is interesting to watch how Japan and South Korea would vote this time.
It is prudent for Sri Lanka to be ready for any adverse outcome that may arise out of Geneva.
Whatever machinery that the Government would put in place in the next two months to investigate the alleged war crimes allegations (currently it seems the Government intends to do the investigation through the Sri Lanka Human Rights Commission with foreign members also appointed), in March 2014, our adversaries in UNHRC may say that such machinery was not good enough. It is obvious that our adversaries will demand a full judicial enquiry than the Government’s current quasi-judicial enquiry. Even if the Government announces a full judicial enquiry - to be conducted by a judicial Commission/Tribunal that has punitive powers, it is likely that Sri Lanka’s enemies will still not be satisfied with that. To the writer, they seem hell-bent on conducting their own enquiry.
Given that Sri Lanka too has strong support in UNHRC, there is a possibility that UNHRC may give Sri Lanka another chance to set up a full scale judicial body with the UNHRC stipulating the terms of reference for the Commission/Tribunal, and they may agree to assess the position again in late 2014 or in 2015. Comparatively, this would be a good outcome. What the UNHRC will actually do in March 2014, it is difficult to predict now, much depends on the attitude of the member countries. If India again decides to vote against us (likely), it will certainly not help us. Due to India, some Asian and African countries may be unwilling to assist us.
Given that Ms Pillai will still be at the helm of UNHRC and the recent rhetoric of Messrs Cameron, Harper, Singh, Rapp et al., as stated before, we should be ready for any scenario, even an adverse outcome – UNHRC may pass a resolution to set up its own International Commission of Enquiry against Sri Lanka. It is difficult to believe they will seek other punishments such as imposing economic sanctions/travel bans on the country’s leaders.-
ii) Effects of an UNHRC resolution to appoint an International Commission of Enquiry on Sri Lanka
The UNHRC in Geneva can make resolutions as it likes by way of majority vote, but they are not binding on the member nations. Even last year there were resolutions passed against Sri Lanka such as requesting us to fully implement the LLRC recommendations. But Sri Lanka is not bound by them, so Sri Lanka can disregard them and do nothing (Sri Lanka almost fully complied with the last year’s resolutions). Except the bad publicity, nothing will happen to Sri Lanka from a UNHRC resolution. UNHRC resolutions do get wide publicity and no country wants a resolution passed against them. For example, so many resolutions have been passed against Israel and nothing has happened to Israel.
Like Israel, nothing will happen to Sri Lanka, unless the matter is raised in the UN Security Council.
Israel is more fortunate than Sri Lanka. There have been more than half a dozen resolutions passed against Israel in UNHRC, and Israel ignored all of them. The UN Security Council has never made a referral of Israel to the ICC or imposed sanctions against it. Israel is safe, it knows the UN Security Council is unlikely to make sanctions against it. This is because Israel is always protected in the UN Security Council by the US. Very recently, the retired UK Judge Goldstone made adverse findings against Israel in his UN report on Israel’s attack on a flotilla of boats to Gaza where innocent people were killed. When the matter was raised in the UN Security Council, the US blocked any resolution being brought against Israel.
iii). Sadly assuming that the worst case scenario happens – an International Commission of Enquiry is established against Sri Lanka in March 2014,what would be the consequence of such a Commission on Sri Lanka?
Then, the Commission will promptly conduct its investigations. It is likely that Sri Lanka may co-operate with the Commission to some degree, but, it is likely it may not allow the Commission to conduct sittings in Sri Lanka. The Commission may sit in Geneva. It is unlikely that any Sri Lankan leader (political and military) will give evidence in the Commission’s proceedings. It will not be mandatory anyway. The Commission’s role I believe will only be to conduct committal proceedings – making a finding whether or not there is strong evidence for individuals to be charged for war crimes, to refer them to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague. The writer believes that Channel 4, Gordon Weiss, Mr Darusman and his team, Stephen Rapp (the latter allegedly collected evidence in Mulatiwu during his travel this time), Tamil Diaspora, TNA, Northern Tamils (people like Ms Sasitharan, Rayapppu Joseph and hundreds or possibly thousands of other Tamils) will adduce evidence before the Commission. True, that most of the evidence against Sri Lanka will be dubious, due to limited or no participation of Sri Lanka at the enquiry and veracity of the evidence against Sri Lanka being very high, it is likely that the Commission will make a finding that criminal proceedings should be initiated against certain Sri Lankan political and military leaders and soldiers (the Commission will name them), for alleged war crimes. This will be a real blow to Sri Lanka.
The referral of Sri Lankan nationals to the ICC must be determined by the UN Security Council.
Note that after an International Commission of Enquiry, the political leaders of Kenya (including its President and the Vice President) are currently facing charges in the ICC for alleged crimes committed during and after the 2007 Kenyan Presidential election – The Prosecutor v. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta ((ICC-01/09-02/11). The UK actively demanded this pathway.
(iv). UN Security Council
Sri Lanka is not a member of the ICC. Mr Ranil Wickramasinghe, when Prime Minister, refused to join the ICC (even the US is not a member). The approval from the UN Security Council is required to send a non-member to the ICC. Kenya was then a member (not any more).
We have good friends like China and Russia in the UN Security Council, but it is naïve to think that China and Russia will come and rescue us all the time Note the recent Chinese Government statement about Sri Lanka’s human rights record.
It is true Russia strongly protected Syria at the UN Security Council. The Russian President Mr Putin personally congratulated our President on his appointment as the President of the Commonwealth. Will Russia come and rescue Sri Lanka at the UN Security Council (or whether or not both Russia and China will protect Sri Lanka at the UN Security Council), they are difficult predictions to make at this stage.
When the UN Security Council approved the referral of Mr Omar Al Bashir of Sudan to the ICC in the Hague, his best friends, China and Russia abstained from voting – they did not veto against the proposal. After he was indicted by the ICC (ICC-02/05-01/09; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir), Mr Al Bashir agreed to hold a referendum to determine whether or not Sudan should be divided into two.
When Mr Al Bashir’s matter was raised in the Security Council, China was investing in Sudan more than any other African country. But, China did not intervene to save its friend. The same situation arose in relation to Libya, to overthrow Gadhafi. Both China and Russia abstained from voting in the Security Council, so the West was able to send planes to bomb Libya. In 1990, both Russia and China consented to sending UN forces to Iraq.
Therefore, it is an illusion to think that either China or Russia (or both) will definitely come and rescue Sri Lanka in the UN Security Council if an adverse finding is made against Sri Lanka by the International Commission of Enquiry, a body (to be) created by the UNHRC, that our political and military leaders should be prosecuted for war crimes in the Hague. After an adverse finding by the Enquiry, it is possible that lesser number of countries may come forward to help Sri Lanka in the UN Security Council.
Like in Sudan and Libya situations, it is possible China and Russia to finally abstain at the crucial Security Council voting against Sri Lanka, resulting the referral of Sri Lanka to the ICC (ie, certain Sri Lankan political and military leaders).
Again, if our leaders and military commanders are referred to the ICC in the Hague to face war crimes charges, this will be a tremendous blow to Sri Lanka. In ICC, quick indictments will be issued against them and warrants will be issued for their arrest if they do not turn up for court proceedings in the Hague. This is how the ICC acted in relation to Sudan, Kenya and former political and military leaders of former Yugoslavia, Serbia and Bosnia Herzegovina.
In regards to the former Sierra Leon leader, Charles Taylor, the ICC imposed a 50 year custodial sentence upon him. He is scheduled to be moved to a British jail.
(v). Real motive of the West in establishing the International Commission of Enquiry against Sri Lanka – a referendum to create the Tamil Eelam?
After the emergence of South Sudan, the West has shown no interest to pursue Mr Al Bashir in the Hague. Mr Al Bashir who is on an international warrant for arrest, was in China and also in Egypt some time ago, in December 2013 he was in Kuwait , no one was really bothered to arrest him. This shows the West’s ulterior motive – what they wanted was Mr Al Bashir to agree to hold the referendum, not the actual prosecution of him.
The West basically achieved what it wanted – create the Christian South Sudan.
By asking for a war crimes investigation against Sri Lanka and then referring the leaders to the Hague as a result of the findings of the Enquiry, one could say that the West is using the same Sudan tactic against Sri Lanka. The West is heavily indoctrinated with false accusations against Sri Lanka by the most powerful Tamil Diaspora. Now, both the West and the Tamil Diaspora desperately want the Tamil Eelam, and they know the best way to achieve it is by way of exerting pressure on Sri Lanka, so that a referendum will eventuate.
This referendum will be limited to the North and East (not islandwide) . If the referendum is held, the Tamil Eelam will be dawned, I believe sometime between 2016 – 2018.
Once that happens (once the Tamil Eelam is dawned), the current adverse international focus on Sri Lanka may stop. The West will donate large sums of money to Sri Lanka to keep it happy. Our political and military leaders and soldiers may not be strenuously hounded down on the Hague pathway. Both Sri Lanka and Tamil Eelam will learn to co-exist, for the Sinhalese there will be no other choice anyway. Of course, the Sinhalese will lament the loss of 1/3 of the land mass (best lands of the country) and 3/4 of the coastal area, but they will learn to accept the fact. It may be that they will eventually be satisfied that the war did come to an end in 2009, Prabhakaran is dead, and everyone has managed to live in peace and harmony in the two respective countries. I believe Mr Wigneswaran’s TNA will impose strict travel restrictions on Sinhalese to travel to Tamil Eelam and the Sinhalese who live in Tamil Eelam (like the Nawatkuli Sinhalese who have lived in Jaffna for generations) will be forced to return to the south – to Sri Lanka. Tamils who live in Sri Lanka will continue to live there.
Initially, our patriotic leaders of the nation will not agree to hold the North/East referendum, but, the pressure that will be put on them will be so severe (like in 1987, there will be bogus threats of military intervention in Sri Lanka etc, eventually like Mr Al Bashir , Sri Lanka may agree to hold the referendum. India will always take the side of the West. It is strongly advised that whatever the pressure put on Sri Lanka, it must not consent to hold a referendum in the North and East. We should not repeat the stupid acts of Sudan and Indonesia (the latter, in relation to East Timor) to hold referendums to divide our country.
Messrs Wigneswaran and Sampanthan are now Mandela type world figures (it is we who created such statures for them!). They have more acceptance in the West than for our President. Once the Tamil Eelam is created, it will not be a surprise if both of them become joint recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize. Our President will continue to rule Sri Lanka.
vi) What should Sri Lanka do now – to avoid an adverse resolution being passed against Sri Lanka, such as setting up of the International Commission of Enquiry in March 2014? (Given that this is a do or die moment for Sri Lanka, as a matter of urgency it must do everything possible to win the UNHCR vote in Geneva in March 2014)
1). Sri Lanka must establish its own Commission of Enquiry (must be judicial), preferably with acceptable foreign members on the panel as soon as possible, definitely before the Geneva sessions in March 2014
Mr David Cameron asked Sri Lanka to hold its own war crimes enquiry. He stated if not, he will recommend that the international community (ie, UNHRC) will conduct its own enquiry. To conduct its genuine enquiry, the Sri Lankan Government after it has established its own Commission will need to make a formal worldwide request for witnesses to come forward to give evidence before the Commission. The Government must ask the West to provide it with a list of victims of the war, if the victims are dead, names of the family members to become witnesses etc. But, it is unlikely that the West will do this. Channel 4 has stated they will not divulge their sources of information to Sri Lanka. Mr Darusman has uttered the same. Neither the Tamil Diaspora nor the TNA will file complaints with the Sri Lankan Government about the matter, they want to give evidence only before an International Commission of Enquiry. This is creation of a ‘Catch 22’ situation for Sri Lanka. The West especially the UK should not encourage this. Without complainants/witnesses, it will be impossible for Sri Lanka to establish a war crimes Commission/Tribunal and conduct proper hearings. Mr Abbott, the Australian Prime Minister stated in relation to the controversy over Australia’s live cattle exports to Indonesia that it was wrong for the former Australian Government to formulate policies based merely on an ABC TV documentary. The same rationale applies to the allegations made against Sri Lanka by Channel 4. Mr Cameron and the West blindly believe that Channel 4 documentaries are true when Sri Lanka has stated (unfortunately, not very convincingly) that Channel 4 videos are unauthentic (and findings of the Darusman Report are also wrong). Thus, the West demands that Sri Lanka must conduct its own Enquiry into the alleged war crimes as highlighted in the Channel 4 videos. Their demand has no substance if they do not actively assist Sri Lanka to properly conduct its own Enquiry (investigation). Effectively, they are laying another trap for Sri Lanka to fall into.
2) Sri Lanka should obtain assurances from its 2 friends in the UN Security Council – China and Russia, that they will veto any proposal to refer our political and military leaders to the ICC, if such a proposal is brought before the UN Security Council, after the making of adverse findings against Sri Lanka by the International Commission of Enquiry
3). Sri Lanka should initiate a massive campaign to win over the moderate members of the UNHRC – especially those who are likely to abstain from voting on the proposed adverse resolution to be brought against Sri Lanka, (most likely by the US) and Sri Lanka should lobby other countries at .large. Sri Lanka must ask its friends and those countries that will definitely vote for it in Geneva to canvass more votes for Sri Lanka. These actions must start immediately.
We must stress to the world that we did not commit war crimes and the accusations brought against us are mostly dubious and fraud. This can be done, provided that the Government starts a robust, sensible campaign to rebut the most serious allegations that have been made against Sri Lanka. We should use expert technical analysis to prove that Channel 4 videos are unauthentic. Sri Lanka Support Group (the writer is the President) is in possession of such expert analysis. The writer who once received instructions to initiate legal action against Channel 4 (but, a cause of action against Channel 4 was not initiated), has identified 38 blatant errors/untruth in the ‘Sri Lanka Killing Fields’ video; he now says there are more. The 1st Channel 4 video that alleges that the Sri Lankan Army shot dead a number of Tamil Tigers extra-judicially, in pointblank range is a total fabrication. It is now proven that that video was prepared by the LTTE in Tamil language much earlier than end of the war in May 2009. Channel 4 concealed this from its viewers. The background of this video does not resemble that of Sri Lanka but a Balkan or a Mediterranean country. The people in the video resemble Mediterranean type of people (of olive complexion). The 3rd and 4th videos are also full of inaccuracies. The Channel 4 videos contain number of sub-videos that have been highly edited, thus are extremely dubious. Channel 4 stated that the original videos provided to them were proper records of the battlefront and the videos were taken using mobile phones. Expert technical analysis very well show that some of the videos have been made using sophisticated video cameras that have zoom lenses. Everyone knows that mobile phone cameras do not have zoom lenses. It is highly believed that some scenes of the ‘Sri Lanka Killing Fields’ (the 2nd and the most controversial video) had been shot in Thamilnadu using Tamil actors. Sri Lanka Support Group is in possession of evidence against Channel 4 and they are many. The writer has prepared comprehensive reports about the Channel 4 inaccuracies. There are many other patriots around the world who have worked tirelessly on these areas. These works must be properly collated and used in defence of the country. All these must be presented to UNHRC members, Mr Cameron and the West in a meticulous, methodical, comprehensive and professional manner.
4). Patriotic Sinhalese groups must travel to Geneva well in advance of the UNHRC sessions in March and meet with delegates of the member nations, legislative members of the European Union, various NGOs and also with Ms Pillai. They must work as one coherent group. They must run a permanent stand at UNHRC in Geneva manned by volunteers and must also participate in media briefings, press conferences, conduct workshops, exhibitions, lectures, public meetings, street theatres, film shows etc at UNHRC premises, its surroundings and in Geneva City (all peacefully). Like in the past, the Tamils will do similar lobbying and propaganda work. The Sinhalese patriots (hundreds of volunteers who are required to travel to Geneva from various parts of the world) will have to regularly write to Geneva based newspapers and participate in radio talkback shows. They may conduct peaceful demonstrations with banners/placards clearly depicting the unfair and unjust treatment meted out to Sri Lanka by the West. Where possible they must attend radio and TV stations and talk to journalists to explain the real, true situation in Sri Lanka. These Foregin government representatives of UNHRC, EU, NGOs etc have an obligation to meet with our Sinhalese representatives, given that they afford much time to meetings with separatist Tamil groups.
5) Sinhalese groups in the UK must demand a meeting with Mr Cameron, who frequently give appointments to Tamil groups to meet with him. The Sinhalese groups must make him aware that there are more Sinhalese voters in the UK than Tamil, and the Sinhalese in the UK are very unhappy with the harsh stance that Mr Cameron has thus far taken against Sri Lanka. Similarly, Sinhalese groups in Canada need to meet with Mr Harper, another harsh critique of Sri Lanka. If we continue to avoid them, there will be no one that will be able to explain them the real truth. Patriotic Sri Lankans in Australia, including Sri Lanka Support Group, will continue to positively lobby Australian parliamentarians.
6). The Sri Lankan Government will need to highlight the alleged frauds perpetrated by Channel 4 and others against Sri Lanka to Western Governments, Western Media, UN and its agencies and NGOs. So far, the Government has done some work but not enough. It appears that the Government does not have capable persons to do the job in its armoury. Now, as a result, the country’s leaders are at risk of facing serious war crimes charge and the sovereignty of the country is at grave stake.
7). In the next 2 months, if we can convince the 47 members of the UNHRC, not excluding the UK, US, Canada, Norway and the EU about the Channel 4 forgeries and Tamil Diaspora lies/frauds; if we do a very good job (emphasis added), we may be able to avoid an International War Crimes Enquiry being mounted against Sri Lanka. This means we will be able to fix the problem permanently. If the West is defeated in Geneva this year (ie, if we win!), it will be impossible for the West to bring another resolution against Sri Lanka ever again. Some may say it is useless talking to these countries, and they have already prejudged Sri Lanka. There is a truth in having such a negative belief about these powerful Western powers, but, we must not give up. Sri Lanka’s case is different to that of Sudan and Kenya. Sri Lanka did not commit war crimes during the last stages of the war. We must not be scared to say this and we must not admit to crimes that were never committed. If horrendous isolated war crimes were committed , they should be investigated internally (locally), not internationally, and the perpetrators after due trials should be punished (the Government has already stated it will embark on this pathway). The Government has already sent to jail few ex-soldiers for committing war time atrocities (isolated crimes during cause of the war). But, we must try to stop the International Commission of Enquiry being appointed against us in March 2014 at any cost. It will simply be the opening of a huge Pandora’s Box for Sri Lanka.
8). In the next 2 months, the Government must send fine emissaries to Western and other countries. They must be people who can sit on an equal footing with Western leaders like William Hague, John Kerry and John Baird etc and meet with other world leaders and explain them that due to the alleged frauds associated with Channel 4 and other dubious sources of information like the Darusman Report, it is necessary that they give deference to our side of the story as opposed to that of our opponents. Given the current difficult predicament that we are in, we must try everything possible to prevent the International Commission of Enquiry being established. Professor GLPeiris is well suited for the task; he needs a good, intelligent, vibrant team. If the Government can spend millions of dollars on a useless CHOGM conference, surely it should be able to spend some money on this matter – a matter that goes to the very heart of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. But, like in the past, it will be foolish for the Government to pay millions of dollars to foreign consultancy and law firms to do public relations (PR) work for the Government. The money paid to the foreign firms before was a sheer waste.
9). One example (there are many examples) of false war crimes accusations that have been made against Sri Lanka – that Sri Lanka killed 40,000 innocent Tamils in the last stages of the war. The contradictions in the evidence put forward against Sri Lanka are overwhelming. These anomalies should be brought to the personal attention of people like Messrs Obama, Cameron, Harper, Abbott, Key, Kerry, Hague, Baird, representatives of the 47 UNHRC Member states etc. Sadly, the Government has so far not carried out these representations effectively. Let us undertake to give wide publicity to the following in the next 2 months:
i. During the war Mr Gordon Weiss (the then UN Spokesman in Colombo) stated that up to 7,000 people were killed (this was also a high number and the Sri Lankan Government denied this high number). Mr Weiss waited for 9 months after the end of the war to state that the actual number of deaths may be 40,000. He wanted to sell his book; the writer confronted Mr Weiss at his book launch in Melbourne in 2010 as to how he came up with the figure, Mr Weiss was baffled and could not answer. The London Times also picked up the 7, 000 figure and later published a big headline story that Sri Lanka killed 40,000 innocent Tamils. The news travelled like wildfire. Channel 4 later produced a number of dubious videos.
ii. Mr Darusman went ahead and wrote the report based on such hearsay (inadmissible) evidence.
iii. Up to now, no one has been able to say where these figures have come from. They cannot do this because Mr Weiss and the London Times plucked the 7,000 and 40,000 figures respectively from thin air.
iv. Now the whole world (ie the West) want to prosecute Sri Lanka for a crime it did not commit.
v.The TNA MP, Mr Sumanthirian stated about 5 months ago that the Sri Lankan Army killed 75,000 Tamils. According to Stephen Rapp thousands were massacred in St Anthony’s Park in Padumathalan. He made this ‘finding’ solely on the basis of hearsay evidence, when no investigation into such a massacre has been conducted by anyone including himself. This is the first time that such an allegation has been made against Sri Lanka (the alleged St Anthony’s Park massacre). With time to come, it is possible for enemies of Sri Lanka to increase the dead figure, say to a more comfortable 200,000 or 300,000, so that immense pressure can be brought forth upon our leaders forcing them to eventually agree to hold the referendum in Sri Lanka, to create the Tamil Eelam. As stated before they can still be sent to ICC in the Hague for criminal prosecution after creating the Eelam.
vi. It is estimated that since end of the war at least 7,000 Tamils migrated to Australia illegally in boats. Many thousands of Tamils fled to other European countries like Italy, the UK, US etc. Without disclosing these facts Channel 4 and the Tamil separatists say that since end of the war thousands of Tamils have disappeared in Sri Lanka. Those people who migrated in boats illegally are counted as missing ( disappeared) Tamils of Sri Lanka.
vii. If Sri Lanka killed so many innocent Tamils during last stages of the war (intentionally or recklessly), would India, or for that matter Tamilnadu (located only 30 km away from the war zone), maintained a silence at that time? Then, India offered full support for the war.
viii. If 40,000 Tamil civilians were killed in such a small area of land (the no fire zone was less than 3 sq. km), where were the dead bodies buried, what are the names of the dead 40,000 people, who are their relatives, why cannot the TNA/Tamil Diaspora., ordinary Tamils in the North give the list of the victims’ names to the Government?
ix. People like Messrs Weiss, Sumanthirian etc who come up with fanciful allegations against Sri Lanka also agree that Tamil civilians were killed by the LTTE weapons and thousands of Tamil terrorists were legitimately killed by the Sri Lankan Army. They should be included in the dead Tamil numbers (during last stages of the war, the Tamil Tigers deliberately killed Tamils who were fleeing the no fire zone. Even Mr Weiss agreed in his book that the LTTE were holding heavy armory inside the no-fire zone and they fired at the civilians who fled it. The number of civilians died from LTTE gunfire amounts to few hundreds, not thousands. Then, about 12,000 Tamil Tigers were killed by the Sri Lankan Army and about 5,000 Army soldiers also died. So there were ‘legitimate’ killings happening in the war areas. But, even these killings did not reach the very high 40,000 mark as alleged by the country’s adversaries).
x. To save civilians, Sri Lankan Army did not fire at the no-fire zone, thus, large numbers of Sri Lankan soldiers got killed as a result of the Tamil Tiger gun/artillery fire. This shows the waging of a ‘just war’ by Sri Lanka. It was called a humanitarian operation than a war. Mr Weiss, Channel 4, The London Times, Mr Sumanthirian or other enemies of Sri Lanka would not admit this truth. This is because then they cannot a create a bad impression about Sri Lanka worldwide. Just because of that the West should not set up an International War Crimes Enquiry against Sri Lanka.
xi. During last stages of the war thousands of Tamils in North died due to natural and other causes (non-war related causes). It is believed these people are also included the 40,000 figure.
Mr Cameron was misled by the Tamil Groups in the UK. It seems he believed every lie uttered to him by the Tamil groups whom he met in London just prior to his visit to Sri Lanka. Unfortunately, Mr Cameron acted like a child in relation to Sri Lanka, he did not act like a statesman. Mr Abbott did show statesmanship.
Mr Cameron should have learnt a lesson from Mr Muraltharan, the world famous cricketer. He, a Tamil, uttered that Mr Cameron was misled by the Tamil Diaspora and Channel 4 about Sri Lanka.
In relation to the war, it is the desire of all patriotic Sri Lankans that truth must prevail at any cost, even so belatedly - after more than 4 years of ending the war. The Government is obliged to use all its resources to show to the world the real truth – Sri Lanka fought a just war that no recent Army has fought (especially compared to how the US and UK fought the 2nd war in Iraq).
If we can effectively ‘market’ the truth to the world, we may be able to escape the War Crimes charges to be made against Sri Lanka in March 2014. Sri Lanka organised the CHOGM so well. The conference was a success. It is now time for Sri Lanka to conduct another efficient operation to safeguard its good name and reputation. If we lose this ‘war’, it is possible that our political and military leaders may end up in the Hague; it will also be the end of One Sri Lanka.
In the current UNHRC scenario, it is not a major point to show that the LTTE was a brutal group and it killed so many innocent civilians – both Sinhalese and Tamil. Also, the fact that the LTTE killed so many democratically elected politicians including President Premadasa of Sri Lanka and Prime Minister Gandhi of India. The LTTE is a spent force. All of their leaders are dead and gone. The international community accepts that the LTTE was a terrorists group. Mr Rapp questioned the Government as to why it did not prosecute the captured LTTE cadres. Currently, unfortunately the spotlight is on Sri Lanka – that the democratically elected Government of Sri Lanka massacred its own citizens – innocent minority Tamil women, men and children in many thousands. This is a very serious accusation to be made against a nation. The West will not accept that any Tamil civilians killed during the war amounts to collateral damage (ie, negligence on the part of Sri Lanka). They allege that any Tamil civilian death may have been deliberate or reckless. That is why they demand an International Enquiry (if a local enquiry failed). The West’s policy on Sri Lanka is contrary to the standard that is applied in other wars. The international community (the West) obviously wants that a very high standard of care be applied to Sri Lanka, in relation to its conduct during final stages of the war. The US, UK are not hounded down for their alleged war crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other countries, but only Sri Lanka is hounded down. This shows sheer Western hypocrisy. The US and UK will not admit they committed war crimes in their recent wars. Like for Sri Lanka, no country seems interested in demanding investigations against these very powerful nations (super powers) for alleged war crimes. At the moment it is Tamil Diaspora that is exerting pressure on the West to hound down Sri Lanka, on bogus charges. Due to enormous Tamil power worldwide, the West seems have no other alternative but to carry out the Tamil demands. This is also the reason why India has become hostile to Sri Lanka (due to enormous Thamilnadu power). It is important we learn this reality and try to come out of the mess by relying on the truth and stressing to the world of this truth. Sri Lanka fought a just war and it did not kill thousands of innocent Tamil civilians indiscriminately. The West does not currently believe this. If we manage to convince them (and also the world) as to exactly what happened, despite the West’s extreme prejudice against us, we may be able to come out of the huge mess we are currently in, with minimum fuss. If large numbers of Tamil civilians were not killed by our forces (ie, thousands of Tamil), then there will be no need for the world to ask for a war crimes investigation against Sri Lanka. To convince this to the world, it is paramount that all patriotic forces work together, irrespective of petty differences. We will then be able to rescue and safeguard our beloved mother country, Sri Lanka, from the deadly crisis that she is currently unfortunately in.